The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Committee has voted to remove the required High Court approval for assisted deaths, which will be replaced with oversight from a panel of legal, medical, and social care experts. Under previous provisions, all assisted deaths had to be approved by a High Court judge. Amendments put forward by Kim Leadbeater MP, the sponsor of the Bill, will replace the role of the High Court in the Bill with a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commission and expert panels. Humanists UK and My Death, My Decision have welcomed the votes.
15 MPs on the committee voted in favour of removing Clause 12, 7 against. Clause 12 outlined the steps required for court approval of an assisted death. New clauses to set up the Voluntary Assisted Dying Commission and expert panels have been debated as part of this group; however, voting on them will happen at the end of the committee stage. Amendments NC14 to NC17, NS1 and NS2 outline the new process.
Claire Macdonald, Director of My Death, My Decision, said:
“Removing the High Court approval, to replace it with a dedicated Commission and expert panels, is a welcome step forward. We support the move towards a specialist panel that can provide expertise and fairness in assisted dying decisions.
“Spain is the only country in the world that requires a panel to assess every single assisted death while none require the High Court. Most jurisdictions trust two independent doctors to assess the patient, with no third tier of oversight. We hope MPs on the committee remain dedicated to ensuring the process is safe, without being too complex or burdensome for those in need.”
Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, said:
“Replacing the High Court judge with a multidisciplinary panel is a welcome improvement. It has the potential to make assisted dying decisions more efficient and accessible while strengthening already rigorous safeguards. However, it is crucial that this new process as implemented is practical and does not create unnecessary bureaucracy that could delay compassionate end-of-life choices.”
Tom Gordon, MP and committee member, said:
“Today’s vote is a step in the right direction. Replacing the High Court with a multidisciplinary panel will ensure decisions are made with the right expertise, rather than adding unnecessary legal delays. We must ensure that our assisted dying process remains clear, accessible, and does not create obstacles for those already dying and facing immense suffering.”
Polling commissioned by Humanists UK shows that more than two-thirds (67 per cent) of the British public support the amendments to replace High Court approval with a panel of legal, medical, and social care professionals. The High Court requirement had been criticised as costly and time-consuming, while a specialist panel should provide faster and more practical decision-making to make end-of-life care more accessible while maintaining safeguards.
The role of the High Court in the Bill has been replaced with a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commission and expert panels. The role of the High Court and its workability has been challenged on the basis that the Court doesn’t have the capacity and that it wouldn’t provide additional safety. The Voluntary Assisted Dying Commission will be led by a High Court judge or senior former judge. It will oversee all cases and report each year on the number of applications and how many were approved or rejected.
It will also appoint expert panels, with each applicant for assisted dying going to a panel for a decision after sign-off by two doctors. The panel will be chaired by a senior lawyer or retired judge and also feature a psychiatrist and a social worker.
Spain is the only country in the world that requires a panel to assess every single assisted death while none require the High Court. Jake Richards MP cited in the debate that 20% of people who apply for an assisted death in Spain die before they can finish the process. Most jurisdictions trust two independent doctors to assess the patient, with no third tier of oversight.
During her speech, Kim Leadbeater MP highlighted the uniqueness of this clause:
“I appreciate this is very unusual if we compare this Bill to the many other models of assisted dying around the world. Most jurisdictions have a process which involves two doctors as this Bill does, but there is no additional stage in those processes, and I know there are different views as to whether this third layer is necessary as many of the jurisdictions have processes which provide a very compassionate, patient-centered, and well safeguarded approach to assisted dying without it.
“Indeed, some of the most difficult emails I receive are from terminally ill people who are very concerned about the complexity of the process as laid out in the Bill, who feel that it is overcomplicated and too bureaucratic for people who are in their dying weeks and days to navigate, and I am very sensitive to this.
I’m also aware that the thorough process as set out in the Bill will take time, and there will be people who embark upon it who will die before they can complete it, as happens in other jurisdictions, which is of course extremely sad. But I also know that certainly in this country people feel strongly that oversight and scrutiny of what we might call the medical initial stages of the assisted dying process is important.”
Supporting the panels, Kit Malthouse, MP and committee member, said during the debate:
‘We need to take care to tread lightly on people’s final moments. We have to have at our at the heart of our thinking, the notion that we are filling these people’s final days and hours with possibly stress, with bureaucracy, with a sense of jeopardy. About whether they’re going to get permission for what they want. For what they’ve declared to two doctors, for the forms that they filled in, and at the back of their mind that they don’t have long left.
‘And so, while I understand the motivation of those who are trying to amend and restrict accessibility and elongate the time, I do ask them to to bear that in mind and help us to strike a balance. Between, yes, having a system that gets to the robust answer, but, as I say, treads as lightly as possible on the lives of remaining lives of these people are facing their end.’
“We must tread lightly on people’s final moments.” Powerful words from @kitmalthouse on why assisted dying must be accessible, compassionate & free from unnecessary stress. A choice, not an ordeal. Watch his speech 👇 #AssistedDying pic.twitter.com/Te61JYsf8A
— MyDeath, MyDecision (@MDMDmydecision) March 12, 2025
Notes:
For further comment or information, media should contact Humanists UK Assisted Dying Campaigner Nathan Stilwell at nathan@humanists.uk or phone 07456200033.
Humanists UK and My Death, My Decision have people and their loved ones who would be affected by this change available for the press.
If you have been affected by the current assisted dying legislation, and want to use your story to support a change in the law, please email campaigns@humanists.uk.
Amendments NC14 to NC17, NS1 and NS2 in detail:
- NC14 establishes the ‘Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner’ appointed by the Prime Minister. The appointee must be a current or former judge of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, or High Court, and will not become a civil servant upon appointment
- NC15 sets out how, after two doctors have approved an application for an assisted death, the Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner is to refer the case to a multidisciplinary panel, to be called an Assisted Dying Review Panel
- NC16 is called ‘Determination by panel of eligibility for assistance’. The panel must do this by determining that all the decision-making up to that point has been correct, including that all the eligibility criteria are met. The panel is required to question one of the two approving doctors and may question both. The panel may also question the patient themself, as well as others including other experts. Such questioning can be in-person or by video or audio link. If someone is deemed eligible, then a certificate to that effect will be issued
- NC17 is called ‘Reconsideration of panel decisions refusing certificate of eligibility’. It allows for an appeal by an unsuccessful applicant to the Commissioner, which happens without a hearing, and if the appeal is successful the case is remitted to a new Review Panel
- NS1 contains various consequential provisions related to the Commissioner role, including that there is also a Deputy Commissioner, and tenure is up to five years for both roles, although the Secretary of State may dismiss them. It provides for staffing and funding for the Commission
- NS2 outlines the make-up of the panel, consisting of a legal member, a psychiatrist, and a social worker. Again there is a five-year tenure. The legal member will be the chair and must be a current or former judge of the High Court, Court of Appeal, or Supreme Court, or be a KC. There is majority voting except to approve an assisted death, where it has to be unanimous.
Humanists defend the right of each individual to live by their own personal values, and the freedom to make decisions about their own life so long as this does not result in harm to others. Humanists do not share the attitudes to death and dying held by some religious believers, in particular that the manner and time of death are for a deity to decide, and that interference in the course of nature is unacceptable. We firmly uphold the right to life but we recognise that this right carries with it the right of each individual to make their own judgement about whether their life should be prolonged in the face of pointless suffering.
We recognise that any assisted dying law must contain strong safeguards and the international evidence from countries where assisted dying is legal shows that safeguards can be effective. We also believe that the choice of assisted dying should not be considered an alternative to palliative care, but should be offered together as in many other countries.
Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non-religious people. Powered by over 130,000 members and supporters, we advance free thinking and promote humanism to create a tolerant society where rational thinking and kindness prevail. We provide ceremonies, pastoral care, education, and support services benefitting over a million people every year and our campaigns advance humanist thinking on ethical issues, human rights, and equal treatment for all.
My Death, My Decision is a grassroots campaign group that wants the law in England and Wales to allow mentally competent adults who are terminally ill or intolerably suffering from an incurable condition the option of a legal, safe, and compassionate assisted death. With the support of over 3,000 members and supporters, we advocate for an evidence-based law that would balance individual choice alongside robust safeguards and finally give the people of England and Wales choice at the end of their lives.
Humanists UK and My Death, My Decision are both members of the Assisted Dying Coalition, along with Friends at the End, Humanist Society Scotland, and End of Life Choices Jersey.
