Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – Latest Update
On Friday 20th June 2025, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill returned to the House of Commons for MPs to vote on a final selection of amendments and for Third Reading.
The day began at 9:30am with votes on five amendments to the Bill. Below is a short explanation of the clauses and the outcomes of the votes, including how I voted.
New Clause 16
This clause sought to prevent an individual from accessing voluntary assisted dying if they are substantially motivated by not wanting to be a burden, a mental health disorder, financial concerns and some other factors.
I considered this amendment and while I understand the positive motivation behind it, I believe it to be unworkable in practice because doctor cannot be expected to determine what has “substantially motivated” a patient - it is not a commonly understood medical or legal concept. They can and must make a clinical judgement on the very strict eligibility criteria and will receive training to help them do so. The Bill is also clear that a person is not “terminally ill” only by reason of having a disability or mental disorder (or both). They must have an “inevitably progressive illness or disease which cannot be reversed by treatment” and a six-month terminal prognosis by two doctors.
I therefore vote against this amendment alongside the majority of MPs. Therefore, it was not added to the Bill.
Amendment 12
This amendment would have prevented the Secretary of State from making changes to the NHS Act.
As it stands, the original wording of the Bill is clear that the NHS Act be amended only if needed for the purposes of making the Bill workable and would not open the back door for the Secretary of State to change the NHS Act on whatever issue they please. In view of this I voted against the amendment alongside the majority of MPs and therefore the amendment did not pass.
Amendment 14
This amendment seeks to ensure that it would not be possible for a person who has stopped eating and drinking to access voluntary assisted dying.
I supported this amendment, as it is a helpful extra safeguard for the Bill, in particular helping to avoid any ‘loophole’ around anorexia. (It is worth noting that mental disorders are specially excluded from the Bill and anorexia is not ‘inevitably progressive’ which is a key part of eligibility under the Bill).
The amendment passed and was added to the Bill.
Amendment 24
This amendment would remove the assumption of capacity that exists currently under the Mental Health Act when assessing for voluntary assisted dying.
In considering this amendment I was struck by the comments of Sir Christopher Whitty (Chief Medical Officer for England) in relation to the current wording of the Bill (below) and therefore decided that removing the assumption of capacity would be unhelpful and unnecessary.
As a practitioner, I was relieved that the decision was for the Bill—if it stays this way—to stick with the Mental Capacity Act, and that was for two reasons. First, that Act is used up and down the country by doctors and nurses every day; they know it and they understand it… It additionally has the advantage of being tested in the courts. That has gone as far as the Supreme Court, and the various ambiguities that were inevitably in the legislation have been clarified by senior judges. Therefore, to practitioners like me, it feels like a piece of robust and predictable legislation.
I voted against the amendment, as did the majority of MPs and therefore the amendment was not passed.
Amendment 21
I was pleased to support the tabling of this amendment, by my colleague Munira Wilson MP, which would require the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to prepare and publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end of life care services as part of the first report on implementation of the Act (to be undertaken within 1 year of the Act being passed). This would mirror the assessment already required as part of the 5-year review of the act.
From the start of the process for the Bill I have been clear that it is not an either / or choice when it comes to palliative care and voluntary assisted dying – they are both crucial and current palliative care is not where it should and needs to be. Not due to the professionals who work day by day to provide care and support for patients and families needing palliative care, but due to a lack of funding and recognition by Government of the important role it performs.
I am pleased to say that this amendment was passed without a vote, as it was supported by all MPs in the Commons when announced by the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Amendment 78 and 79
These amendments were tabled by Kim Leadbeater to ensure that the devolution settlement is fully respected in the Bill. They do not encroach on matters that are properly devolved, but they do ensure that the right powers are exercised by the right people at the right time.
I therefore voted AYE to keep them in the Bill, alongside a majority of MPs. Therefore, the amendment was added to the Bill.
Third Reading
After a considered debate by MPs from all parties and all views on the Bill, the House of Commons moved to a vote on whether the Bill should be accepted as currently drafted and amended, and continue on to be scrutinised in the House of Lords.
I have given serious consideration to the Bill, in particular the safeguards within it to protect vulnerable people especially under 18s, people with mental health disorder, people with disabilities - this is a very significant piece of legislation. I am grateful to everyone who has written to me to share their questions, concerns and personal stories – each has given me food for thought as I have considered how to vote at Third Reading.
I continue to be concerned that palliative care provision is not where it needs to be and will continue to raise this issue with the Government – palliative care and the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill are two pieces of crucial legislation for those facing a terminal illness diagnosis.
After much thought, I voted in favour of the Bill at Third Reading. The Bill, as amended, passed by a majority of 23 and will now continue on to the next stage of scrutiny in the Lords.
You can find out more information on what happens next in this BBC article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rpdxz11d8o