Britain’s House of Commons rejected an assisted dying bill Friday, blocking a proposal to allow certain terminally ill adults in England and Wales to receive medical assistance to end their lives.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill failed at second reading by 286 votes to 270, with 87 members not voting, Trending Politics reported. The defeat ends the measure’s progress this parliamentary session.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham did not vote. The government maintained a neutral position, and lawmakers were allowed to decide according to conscience without being required to follow a party position.
Burnham has argued that improvements to palliative care and adult social care should come before assisted dying legislation, Reuters reported.
Dignity in Dying expressed disappointment but remained hopeful that reform would eventually succeed. Opponents at Care Not Killing welcomed the outcome and warned that changing the law could endanger vulnerable people.
Labour MP Lauren Edwards introduced the private member’s bill, reviving legislation substantially matching a previous proposal from Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.
Leadbeater’s bill cleared its second reading in November 2024 by 330 votes to 275. The Commons subsequently approved it at third reading in June 2025 by 314 votes to 291.
That legislation stalled in the House of Lords, where more than 1,200 amendments were tabled before parliamentary time expired. Edwards reintroduced the measure on June 17.
Under the proposal, applicants would have needed to be at least 18, ordinarily resident in England or Wales for at least 12 months and registered with a general practitioner in either nation.
Eligibility also required an incurable, progressive illness expected to cause death within six months. Disability or a mental disorder alone would not have qualified someone, according to Parliament’s explanatory notes.
Applicants would have needed decision-making capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Their wish to die had to be informed, settled and voluntary, without coercion or pressure from another person.
The process would have begun with a written declaration, followed by assessments from two doctors at least seven days apart. Both would have needed to establish that the eligibility requirements were satisfied.
A multidisciplinary Assisted Dying Review Panel would then have considered the application. Approval would have triggered a 14-day reflection period, shortened to 48 hours if death was expected within one month.
After that period, the applicant would have signed a second declaration. An approved substance would have been provided for the person to administer themselves, with doctors permitted to decline participation.
The bill also proposed criminal offenses involving coercion, inducement and falsified documents. Encouraging or assisting suicide outside its legal framework would have remained a criminal offense.
Eligibility disputes have also surfaced in Canada, where an actress filed a legal challenge seeking access to assisted dying for psychiatric conditions. A Quebec medical organization separately drew criticism over a proposal concerning newborns with severe disabilities.
Scotland rejected separate assisted dying legislation earlier this year. Further efforts in England and Wales could be introduced in a later parliamentary session, but no timetable has been announced.
