What is the current UK law on assisted dying for terminally ill patients?

1. Why the law still says 'no' — the black‑letter position and prosecutorial reality

Under the black‑letter law, England and Wales criminalise assisting or encouraging suicide through section 2^[5] of the Suicide Act 1961, carrying potential prison sentences; similar prohibitions apply across Scotland and Northern Ireland under their respective criminal codes, so there is a current national ban on physician‑assisted death ^{[2] [6]}. In practice, the Crown Prosecution Service applies the Director of Public Prosecutions’ guidance (issued in 2010) which requires evidential and public‑interest tests before prosecutions proceed, meaning that not every act of assistance automatically leads to criminal charges — practical enforcement is constrained by policy even as the statute remains punitive ^{[2] [4]}. Courts have considered human rights challenges; the Supreme Court has signalled that changes to the overarching prohibition are for Parliament rather than the judiciary to decide, reinforcing the legal status quo unless Parliament legislates otherwise ^[2].

2. A live political fight — the Terminally Ill Adults Bill’s rise and limits

Parliamentary activity has intensified: the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, introduced in 2024 and shepherded through key Commons stages, would, if enacted, permit assisted dying for adults with a terminal diagnosis under strict safeguards including dual medical assessments, judicial oversight, and reflection periods — but the bill has not received Royal Assent and remains subject to further Commons‑to‑Lords scrutiny and potential amendment ^{[1] [3]}. Reports from mid‑2025 indicate the bill passed significant Commons stages and attracted cross‑party debate, with proponents emphasising patient autonomy and opponents warning of risks to vulnerable people; however, passage in the Commons does not equal a change in criminal law until the full legislative process completes ^{[7] [8]}. The legislative timetable and the House of Lords’ appetite to amend or block the measure mean outcomes remain uncertain despite forward momentum ^{[1] [9]}.

3. How proposed reforms would work — eligibility and safeguards under the bill

The proposed framework reported in parliamentary and media analyses would limit eligibility to competent adults with a prognosis often framed as six months or less to live, require confirmation by at least two independent doctors, and demand higher judicial or panel approval before dispensing life‑ending medication that the patient could self‑administer ^{[9] [8]}. Advocates argue these multi‑layered safeguards balance autonomy with protection, while detractors counter that medical prognoses are imprecise and safeguards can be porous in practice — a tension that shapes both parliamentary debate and professional body positions such as the British Geriatrics Society, which has expressed opposition on safety and care‑quality grounds ^{[6] [9]}. The bill’s technical provisions and downstream regulatory design would determine whether it meaningfully changes clinical practice and legal liability for healthcare professionals.

4. Different parts of the UK — diverging trajectories and political fault lines

Reform momentum is uneven across the UK: reporting indicates the Terminally Ill Adults Bill targets England and Wales specifically, while separate proposals or debates have been mooted in Scotland and no parallel high‑profile legislative drive is reported for Northern Ireland, creating the possibility of divergent legal regimes within the UK ^{[6] [9]}. This patchwork raises questions about cross‑border practice, patient mobility and the coherence of professional guidance for clinicians working near borders. Political fault lines are also clear: the Government has characterised reform as a matter for Parliament and individual conscience votes, while public petitions, polling, and parliamentary second readings reveal strong public interest and cross‑party supporters pushing for change ^{[2] [4]}.

5. Public opinion, medical bodies and enforcement — the contested ecosystem around a law change

Public polling and high‑profile petitions have shown majority support among the public and a significant portion of clinicians for some form of legalisation, but leading medical bodies remain split; for example, the British Geriatrics Society has voiced opposition over safeguarding and end‑of‑life care quality concerns ^{[4] [6]}. Even if a bill becomes law, practical implementation would hinge on professional regulatory positions, clinical guidelines, and prosecutorial practice that currently temper enforcement under the Suicide Act 1961. The debate therefore spans law, medicine, ethics and policy: statutory change would not be the final word — it would trigger a second phase of rule‑making that determines how patients and clinicians experience any new regime ^{[2] [4]}.

6. Bottom line and what to watch next — milestones that would actually change the law

The bottom line is clear: as of the latest parliamentary reporting, assisted dying remains illegal under existing criminal statutes, and the Terminally Ill Adults Bill — while advanced in Parliament and politically significant — has not yet become law ^{[1] [3]}. Key milestones to watch that would concretely alter the legal position are successful passage through the House of Lords, Royal Assent, and subsequent statutory/regulatory instruments that operationalise any new regime; conversely, defeats or substantial amendments in the Lords or withdrawal of government support would likely preserve the status quo. Monitoring parliamentary timetables, votes in both Houses, and official guidance from the CPS and medical regulators will show whether the legal landscape changes from prohibition to a regulated assisted‑dying system ^{[7] [8]}.