MPs remove High Court approval

MPs have voted to eliminate the need for a High Court judge to approve assisted dying requests, a decision that has sparked significant debate. The change relates to Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill (End of Life) Bill, introduced in November, which seeks to allow terminally ill adults with less than six months to live to receive medical assistance to die.

The bill proposes replacing judicial approval with a three-person panel of independent experts who would assess each case. Supporters argue that this would provide a more efficient and specialised review process, while critics raise concerns over oversight and regulation.

Louise Lewis, a partner who specialises in trusts, estates and tax at Freeths, said a three-person panel would provide extra safeguards. It means that three independent experts must discuss and agree on the position, rather than one High Court judge who may lack experience with vulnerable clients. This will also mean extra safety for people because experts working in the field of mental capacity and vulnerable clients will have more insight into the red flags around abuse of those clients, and it means more probing work will be done on the decision to allow a person to end their life early.

She added that she personally thinks this seems better than the High Court option, plus not using the already overloaded court system should mean quicker decisions. A real issue to be addressed though will be who regulates these people and checks on their decisions so there may have to be some clear reporting lines. For example, do they report into someone in the NHS? Will there need to be some sort of ombudsman or regulator specifically for the panels? All questions that need careful consideration.

The proposed change is expected to continue generating discussion as policymakers navigate the complex ethical, legal and practical implications of assisted dying legislation in the UK.