Press Release – Anscombe Centre Publishes Analysis of a Sinister Document About a Sinister Bill

On 30 November 2024, MPs voted at the Second Reading of Kim Leadbeater MP’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. They did so without any assessment from the Government of the financial impact of the Bill or its impact on equality and human rights.

On 4 April 2025, the Anscombe Bioethics Centre wrote to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, asking for an assurance that the Impact Assessment would involve full consideration of the potential impact of the Bill on equalities and human rights. We also urged that those drawing up this assessment consider the evidence that was heard by the Public Bill Committee.

On 2 May 2025 the Department of Health and Social Care produced two impact assessments of the Bill together with a Memorandum on whether the Bill, if implemented, would be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The latter two documents were co-authored by the Ministry of Justice. These documents were released with minimal publicity the day after the local elections and the day before the Bank Holiday weekend. This was a good time to bury bad news, but the Impact Assessments give an insight into the Bill and into the thinking of the Government. They merit careful scrutiny.

The Anscombe Centre has produced an analysis of each of the three documents. We are releasing our analysis of the first document today (23 May 2025) and will release the analyses of the other two documents next week.

The first Impact Assessment concerns the financial implications of the Bill. This shows that the implementation of the Bill would cost millions, especially because of the proposed new quango: the office of the Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner. However, the figures also suggest that over time the Bill could save money by ending people’s lives. In this Impact Assessment, a government department sets down in black and white estimates for how much money the NHS could save, and local authorities and the exchequer could save, if only patients died earlier. It is truly a sinister document.

Professor David Albert Jones, Director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, said:

‘While disabled people are facing cuts and the country is facing economic uncertainty, it is deeply concerning that the Government could frame the intentional ending of patients’ lives as a way to save money. At the same time, the Impact Assessment shows that, in the short term, the implementation of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would cost millions that could otherwise be spent on improving NHS services. With so much being spent initially there would be an obvious financial incentive to encourage increasing numbers of patients to use the opportunity to die sooner than they might have. This Impact Assessment shows vividly the threat that this Bill poses to vulnerable people.’

END

Notes to Editors:

• Any part of the above can be quoted as coming from our Director, Professor David Albert Jones.
• For more information, please see the Centre’s full Guide on ‘Assisted Dying’ (euthanasia and assisted suicide) which includes a guide to the latest evidence concerning EAS internationally, the Centre’s series of briefing papers on EAS since 2021, and videos on subjects relating to EAS.
• If the issues discussed here affect you or someone close to you, you can call Samaritans on 116 123 (UK and ROI), visit their website or contact them on: jo@samaritans.org
• If you are reporting or writing about a case of death by suicide, whether assisted or non-assisted, please consult the Samaritans’ media guidelines on how to do so responsibly.
• For more information on the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, see our website: www.bioethics.org.uk
• For interviews or comment, contact: media@bioethics.org.uk