Despite a large drop in Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) members who want the RCGP to support assisted suicide, the RCGP Council has decided to move the RCGP from opposing assisted suicide to a neutral position of neither supporting nor opposing assisted suicide being legal.
Ahead of a historical vote on assisted suicide that is expected to take place in April, this large decrease in support for assisted suicide among GPs over recent years sends a clear signal to MPs who are hesitant about supporting current attempts to legalise the practice that they must vote against the Leadbeater assisted suicide Bill at Third Reading. As the subject has increased in profile, support has fallen.
The member-wide survey of the Royal College of General Practitioners has revealed a large decrease in the percentage of members who said that the RCGP should support assisted suicide being legal, subject to an appropriate regulatory framework and safeguarding processes, from 40% in 2019 to 33.7% in 2025.
The survey also showed an increase in the number of members who said the RCGP should oppose assisted suicide being legal, from 47% in 2019 to 47.6% in 2025, with significantly more RCGP members surveyed who favoured the College remaining opposed to assisted suicide being legal rather than supporting assisted suicide being legal with strong caveats, subject to an appropriate regulatory framework and safeguarding processes. 47.6% favoured remaining opposed, 33.7% favoured support with caveats.
When those who are undecided are removed, and only those who took a position are included, a majority (50.2%) of RCGP members surveyed favoured the RCGP opposing assisted suicide being legal. The proportion of members favouring ongoing opposition (47.6%) exceeded those who favoured support and neutrality combined (47.3%).
Significantly, 49.6% of women compared to 44.9% of men opposed assisted suicide. When the undecided are removed, and only those who took a position are included, 52.7% of women surveyed said that the RCGP should oppose assisted suicide being legal.
Additionally, RCGP ‘Members’ were most likely to favour the RCGP opposing assisted suicide, with 49.8% of RCGP ‘Members’ compared to 45.3% among GPs in training and 38.5% among Fellows. When the undecided are removed, and only those who took a position are included, 52.5% of RCGP members surveyed said that the RCGP should oppose assisted suicide being legal.
The results of the survey indicate there has been a significant drop in support among GPs for introducing assisted suicide since 2019.
Despite these results (and only 13.6% of respondents saying they should move to a neutral position), the RCGP UK governing Council announced that the RCGP will move to a neutral position of neither supporting nor opposing assisted dying being legal.
More than 260 GPs said their views have been misrepresented
Responding to the RCGP decision, over 260 GPs have signed an open letter saying that the RCGP has misrepresented the views of its members saying that their new position is “grossly misrepresentative of GPs’ attitudes to assisted dying”.
In the letter, the GPs said: “We believe assisted dying undermines public understanding of and access to palliative care, puts vulnerable populations at risk of self-coercion or abuse, and drives societal biases that devalue certain lives. We find assisted suicide incompatible with our values as doctors: to promote and preserve life, and to be worthy of our patients’ trust”.
Follows legal action from assisted suicide pressure group Dignity in Dying
In 2019, when the RCGP ran a similar survey of their membership and found that there was similarly more support for remaining opposed (47% said opposed, 40% said support and 11% said should go neutral), the RCGP was threatened with legal action by Dignity in Dying board member Aneez Esmail and RCGP Council member Sam Everington, who were funded by Dignity in Dying, for not moving to neutral.
At the time, Dignity in Dying said that the RCGP should move to neutral under the dubious grounds that “neutrality is the only right position for medical bodies to take on the subject of assisted dying.”
Dignity in Dying also said the following, which seems somewhat ironic given the decision released today: “What is the point in asking doctors for their views if they are going to ignore the results?”
Inclusion of new “loaded” question in survey
Appearing to be aware that opposition to assisted suicide, while the most popular position, was only supported by 47% of members in 2019, the RCGP included a new question, this time asking what it should do if again fewer than 50% of respondents supported or opposed legalisation.
This question meant the survey was not directly comparable to previous surveys and paved the way for the RCGP Council to be able to change its position to neutrality, even though opposition to assisted suicide has hardened since 2019.
Although fewer than 50% of respondents favoured neutrality if neither opposition nor support received majority support, the RCGP Council went ahead in changing its stance anyway.
Assisted suicide lobby reacts
The assisted suicide lobby appears to have attempted to present the RCGP’s survey as demonstrating a swing in support for assisted suicide from GPs.
Dignity in Dying CEO Sarah Wootton described the result as “a remarkable shift in how the medical profession approaches choice at the end of life”.
Paul Brand, a journalist who has been a cheerleader for assisted suicide, said that the result “…adds to momentum in favour of assisted dying in the UK”.
Kim Leadbeater, who introduced legislation to legalise assisted suicide, also welcomed the decision saying it “reflects the many conversations I have had with GPs during the progress of the Bill”.
BMA Consultants also sound alarm on assisted suicide
The results of the RCGP survey follow BMA Consultants sounding the alarm on assisted suicide.
Earlier in March, the British Medical Association (BMA) Consultants voted through a strongly worded motion stating that the Leadbeater assisted suicide Bill presents “serious moral hazards to consultants” and could have “serious potential adverse impacts” on health services in the UK.
Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “This large decrease in support for assisted suicide among GPs over recent years sends a clear signal to MPs who are hesitant about supporting the Leadbeater assisted suicide Bill, that they must vote it down at Third Reading. As the subject has increased in profile, support has fallen”.
“There has been a significant drop in support among GPs for introducing assisted suicide since 2019, from 40% in 2019 to 33.7% in 2025”.
“Significantly more RCGP members surveyed wanted the College to remain opposed to assisted dying than to support assisted dying or adopt a neutral position. 47.6% said it should remain opposed, 33.7% said it should support with strong caveats and only 13.6% said it should move to a position of neutrality”.
“In fact, if you don’t include those who were undecided, a majority of those who took a position, 50.2%, wanted the College to remain opposed, 35.5% wanted it to support assisted suicide with caveats and 14.3% wanted it to become neutral”.
“Support for the College remaining opposed was strongest among females and among respondents who were RCPG ‘Members’ rather than fellows or GPs in training”.
“For those who did support a change, their support was strongly caveated as being ‘subject to an appropriate regulatory framework and safeguarding processes’. Given serious concerns that have been voiced around the lack of safeguards in the Leadbeater Bill, it is likely that many of these GPs who indicated the College should support but with strong caveats would not consider the Leadbeater Bill to fit these caveats”.
“Assisted suicide campaigners are attempting to present the new survey as demonstrating a swing in support for assisted suicide from GPs. In reality, the only shift was towards greater opposition with a majority of those expressing a view favouring ongoing RCGP opposition, and opposition now outnumbering support and neutrality combined. The RCGP change of stance is unwarranted and misleading”.
