29 August 2026 – A new Government assessment of the revived assisted suicide Bill, which MPs will vote on at Second Reading on 11 September, has warned that poverty, poorer access to healthcare, lower-quality care and domestic abuse could lead to “disproportionate numbers of ethnic minority people” opting to end their lives through assisted suicide, as new Government modelling has increased its central estimate of assisted deaths by 60%.
The new warning comes after the Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, said “the fixing of the funding of palliative care and social care” needs to happen before Parliament debates whether to introduce assisted suicide. Burnham said it would be deeply challenging to hold that debate while people were not receiving the care they needed or the peace of mind that such care would be available.
The assessment gives further weight to Burnham’s warning, identifying poorer access to healthcare and lower-quality care as structural pressures that could result in disproportionate numbers of people from ethnic-minority backgrounds opting for an assisted suicide.
In the new impact assessment, the Government has increased its central Year 10 estimate for annual assisted suicide deaths upwards by 60%, from 2,183 to 3,502. This would amount to almost ten assisted suicide deaths every day. The high scenario has risen from 4,559 to 6,257 deaths a year, more than 17 every day.
Key findings in the Government’s new assessments
The Government has published a new impact assessment, equality impact assessment and ECHR memorandum on the revived assisted suicide Bill tabled by Lauren Edwards MP, which MPs will be voting on at Second Reading on Friday 11 September.
- The Government has added a new warning that structural pressures involving poverty, poorer healthcare access, lower-quality care and domestic abuse could result in disproportionate numbers of people from ethnic-minority backgrounds choosing an assisted death to avoid financial hardship or escape abuse.
- (2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 9, “Coercion and pressure”; compare 2025 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 8, “Coercion and pressure”).
- It has also newly identified neglect, poverty and difficult living conditions as potential structural pressures on disabled people considering assisted suicide.
- The Government’s central estimate of assisted deaths in Year 10 has risen by 60%, from 2,183 to 3,502 a year. (2026 Impact Assessment, p. 32, para. 81)
- This would amount to almost ten assisted suicide deaths every day. The high scenario has risen from 4,559 to 6,257 deaths a year, more than 17 every day.
- The report makes clear that even its 6,257 high scenario is not a definitive upper bound. (2026 Impact Assessment, p. 31, para. 77)
- A new sensitivity analysis produces 9,810 assisted deaths in England and Wales in Year 10 if New Zealand’s actual and projected assisted-death rates are applied here. (2026 Impact Assessment, p. 39, Table 11)
- The Government has changed the methodology behind its estimates after concluding there is “limited evidence” to support an assumption that growth in assisted deaths levels off after five years. (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 28–30, paras. 64–69)
- The central Year 10 cost of health and social care staff time spent on delivering an assisted suicide service has increased from £5.49 million to £9.27 million – around 69%.
- The high estimate is now £16.6 million. (2026 Impact Assessment, p. 76, Table 30; 2025 Impact Assessment, p. 70)
- The new assessment cites an assisted death in Oregon taking up to 123 hours – just over five days – following ingestion of the prescribed drugs.
- The Government is now modelling as much as £30.24 million of State Pension payments in Year 10 that would no longer be required under the high scenario if people died four months earlier than they otherwise would have.
- “The previous assessment’s main equivalent high estimate was £18.3 million (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 103–106, paras. 335–352; 2025 Impact Assessment, p. 151, Table 104)
- Relevant background information
- In 2025, an article arguing that assisted suicide could curb “the pensions bill, the NHS bill and the care bill” prompted fierce criticism from MPs and disability campaigners.
- Former MP Matthew Parris faced condemnation in Parliament after welcoming pressure on terminally ill people to die sooner so as not to be a burden.
- A Guernsey politician was rebuked by politicians on both sides of the debate after arguing that assisted suicide could produce “considerable savings”.
- Wes Streeting called the possibility of people choosing assisted suicide to save the NHS money a “chilling slippery slope”.
- Relevant background information
- “The previous assessment’s main equivalent high estimate was £18.3 million (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 103–106, paras. 335–352; 2025 Impact Assessment, p. 151, Table 104)
In addition, serious concerns identified in previous current Government assessments have continued to be highlighted in the new assessment – a summary covering some of these concerns is provided at the end of this press release.
Major poll shows Burnham’s holds the same position as the majority of the public
An MRP poll of over 10,000 people, the largest public poll conducted on assisted suicide since Kim Leadbeater’s Bill was introduced in October 2024, has shown that there is no mandate from the public to revive Leadbeater’s failed assisted suicide bill and circumvent the House of Lords to push it into law.
Legalising assisted suicide came rock bottom of a list of voters’ priorities they want their MP to focus on if they have the opportunity to make a law change (e.g. through a Private Members’ Bill) over the next year, with half the support of the next lowest scoring priority. Asked to select three priorities, just 7% of the public and 7% of Labour voters consider assisted suicide a priority.
In line with Burnham’s position on assisted suicide, in every single constituency in Great Britain, the majority of voters agreed that Parliament should prioritise fixing the NHS and improving palliative, social and end-of-life care before considering whether to introduce assisted suicide.
Full details on this polling are available in this press release from The Other Half here.
Hospices face deficit of more than £70 million
Hospices in England ended the last financial year with a collective deficit of more than £70 million, more than double the previous year.
At least 33 hospices have already made significant cuts to services, while almost six in ten have either made changes or are considering reductions. Hospice UK has warned that “nearly one in three people who need palliative care miss out on the support they need”.
Prominent people with disabilities, including Liz Carr, Ruth Madeley, Rosie Jones and Sophie Morgan, have called for the Bill to be halted until disabled and terminally ill people have as much support to live as the Bill would provide for them to die.
Their open letter warns: “Many disabled people have been made to consider suicide – not by the impact of our conditions, but the social context we live in.”
It argues that inadequate care and support can create a coercive environment in which people choose an earlier death because society has failed them.
Large increase in deaths in jurisdictions considered in impact assessment
California, New Zealand and Oregon are among the jurisdictions considered in the Government’s impact assessment.
In New Zealand, assisted deaths increased from 328 in 2022/23 to 486 in 2025/26, an increase of 48%.
In California, the annual number rose from 495 in 2020 to a record 1,235 in 2025, an increase of almost 150%.
In Oregon, almost two in five people who died by assisted suicide in 2025 reported concern about being a burden on family, friends or caregivers.
Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, CEO of the charity Right To Life UK, which campaigns against assisted suicide and in support of better access to palliative care, said:
“The Government’s own equality assessment shows exactly why Andy Burnham is right in identifying that palliative care and social care must be fixed before Parliament debates whether to introduce assisted suicide.”
“In the impact assessment, the Government has warned that structural pressures such as poverty, inadequate care, neglect and abuse could result in disproportionate numbers of people from ethnic-minority backgrounds opting to end their lives through assisted suicide.”
“Parliament should be focusing on introducing policies that provide care, protection and support for people facing these structural pressures who may feel pressure to end their lives, not assisted suicide.”
“Given the state of palliative and social care in this country, introducing assisted suicide would be a disaster.”
“At the same time, the Government has revised its central Year 10 assisted suicide estimate upwards by 60%, from 2,183 to 3,502 deaths a year. Its high scenario now exceeds 6,250 deaths annually, more than 17 every day, and even that is not a maximum.”
“MPs should put care first and vote against this dangerous Bill at Second Reading on 11 September.”
ENDS
- For additional quotes and media interviews contact 07774 483 658 or email press@righttolife.org.uk
- For further information on Right To Life UK visit www.righttolife.org.uk
Further notes – serious concerns identified across both the previous and current Government assessments
- Disabled people may be more susceptible to feeling that they are a burden on those around them.
- They also outline that disabled people are around twice as likely as non-disabled people to experience domestic abuse, including coercive behaviour. The 2026 assessment goes further by adding poverty, neglect and difficult living conditions as potential structural pressures. (2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 9, “Coercion and pressure”; 2025 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 8, “Coercion and pressure”)
- Identify particular risks affecting older people, who are the main recipients of assisted suicide in comparable jurisdictions.
- Identify that older people can be dependent on carers, and that can come with associated elder-abuse risk, while citing human-rights experts’ concerns about subtle pressure on older people to die prematurely. (2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 18, “Age”; 2025 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 15, “Age”)
- Unequal access to palliative care has repeatedly been identified as a potential concern.
- The previous Equality Impact Assessment recorded the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s warning that regional variation in palliative care could lead some patients to consider assisted suicide when they might not have done so if appropriate palliative care were available.
- The 2026 assessment continues to acknowledge that people in rural or stretched areas may struggle to access palliative care, while its new structural-pressure section says lack of appropriate services and support, including palliative care, can create subtle pressure. (2025 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 19, “Geography”; 2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 9, “Coercion and pressure”; 2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 22, “Geography”)
- A person with a mental-health condition is not excluded from assisted suicide if they otherwise meet the criteria.
- Both assessments outline that having a mental-health condition does not itself disqualify an applicant. They also record increased suicide risk among people with conditions including low-survival cancers, chronic ischaemic heart disease and COPD. (2026 Equality Impact Assessment, pp. 23–24, “Mental health”; 2025 Equality Impact Assessment, pp. 19–20, “Mental health”)
- There is no single substance or combination of substances understood to be the most appropriate for causing an assisted death, and that the safety and efficacy of assisted-suicide substances is difficult to assess.
- Government cites reported complications including difficulty ingesting or regurgitating drugs, seizures and intravenous-line complications. (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 50–51, paras. 123–124; 2025 Impact Assessment, pp. 43–44, paras. 113–114)
- Envisage that, initially, the drugs used to cause death would not be specifically licensed by the MHRA for assisted suicide.
- The Department of Health and Social Care anticipates initially using medicines already authorised for other purposes and says randomised controlled trials testing their safety and efficacy for assisted suicide are unlikely in the immediate future. (2026 Impact Assessment, p. 52, paras. 128–129; 2025 Impact Assessment, p. 45, para. 118)
- Repeatedly outlined existing healthcare training cannot simply be assumed to be sufficient for assisted suicide
- Training on capacity, coercion, domestic abuse and safeguarding exists, but not specifically in an assisted-suicide context, meaning provision would need to be adapted or expanded.
- The Equality Impact Assessments also cite evidence that healthcare professionals may lack domestic-abuse training and may be reluctant to raise the issue
- (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 53–54, paras. 133–134; 2025 Impact Assessment, pp. 46–49; 2026 Equality Impact Assessment, p. 15)
- Record substantial concern among the professionals who would be involved in operating the law.
- The British Geriatrics Society and Association for Palliative Medicine oppose assisted suicide; the Royal College of Psychiatrists is neutral on the principle but says it cannot support this Bill in its current form; and the Royal College of Pathologists takes no position on the ethical principle but does not support the medical-examiner role set out in the Bill.
- The latest Impact Assessment also records a 2025 Royal College of General Practitioners survey in which 48% were opposed and 34% in favour, despite the College’s overall neutral position.
- (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 47–48, paras. 115–118 and Table 14; 2025 Impact Assessment, p. 41, paras. 105–108 and Table 12)
- Both ECHR memoranda consider the possibility of suffering caused by the substance used to bring about death.
- The Government’s 2026 analysis acknowledges that the substance provided by a doctor could cause suffering before death.
- (2026 ECHR Memorandum, pp. 25–27, Article 3; 2025 ECHR Memorandum, pp. 20–21, Article 3)
- The full cost of establishing an assisted-suicide service remains unknown.
- Both Impact Assessments say implementation costs could not be estimated.
- The latest report says these could include estates, IT, recruitment and training, while separately warning that significant parts of the Bill remain impossible to quantify and that adding together only the quantified figures would not give a comprehensive assessment of its net impact.
- (2026 Impact Assessment, pp. 4 and 80, para. 242; 2025 Impact Assessment, pp. 19 and 74, paras. 43 and 233)
