After Kim Leadbeater’s assisted dying bill ran out of time in the House of Lords, the Labour MP Lauren Edwards introduced a near-identical Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill as a private member’s bill in June 2026. It would have allowed some terminally ill adults in England and Wales who were expected to die within six months to seek assistance to end their lives. The government stayed neutral and MPs had a free vote.
On 11 September 2026, after a debate of more than four hours, MPs voted against the bill at second reading by 286 votes to 270. The Commons had supported the earlier bill in 2025, so the result reversed its previous position, and the bill could go no further.
The bill shows the limits of the private member’s bill route. Without government time or the Parliament Acts, a bill that the Commons had backed had to start again in a new session, and at second reading it lost. A backbench MP can bring a major issue to a vote, but cannot guarantee the outcome.
It also shows how a free vote works. With no whip and a neutral government, the result depended on individual MPs’ judgements, and pressure groups, churches and professional bodies on both sides tried to influence them directly.
Supporters of the bill argue that the private member’s bill route left a major change dependent on limited time and the Lords. On this view, the defeat shows that backbenchers cannot deliver major reform without government support.
Lauren Edwards argued that much of the opposition was about parliamentary process rather than the principle, and blamed a minority in the Lords for blocking the earlier bill. Opponents said the bill was unsafe and lacked adequate safeguards against coercion of vulnerable people.
Supporters argued for individual choice and an end to people travelling abroad, for example to Switzerland, for an assisted death. Opponents argued that palliative and social care should be fixed first and raised concerns about uncertain prognoses and the protection of disabled people and people with mental illness.
The fall in support since 2025 may reflect MPs changing their minds, different MPs voting, or more abstentions. No reliable count of MPs who changed their vote was found.
The bill can make no further progress. A future bill would have to start again from the beginning. Check for any new bill.
Shows a private member’s bill and a free vote reversing the Commons’ earlier support for the same proposal.
Signed off for students.
Origin: Human-written · Reviewer: Editor
Every fact on this page has been checked against original sources.