Meeting of the Parliament 11 March 2026 [Draft]
Brian Whittle’s amendment 149, and consequential amendment 159, would require assessing doctors to make a person aware of the option of making an advance care directive, and they would work along with the consequential regulation-making power in amendment 303.
As I have said previously, I see a great deal of value in advance care directives. I am pleased that the amendment that Mr Whittle has lodged sets them out as an option rather than as a requirement for those seeking assistance. Advance care planning is a valuable tool in helping people to ensure that their wishes are understood and respected.
To deliver truly patient-centred care, people should be able to decide what care plans they have in place and what medical treatments they do and do not receive, including if they want to refuse treatments or palliative care. General Medical Council guidance already places a duty on doctors to provide relevant information to patients and to have a dialogue with them about the decisions that they may wish to make. It is relevant to note that the bill, as currently drafted, requires the registered medical practitioner to explain and discuss with the person, as far as is considered appropriate, the nature of the substance that might be provided to assist the person to end their own life, including how it will bring about death. The person will therefore be fully informed from the start and, in practice, that provision will likely facilitate a discussion between the person and their doctor about what should happen in all possible circumstances.
I am sure that Mr Whittle would agree that it will be important to ensure that there is clarity around what would happen should somebody change their mind, having submitted an advance care directive.
On balance, I support Brian Whittle’s amendments in this area and genuinely thank him for the power of work that he has done not just at stage 3, but also earlier, at stage 2, on the same issue.