James Ward is a partner and head of private client practice at law firm Kingsley Napley.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is now before the House of Lords.
In its current form, it is said to allow the choice of early death for terminally ill patients who have six months to live, subject to the strictest safeguards of any country with right-to-die legislation.
As a private client attorney, I am not the expert to consult on the ethics, form and detailed legal provisions of the bill.
However, I have been thinking about the practical implications it will have for the typical families and clients I deal with.
Assisted dying: The pending legislation is said to include the strictest safeguards of any country that already allows the right to die.
Much has been made of the fact that the bill gives agency to the terminally ill patient.
Any patient decision must be ratified by two doctors and a judge to confirm that the patient is of sound mind.
It does not empower family members to assist in the lethal dose process and the current strict criminal regulations in this regard will continue to apply.
However, we all know that families will be part of the picture when the patient is weighing their end-of-life options.
In my experience, this is where financial and medical considerations can come into play.
Surely the person will focus their decision tree on pain needs at this critical moment, we would like to believe.
You’d be surprised how often money plays a role in typical caregiving equations.
The cost of care can be significant for terminally ill patients, and I often hear concerns from sick or elderly people that the costs of care are eating into their children’s inheritance.
Sometimes children will rely on a future inheritance to pay a mortgage, cover school fees, or even enable them to retire.
Although often unspoken, this can create underlying pressure on how long people live and are cared for, whether in a specialist setting or by carers who come to the home.
As unpleasant as it may seem, the money left over can be a factor in the mix.
Therefore, despite all the medical and legal safeguards in the world, I can’t help but think that some decisions enabled by this new legislation may come back to money and inheritance at the end of the day.
In contrast, some of my clients who have made significant financial gifts for estate planning purposes will be interested in avoiding missing the seven-year gift deadline.
It is not inconceivable that someone would want to end their pain by adopting an early death option, but would be deterred by the financial implications for their beneficiaries if they do so.
James Ward: I can’t help but think that some decisions enabled by this new legislation may come back to money and inheritance at the end of the day.
I have already tried these conversations with clients about the new inheritance tax cliffs created by Rachel Reeves’ recent budget.
One terminally ill patient told me he hopes to die before the Government can take a portion of his carefully selected pension fund. And sadly, this was not a passing joking comment.
It will be up to lawyers and professional advisors like me to help terminally ill clients exercising their right to die under the new bill with their estate planning and making sure their will is up to date before they leave.
We will also need to be sure of capacity and agency issues if there are last minute requests or changes.
Then there are also the consequences. There is already a growing trend of probate disputes where a family member argues that undue influence or pressure was exerted on the deceased regarding the will they made before their death.
Under this new legislation such disputes are likely to increase or become more acrimonious as objections arise to decisions made regarding the financial division of an estate.
One of the reasons Lord Cameron gave for supporting the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was that it allows for a shorter death.
Unfortunately, it does not reduce all the usual hereditary pressures that come with death.