Cross-border differences throw up major assisted dying questions

Holyrood and Westminster are debating legislation which, if passed, would allow a defined group of people to receive assistance to end their lives. There has been much impassioned debate from those for and against such a change. What has received fewer column inches are the differences that would arise north and south of the border, for patients and for doctors.

There are many similarities between the two Bills. But there is one immediately notable difference. The Westminster Bill provides that assistance to a terminally ill person to end their life would be subject to the High Court’s consent. The Court of Session’s consent would not be required in Scotland. 

Writing exclusively for The Scotsman, Chris Dunn examines the practical, legal, and regulatory challenges posed by proposed Assisted Dying legislation in Scotland, and England & Wales, highlighting key differences and their implications for patients and doctors. 

Read the article