Pharmacists and pharmacy technicians may be asked to accompany the doctor in charge of preparing an approved substance to help a terminally ill patient end their life, the text of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s proposed bill suggests. 

Ms Leadbeater’s private members bill, titled the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, will be debated in Westminster at its second reading on Friday November 29, with all MPs told they may vote in accordance with their conscience.

The bill proposes allowing terminally ill patients aged over 18 in England and Wales who have a “clear settled and informed wish to end their own life” to do so with the support of the state, providing their death “can reasonably be expected within six months” and that they have the capacity to make the decision and have not been coerced by another party.

The most instrumental roles for healthcare professionals in the Leadbeater bill are assigned to doctors: a “coordinating” doctor who would carry out a first assessment of the patient’s condition and whether their request meets the above stipulations before making a statement to that effect; and an “independent doctor” who would carry out their own assessment and make a separate statement. 

The bill states that a “registered medical practitioner” – apparently a reference to doctors, although the bill is not completely explicit – would be able to carry out the functions of an independent doctor providing they have appropriate qualifications and experience and have no connection to the terminally ill patient.

Pharmacy professionals 'may accompany' doctors

Pharmacists and pharmacy technicians are referred to in the umbrella category of “health professionals,” which separately includes registered medical practitioners and registered nurses.  

Pharmacy professionals could be asked to be present as the coordinating doctor prepares an “approved substance” to help the patient end their life, the text of the bill states: “The coordinating doctor may be accompanied by such other health professionals as the coordinating doctor thinks necessary.”

The bill contains an opt-out clause stating that no doctor or other health professional would be “under any duty… to participate in the provision of assistance in accordance with this Act”.

It also states that employers “must not subject an employee to any detriment” for either participating in assisting “in the provision of assistance” to terminally ill patients or for refusing to do so. 

The bill has proven controversial. While not-for-profit group Campaign for Dignity in Dying hailed it as the “strongest proposal Parliament had ever considered on improving choice and protections for dying people,” others including disability campaigners argue that vulnerable people may feel under pressure to end their lives. 

When asked for its view, the Pharmacists’ Defence Association told P3pharmacy: “We’ve consistently stated up until now that if it progresses and becomes legal, the law should allow a conscience clause so that a pharmacist can opt not to be a part of such a process. 

“No pharmacist should fear the consequences of declining to be a part of a patient ending their own life.”