Royal College of Psychiatrists’ approach to assisted dying ‘inconsistent with the membership’

A senior professor of old-age psychiatry has branded the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ (RCPsych) approach to the Assisted Dying Bill ‘inconsistent with the college membership’. Baroness Elaine Murphy, a prominent medical member of the House of Lords, has added her voice to a growing number of RCPsych members, including a former college president and vice-president, in voicing concerns and distancing themselves from the de facto opposition stance taken by their professional medical body.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists officially has a neutral position on assisted dying, following a 2024 survey of 1,474 members that showed an equal proportion of membership (45%) supported and opposed the proposed legislation. But despite this neutral position, the college has become increasingly critical of the legislation, and have distributed briefings and made media interventions opposing the Bill.

Dr Annabel Price, representing RCPsych, will provide evidence today to the House of Lords Select Committee.

Baroness Murphy, senior professor of old-age psychiatry, said:

‘It is, after all, perfectly possible for the college to have a neutral stance and yet to criticise certain aspects of the Bill, as indeed we all do. However, recent college briefings and statements are totally inconsistent with the college members’ wishes to be neutral on the fundamental principles, and some of their statements are plain wrong.

‘It reflects a small group of college officers who are determined to undermine members’ wishes by opposing the Bill.’

In May, Kim Leadbeater, the sponsor of the Bill, said it was misleading to say RCPsych had pulled its support and that there were sufficient psychiatrists to play a role on the proposed panel of experts who will assess all assisted dying cases. 30% of respondents to the RCPsych’s 2025 survey said they would be willing to participate.

Where do the other Royal Colleges and medical bodies stand on assisted dying?

One of the biggest differences between now and the 2015 Assisted Dying Bill is that all of the Royal Colleges have ended their opposition to assisted dying and moved to a position of neutrality. The British Medical Association (BMA) also ended their opposition and moved to a neutral position in 2021.

Richy Thompson, Director of Public Affairs at Humanists UK, said:

‘Psychiatrists have a vital role in safeguarding decision-making, and many are willing to help do exactly that. Suggesting there aren’t enough psychiatrists or that the profession can’t contribute fairly is simply out of step with members’ views. We urge RCPsych to honour the neutral position its members voted for, engage constructively with the Select Committee, and ensure people nearing the end of life are treated with dignity, autonomy, and care.’

Graham Winyard, Board Member of My Death, My Decision, said:

‘Neutrality has to mean neutrality in practice. RCPsych’s own surveys show members are divided, so the College should reflect that balance and support a careful, evidence-led debate rather than take sides. With other Royal Colleges and the BMA now neutral, it’s time for consistency, clarity, and respect for patients who want compassionate end-of-life choice.

‘We are calling on the Select Committee to take evidence from the most important people this debate is centred around, the terminally ill. We cannot fathom how members of the House of Lords could take further evidence about the Terminally Ill Adults Bill without hearing from terminally ill adults. People who are dying deserve to be heard, they deserve the right to make decisions about the end of their lives, and they deserve dignity. ’