Member

I turn now to Amendments 178, 252, 316, 345, 385 and 454 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Carter of Haslemere, and Amendment 186 in the name of my noble friend Lord Hunt of Kings Heath. The Government have workability concerns in relation to these amendments. First, it is unclear what the full assessment is intended to cover and what is required for it, potentially making it difficult to demonstrate compliance. Secondly, the amendments would require repeated referrals at different stages in the process. It would be resource intensive to repeat the same full assessment three times in addition to the existing assessments in the Bill. This might cause delays in the assisted dying process. The Government do not have a detailed delivery model, so we are unable to comment on the point at which the process cannot be delivered within a reasonable timescale. Finally, I note that it is unclear what happens if the individual declines any of the referrals, including if the individual has, in fact, undergone such assessments. That might result in ambiguity for those seeking an assisted death or for the assessing doctor and panels in fulfilling their duties under the Bill.