Ongoing debates around assisted suicide are sparking important discussions about ethics, law, and morality worldwide. As new laws are introduced, it’s crucial to understand their potential effects, especially in relation to areas like inheritance law.
A key aspect of this issue is the Forfeiture Rule. This legal principle states anyone who unlawfully kills another, or unlawfully aids, abets, counsels or procures their death, cannot acquire a benefit in consequence of the killing.
With new legislative changes on the horizon, including the second reading of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, this article will explore the current state of assisted suicide law, the Forfeiture Rule, and how the new Bill could impact inheritance rights.
Assisted Suicide and the Forfeiture Rule
Assisted suicide is providing assistance to a person to end their own life, typically when they are suffering from a terminal illness. While the practice remains illegal in many jurisdictions, a number of countries and regions have enacted laws that permit some form of assisted death. In the UK, for example, while euthanasia remains illegal, assisted suicide is a subject of considerable legal debate. The Suicide Act 1961 decriminalised suicide but made it a crime to assist someone in taking their own life. However, changing attitudes and medical advances are prompting calls for reform.
At the same time, the Forfeiture Rule serves as a significant legal principle in inheritance law. The rule holds that anyone who unlawfully kills or assists in the death of another is disqualified from receiving any part of that person’s Estate. In practical terms, this means that a person who is involved in a loved one’s assisted suicide could potentially lose their right to inherit under that person’s Will, even if they were a named beneficiary. The Forfeiture rule ensures that no one can profit from an unlawful killing, maintaining both moral and legal integrity.
Case Law and Its Impact on Assisted Suicide
While the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill seeks to create a clear legal path for assisted suicide, current case law plays an important role in shaping how these cases are handled under existing legal principles. The case of Morris v Morris[1], Myra and Philip Morris were married in 1977 and had a long and happy marriage. Myra was diagnosed with multiple system atrophy, a debilitating and terminal illness. After enduring two years of progressive suffering, Myra made the decision to end her life with the assistance of a Swiss clinic. Myra told Phillip on multiple occasions that she wanted to die but she did not want him to go to prison. Phillip made efforts to improve Myra’s living conditions, but she became determined to go to Switzerland.
Myra had made a Will, where her husband was the primary beneficiary of her estate, with their children as secondary beneficiaries. However, the involvement of her husband and children in her death raised concerns due to the Forfeiture Rule. Additionally, in Ninian v Findlay[2] that the act of travelling to an assisted dying clinic in the company of the patient could engage the forfeiting effect and might need to be joined as parties to the application.
The court excluded the application of the Forfeiture Rule. It was found that Myra had made a clear, voluntary, and fully informed decision to end her life before Phillip took any action that could be considered assistance. Myra was firm in her decision throughout, and she retained full mental capacity until her death. Phillip’s actions were motivated entirely by compassion, and he never encouraged Myra to end her life. In fact, he attempted to talk her out of it. Despite his efforts, Myra remained determined to go ahead with the assisted suicide. Additionally, Philip reported the situation to the police, but they decided not to take further action.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Second Reading
On 29 November 2024, the UK Parliament will hold the second reading of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This proposed law could change the landscape of assisted suicide, allowing terminally ill adults to seek assistance in dying, under strict conditions. These would likely include medical checks, mental competence assessments, and safeguards to prevent abuse or coercion.
The Bill comes at a time when public opinion is shifting in favour of assisted dying, with surveys showing strong support for such a law, provided it includes proper safeguards. A recent survey revealed that 78% of people support assisted dying under certain conditions[3]. The proposed Bill aims to address concerns by ensuring that the decision is fully voluntary and protected from external pressures.
What This Means Moving Forward
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill represents a significant step in the ongoing debate over assisted suicide. As the Bill progresses, it will bring new challenges to both legal practices and societal values. The relationship between assisted suicide and inheritance law, particularly the Forfeiture Rule, will need further legal clarification.
In the future, the law will need to balance respect for individual autonomy, ensuring safeguards against abuse, and preserving the integrity of the legal process, including inheritance rights. As we await the second reading of the ill, the future of assisted suicide in the UK remains a dynamic and evolving issue.
If you have any questions on your estate planning, we would be delighted to discuss further with you. Please contact us to speak to a member of our Private Wealth & Inheritance Team.
Author’s Edit
Following publication of this article, and second reading of The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-25; MPs have voted 330 to 275 in support of the Bill.
Legal practitioners wait to see what impact this could have on the Forfeiture Rule in the future.
[1] [2024] EWHC 2554 (Ch)
[2] [2019] EWHC 297 (Ch)
[3] YouGov, ‘YouGov / Dignity in Dying Survey Results’, 21 September 2023
