The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) is facing criticism after changing from its longstanding opposition to assisted suicide to a neutral stance, despite a big reduction in support amongst its members for legalising the practice.
The shift comes ahead of a historic parliamentary vote on the Leadbetter Assisted Suicide Bill at Third Reading in April, which goals to legalise assisted dying within the UK.
However, survey results indicate that as the talk has gained visibility, fewer general practitioners now support legalisation in comparison with previous years.
A member-wide survey conducted by the RCGP revealed a notable change in sentiment amongst doctors over the past six years.
The results showed that support for legalising assisted suicide has dropped from 40% in 2019 to 33.7% in 2025, with opposition increasing barely, from 47% in 2019 to 47.6% in 2025.
Additionally, half (50.2%) of those with a transparent stance prefer the RCGP to stay against assisted suicide.
Nearly half (47.6%) of GPs oppose assisted suicide – outnumbering the 47.3% combined who support neutrality or legalisation.
Survey data also revealed that specific demographics inside the RCGP membership showed stronger opposition, with 49.6% of girls supporting continued opposition, in comparison with 44.9% of men.
Non-fellow RCGP members were more more likely to oppose legalisation (49.8%) than trainees (45.3%) or (38.5%) fellows.
When the undecided respondents were excluded, 52.7% of girls and 52.5% of members opposed legalising assisted suicide.
Despite only 13.6% of members favouring a neutral stance, the RCGP governing council has chosen to adopt neutrality, stating it would neither support nor oppose legalising assisted suicide.
Catherine Robinson, spokesperson for Right to Life UK said, “This large decrease in support for assisted suicide amongst GPs over recent years sends a transparent signal to MPs who’re hesitant about supporting the Leadbeater assisted suicide Bill, that they have to vote it down at Third Reading.”
Overlooking the clear trend of declining support, assisted suicide campaigners have sought to border the survey results as an indication of growing momentum.
Sarah Wootton, the Dignity in Dying CEO called the choice a “remarkable shift in how the medical occupation approaches selection at the tip of life.”
Kim Leadbeater, the legislator behind the assisted suicide bill, expressed her support for the choice, stating that the choice “reflects with the various discussions I even have had with GPs in the course of the progress of the Bill.”
The decision has triggered criticism from inside and outdoors the medical community, with over 260 general practitioners signing an open letter condemning the move.
The letter argues that the brand new stance misrepresents GP sentiment and raises ethical concerns.
“We consider assisted dying undermines public understanding of and access to palliative care, puts vulnerable populations susceptible to self-coercion or abuse, and drives societal biases that devalue certain lives,” the letter states.
“We find assisted suicide incompatible with our values as doctors: to advertise and preserve life, and to be worthy of our patients’ trust.”
The Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally, has also voiced her concern about “the impact the Bill would have on probably the most vulnerable members of society.”
“The irreducible value of each human person implies that nobody is a burden, every life is precious, every life is worthy of care. No one should feel compelled to hasten their very own death,” she asserted.
Ms Robinson said the RCGP’s change of stance was “misleading”.
“Assisted suicide campaigners try to present the brand new survey as demonstrating a swing in support for assisted suicide from GPs,” she said.
“In reality, the one shift was towards greater opposition with a majority of those expressing a view favouring ongoing RCGP opposition, and opposition now outnumbering support and neutrality combined,” she added.
“The RCGP change of stance is unwarranted and misleading.”
The controversy comes on the heels of a strongly worded motion by British Medical Association (BMA) consultants, which warns that the proposed Leadbeater Bill sets forth serious ethical and moral risks for UK doctors.
