Cost of assisted dying ‘could be tens of thousands of pounds’ per person
The cost of assisted dying in the UK could mean it ends up being only be for the wealthy, a specialist lawyer has told Sky News.
MPs voted the assisted dying bill through its second stage last month, meaning the UK is closer to allowing people to end their own lives legally.
The bill stipulates people will have to have been given six months or less to live, must have two doctors saying they are eligible and a High Court judge would have to make a final decision.
Politics latest: Farmers protest in Westminster
Lawyer Alexa Payet, who has represented the families of British people who have chosen assisted dying overseas, told Sky News the costs could run into “tens of thousands of pounds”.
She also said because the scope of the bill is so narrow, people who are terminally ill but have longer to live will still choose to go overseas to die.
“Nothing about legal procedure has been set out in the bill yet but I can imagine the process could be tens of thousands of pounds,” she said.
“That begs the question as to whether any funding will be made available.”
Chancellor Rachel Reeve this week refused to say if assisted dying would be made free under the NHS, ahead of a committee of MPs being formed on Wednesday to scrutinise the bill and propose amendments.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater introduced the assisted dying bill to parliament, which passed its second stage last month
Ms Payet, partner in the disputed wills and estates team at Michaelmores LLP, has successfully fought for the families of British people who have gone to places like Dignitas in Switzerland.
As assisted dying is currently a criminal offence, British people who help someone to die at an overseas clinic are can commit a crime which means they are not allowed to benefit from the proceeds from wills or shared assets.
Helping could entail filling out the Dignitas form or organising transport.
Read more:
The details of the assisted dying bill
What happens now MPs have backed assisted dying bill?
Ms Payet has worked on, among many others, two cases that have become case law, which has allowed judges to dismiss other cases – but people still have to go through a criminal investigation before.
She said the cost of lawyers to get a High Court judge to approve the application would be considerable.
Then there would be the legal costs family members might need for helping the person to die, because the Suicide Act may still apply so anybody encouraging or assisting suicide would be criminally liable.
They would then need to pay for lawyers to fight for their right to claim inheritance.
Lawyer Alexa Payet, who specialises in relief against forfeiture, warned the cost of assisted dying could be very high. Pic: Michaelmores LLP
Ms Payet said: “Any family members who provide any form of assistance getting them to that stage of assisted death, they don’t seem to be covered by this bill as drafted.
“I think there’s a question mark over what would happen with those individuals, both from the criminal aspect, but also from the forfeiture.
“It seems to me that the law, as it stands, may apply to those people, and that’s something else that should be given some consideration.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Opinions remain divided after assisted dying vote
She added there has been no mention of whether legal aid would be available, but said many people would not be eligible yet still could not afford the legal fees.
“This bill is incredibly narrow,” she said.
“Anecdotally, most of the people that go off to Dignitas are not people that fit this category of the terminally ill with six months or less to die.
“So, even if that bill was passed, it’s not going to affect the large majority of people who are currently taking steps to obtain an assisted death.
“Those people are presumably still going to go off to these overseas clinics which cost around £10,000 to £15,000 but then there’s also the associated costs like travel, with some people needing an air ambulance.”
Lawmakers in the US Senate Banking Committee voted to advance the nomination of Paul Atkins to be a member of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), paving the way for a full floor vote in the chamber.
In an April 3 executive session of the banking committee, lawmakers voted 13-11 for Atkins to serve two consecutive terms as an SEC commissioner, taking over former Chair Gary Gensler’s term and another term ending in 2031.
Atkins’ nomination will soon go to the Republican-controlled Senate for a full floor vote, where many experts suggest he is likely to be confirmed.
Senator Tim Scott addressing lawmakers on April 3. Source: US Senate Banking Committee
Before calling for a vote, committee chair Tim Scott said Atkins would bring “much-needed clarity for digital assets.” Ranking member Elizabeth Warren reiterated earlier concerns about Trump’s SEC pick helping “billionaire scammers” like former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and Tesla CEO Elon Musk “actively trying to destroy” federal agencies.
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
The US Treasury Department sanctioned eight cryptocurrency wallet addresses linked to Russian crypto exchange Garantex and the Houthis.
The United States Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned eight crypto addresses that data from blockchain forensic firms Chainalysis and TRM Labs had linked to the organizations. Two are deposit addresses at major crypto platforms, while the other six are privately controlled.
Visualization of transaction flow related to OFAC sanctions. Source: Chainalysis
The addresses in question reportedly moved nearly $1 billion worth of funds linked to sanctioned entities. Most of the transactions funded Houthi operations in Yemen and the Red Sea region.
Slava Demchuk, a crypto-focused money laundering specialist and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime consultant told Cointelegraph that “the inclusion of Houthi-linked wallets reflects a broader recognition of crypto’s role in geopolitical conflicts and terrorism financing.” He added:
“The implications are far-reaching — compliance frameworks must adapt swiftly, attribution efforts will intensify, and decentralized platforms may face increased scrutiny.“
Demchuk highlighted that the situation reshapes the regulatory landscape. According to him, crypto “is now firmly within the scope of international security.
Who are the Houthis?
The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, are a Yemeni political and armed movement that emerged from the Zaidi Shia community. Originating as a revivalist and reformist group, they later became a major force in Yemen’s ongoing conflict.
Related: US DOJ says it seized Hamas crypto meant to finance terrorism
In recent years, the Houthis have engaged in attacks against both military and civilian vessels in the Red Sea with missiles and drones. In January, US President Donald Trump designated the group as a foreign terrorist organization.
The announcement noted that “the Houthis’ activities threaten the security of American civilians and personnel in the Middle East, the safety of our closest regional partners, and the stability of global maritime trade.” The group was recently struck by a US bombing campaign.
Related: Binance claims’ no special relationship’ with Hamas, argues to dismiss lawsuit
Garantex: Russia’s crypto laundromat
Garantex is a Russian crypto exchange that was sanctioned and shut down in early March after purportedly helping money-laundering efforts. At the time, Tether — the leading stablecoin operator and issuer of USDt — froze $27 million in USDt on the platform, forcing it to halt operations.
The platform has reportedly shifted millions of dollars as it sought to reboot under its new brand, “Grinex.”
In mid-March, officials with India’s Central Bureau of Investigation announced the arrest of Lithuanian national Aleksej Bešciokov, who was alleged to have operated the cryptocurrency exchange Garantex.
The arrest of the alleged Garantex founder was based on US charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business and conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again
Lawmakers in the US states of Minnesota and Alabama filed companion bills to identical existing bills that if passed into law, would allow each state to buy Bitcoin.
The Minnesota Bitcoin Act, or HF 2946, was introduced to the state’s House by Republican Representative Bernie Perryman on April 1, following an identical bill introduced on March 17 by GOP state Senator Jeremy Miller.
Meanwhile, on the same day in Alabama, Republican state Senator Will Barfoot introduced Senate Bill 283, while a bi-partisan group of representatives led by Republican Mike Shaw filed the identical House Bill 482, which allows for the state to invest in crypto, but essentially limits it to Bitcoin (BTC).
Twin Alabama bills don’t explicitly name Bitcoin
Minnesota’s Bitcoin Act would allow the state’s investment board to invest state assets in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies and permit state employees to add crypto to retirement accounts.
It would also exempt crypto gains from state income taxes and give residents the option to pay state taxes and fees with Bitcoin.
Source: Bitcoin Laws
The twin Alabama bills don’t explicitly identify Bitcoin, but would limit the state’s crypto investment into assets that have a minimum market value of $750 billion, a criterion that only Bitcoin currently meets.
26 Bitcoin reserve bills now introduced in the US
Introducing identical bills is not uncommon in the US and is typically done to speed up the bicameral legislative process so laws can pass more quickly.
Bills to create a Bitcoin reserve have been introduced in 26 US states, with Arizona currently the closest to passing a law to make one, according to data from the bill tracking website Bitcoin Laws.
Arizona currently leads in the US state Bitcoin reserve race. Source: Bitcoin Laws
Pennsylvania was one of the first US states to introduce a Bitcoin reserve bill, in November 2024. However, the initiative was reportedly eventually rejected, with similar bills also killed in Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.
Related: North Carolina bills would add crypto to state’s retirement system
Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and Wyoming are the five states thathave rejected Bitcoin reserve initiatives. Source: Bitcoin Laws
According to a March 3 report by Barron’s, “red states” like Montana have faced setbacks to the Bitcoin reserve initiatives amid political confrontations between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
Additional reporting by Helen Partz.
Magazine: Financial nihilism in crypto is over — It’s time to dream big again
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway