The coming week was due to be another momentous one for assisted dying campaigners. It will now instead be a period of calm before the storm. Kim Leadbeater, sponsor of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of of Life) Bill, has very reasonably delayed the report stage which means it will not return to the Commons until May 16, allowing MPs more time to consider the landmark legislation.

It was a move necessitated by the acceptance of around 150 amendments during a thorough committee stage involving some 90 hours of debate. Vocal opponents have tried to paint the process as a tumultuous one that has left the Bill losing support hand over fist.

But those on the frontline of this historic campaign say that could not be further from the truth — and they are cautiously optimistic that the Bill will retain the backing of a majority of MPs next month. The message from campaigners is clear: this bill is alive and kicking — and stronger than ever.

Their quiet confidence is perhaps less surprising if you tune out the noise and misinformation and focus on the changes that have been made to improve the Bill.

One major amendment means that a requirement for cases to be reviewed by a High Court judge has been swapped for the use of multidisciplinary panels, including a senior lawyer, consultant psychiatrist and social worker.

As well as taking pressure off the court system, it is hard to argue that swapping a single judge for a multidisciplinary panel will not provide a greater level of scrutiny from specialists with a broader range of expertise to assess a person’s capacity and other relevant factors behind their request.

Another significant change came when Ms Leadbeater agreed to extend the implementation period for assisted dying from two years to four. The Spen Valley MP would have faced fierce criticism for rushing the process, had she not done this. Instead, opponents claimed the delay was simply evidence that the legislation is too complex to be safely implemented. It is a classic catch-22.

Other key amendments make it clear that doctors would be explicitly prevented from discussing assisted dying with a patient in isolation and must explain other options available to them, including palliative and hospice care, symptom management and psychological support.

Participating doctors will have to undergo specific training on mental capacity and identifying domestic abuse, including coercive control and financial abuse. And independent advocates will be made available for people with learning disabilities, autism or mental disorders.

Make no mistake, the large number of amendments made to the Bill will need careful consideration by MPs. But it is hard to imagine that many who voted for the bill in principle last November would vote against a piece of legislation that is returning to the Commons even stronger.

Around three dozen who backed the Bill at second reading noted reservations and suggested their position may change down the line. However, supporters of Ms Leadbeater believe they are “gaining, not losing, support”.

One MP who expressed conditional support last year was Dr Marie Tidball. In a deeply personal speech during the debate, she spoke of her own experience with disability and severe illness and described her decision to vote for the Bill as “one of the hardest that I have had to make”.

She proved to be an exemplar member of the Bill committee, engaging constructively with every debate, voicing her concerns and tabling careful amendments to strengthen safeguards for disabled people.

At a press conference marking the end of committee stage, she described the Bill as one crafted with both “principle and precision”. She added: “I arrive at the end of this process, having started it as being someone giving my conditional support, to be so reassured that I will be voting in favour of this at the next reading.”

Only time will tell whether enough MPs are reassured by the updated legislation next month. In the meantime, Ms Leadbeater will no doubt be working incredibly hard in Westminster to ensure colleagues understand the changes made.

She has become a tireless advocate for terminally ill people who are desperate for this choice, showing remarkable resilience in the face of increasingly personal attacks.

Praise must also go to Sir Keir Starmer. The Prime Minister has resisted attempts to turn the issue into a political football by remaining unshakeably neutral on the matter, even as some of his Cabinet ministers defied instructions by sharing their voting intentions.

Since the Bill's second reading, it has become clearer than ever that the tide is turning in favour of this huge societal change.

The Isle of Man's parliament passed an assisted dying bill last month, with the service expected to be available there as soon as 2027. And similar legislation is under consideration in Scotland.

Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen's recent heartbreaking health update — in which she confirmed that her lung cancer wonder drug is no longer keeping the disease at bay — is a stark reminder of the people for whom this is a matter of life and death.

And the annual statistics released by Dignitas last week provided yet more evidence that the public is crying out for this change. The UK accounted for some 331 new registrations with the Swiss clinic last year, more than any other nation.

Some 2,231 Britons were members at the end of 2024, up by more than half compared with five years ago. Tragically, 37 Brits made the stressful and often lonely journey to die at Dignitas last year.

It is those who are facing the terrifying prospect of an agonising and undignified death who should be at the forefront of our minds as we wait for MPs to have their next say on this crucial piece of legislation.

Terminally ill people are only asking to be given a choice over the manner of their death when they have reached a point of no return, and those who oppose assisted dying will be free not to use it.

As this Express crusade has argued for more than three years, the time has come to Give Us Our Last Rights.