I write as Chair of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland and as a member of our Legislative Oversight Forum, who are leading the College's response to a draft Bill on assisted dying which will be put before the Scottish Parliament.

Although we are pleased to see this topic raised in a BJPsych editorial^{Reference Bhui and Malhi1}, there are factual and contextual issues within the article with regard to the Scottish context, to the extent that a misleading impression is given around developments in this area.

From the outset, it portrays the legislation being undertaken through the UK Parliament on making assisted dying available to patients who are terminally ill as applying to the entirety of the UK. It would instead only apply in England and Wales. As already noted, there is separate legislation in Scotland currently being developed, led by a Liberal Democrat MSP.

This failure to account for the Scottish legislation is in spite of the Scottish draft Bill being much more likely to progress. The bill in England and Wales has not yet left the House of Lords, whereas the proposed bill in Scotland has support from individual members of the governing party, the SNP, and has now reached the point of clinical guidance being drafted to support consideration.

The article also fails to provide additional context, including the six previous rejections of similar legislation since 2003 (four times in Westminster and twice in Holyrood). We are concerned that a prominent editorial on such an important subject, written by senior authors, has been published without accounting for the legislative process in Scotland. We would urge the journal to engage with researchers, clinicians and lived experience representatives in the devolved nations to ensure its processes for commissioning, peer review and approval in future accounts for each of the four nations of the UK. This would ensure that an accurate portrayal of such issues can be provided to members in future.