Wes Streeting has ordered officials to analyse the cost of implementing the new assisted dying Bill amid concerns it may divert funds away from NHS care.
The health secretary yesterday repeated his opposition to changing the law, warning it may be necessary to cut other services to fund it.
But he also argued there is a chilling slippery slope argument if people felt compelled to end their own lives in order to save the NHS or their relatives money.
MPs will get a free vote on the change later this month after it was put forward as a private members bill by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.
Speaking at the NHS Providers annual conference in Liverpool, Mr Streeting said: Now that weve seen the Bill published, Ive asked my department to look at the costs that would be associated with providing a new service to enable assisted dying to go forward, because Im very clear that regardless of my own personal position or my own vote, my department and the whole government will respect the will of Parliament if people vote for assisted dying.
Wes Streeting has ordered officials to analyse the cost of implementing the new assisted dying Bill
Dignity in Dying campaigners gather in Parliament Square, central London, in support of the assisted dying bill
That work is now under way, so I cant give you a precise figure today.
Mr Streeting was asked about the costs associated with assisted dying as a new service for patients, but also whether there may be savings if patients need less care because they choose to end their own lives.
He said: You do touch on the slippery slope argument, which is the potential for cost savings if people choose to opt for assisted dying rather than stay in the care of the care providers or the NHS.
I think that is a chilling slippery slope argument, and I would hate for people to opt for assisted dying because they think theyre saving someone somewhere money, whether thats relatives or the NHS.
And I think thats one of the issues that MPs are wrestling with as they decide how to cast their vote. But this is a free vote, the Governments position is neutral.
Mr Streeting, said there were choices and trade-offs, adding that any new service comes at the expense of other competing pressures and priorities.
Earlier in the day, Mr Streeting told Times Radio that a change in the law to allow assisted dying would be a big change and no doctor would be compelled to take part.
He added: There would be resource implications for doing it. And those choices would come at the expense of other choices.
Downing Street would not be drawn into saying whether Mr Streeting was right to say a new assisted dying law could come at the expense of other NHS services.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater (centre) pictured with Dignity in Dying campaigners
Mr Streetings comments come amid growing signs that MPs are nervous about gaps in the bill and the lack of time they are being given to debate it, which could see it voted down.
Energy Minister Michael Shanks told Sky News: I think ultimately Ill vote against the legislation when it comes because Im not convinced the legislation provides enough safeguards, and I am worried about this kind of slippery slope that we potentially get.
But I also absolutely recognise those who are suffering at the moment and want to have some control over the end of their life.
Tory MP Sir Alec Shelbrooke asked Sir Keir Starmer in Prime Ministers Questions to allow the bill more time in the Commons than the currently allotted single day on a Friday, when many MPs return to their constituencies.
He warned that without more time, people like myself may decline a second reading over fear that we may not get to be able to debate these issues in full.
But Sir Keir insisted: I do think there is sufficient time allocated to it, but it is an important issue.
High-profile supporters of a change in the law include Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill and revealed in December that she had joined Dignitas in Switzerland because of the current law.
The broadcaster has hailed the wonderful Bill, but acknowledged it is likely to come into effect too late for her.