Ukrainian lawmakers have proposed expanding the circumstances in which family caregiving can justify either a deferment from mobilisation or discharge from military service under martial law. Bill No. 16118 targets cases where an elderly relative cannot manage essential daily activities and depends on continuing assistance from the person liable for service.

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine reports the bill’s registration on Thursday, October 1. It was introduced by MPs Oleksii Honcharenko, Sofiia Fedyna, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, Viktoriia Hryb and Mykhailo Sokolov during the 16th session of the ninth parliamentary convocation.

The proposal addresses a distinction that can be decisive for affected households: having a serious diagnosis does not always fit an existing statutory category, even when the patient is functionally unable to live without help. The sponsors say citizens have described situations in which a relative provides indispensable daily care but cannot obtain a deferment because the family’s circumstances do not meet the law’s current formal wording.

Under the draft, Article 23 of the law governing mobilisation would gain a new ground for deferment. It would cover a person liable for military service who cares for an elderly parent or a second-degree family member whose chronic disease, cognitive disorder or other lasting impairment has caused a partial or complete loss of self-care or mobility.

Eligibility would not follow from age, kinship or illness alone. The need for permanent outside care would have to be established by a healthcare institution’s medical consultative commission or by an expert team assessing the person’s everyday functioning. This requirement is intended to focus the measure on functional dependency rather than occasional assistance or a diagnosis without major limitations.

The family test is equally important. A deferment would generally be available only if no first-degree family member can provide the care. The draft also recognises that such relatives may exist on paper but be unavailable in practice because they themselves need permanent care or are already responsible for another dependent member of the family.

A matching amendment is proposed for Article 26 of the law on military duty and military service. It would allow a serving member to seek discharge during martial law when the same combination of medical need and lack of an alternative carer applies. This could matter when a relative’s health deteriorates after the service member has joined the armed forces.

Deferment and discharge would remain legally separate processes. The first prevents mobilisation while its grounds remain valid; the second ends an existing period of service after review through the military personnel system. Applicants could therefore face different filing routes, evidentiary checks and decision-makers even though the underlying family circumstances are similar.

The bill’s rationale portrays care as more than voluntary household support. A dependent person may require help with eating, hygiene, medication, movement, communication, medical appointments and compliance with treatment. Removing the only available carer can consequently create an immediate health and safety risk, particularly where municipal or residential services cannot provide an equivalent substitute.

At the same time, implementation would require precise safeguards. Authorities would need a reliable way to identify relevant relatives, determine whether they are genuinely able to help and prevent conflicting findings by medical bodies, recruitment centres and military units. Privacy rules will also matter because the procedure may involve sensitive health data belonging not to the applicant but to a family member.

Supporters are likely to frame the proposal as a narrowly designed correction that balances defence needs with protection for highly dependent older people. Sceptics may focus on the possibility of fabricated caregiving arrangements, inconsistent medical conclusions or pressure on commissions. A transparent appeal mechanism would be essential because an incorrect refusal could leave a vulnerable person without care, while an unjustified approval would affect available military manpower.

The national security, defence and intelligence committee is designated as the lead committee. The health, social policy, budget, anti-corruption, humanitarian policy and European integration committees are also expected to review aspects of the initiative. The explanatory note says implementation would require no additional state-budget expenditure, although document verification and medical assessment could still add administrative workload.

Registration does not change the law or create an immediate entitlement. The proposal must pass parliamentary consideration, receive the required vote, be signed and be officially published. If enacted in its current form, it would take effect on the day after publication, while the Cabinet of Ministers would have one month to align regulations and establish the detailed machinery for its application.