[Politics] Assisted dying

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Seven years ago, before I got incurable cancer, I would definitely have had said yes but now I would edge towards no. It’s difficult because the outcome could have very real implications for me. My concerns are these:

I don’t really see how the safeguards against bullying will actually work as pressure can be applied in subtle ways particularly when a patient is vulnerable and dependant. In a recent case someone I know with cancer was kept away from their friends and relatives by their partner who did absolutely nothing to give them a life. My friend just gave up and their partner was already planning his new life they were dying.

I am also concerned about the pressure that patients will apply to themselves. I am completely independent but it is quite likely that this will change. How will I cope with seeing myself as a burden? I can get round the 6-month terminal prognosis requirement by simply refusing the treatment that is keeping me alive. Having incurable cancer involves a constant battle to keep my head together; throwing in guilt could make things unbearable. This would be exacerbated if I knew that my death would give children or grandchildren the chance to buy a home.

Finally I am not re-assured by the evidence of Canada and think it could be a slippery slope. In Canada I may well have been offered it already. One of the more alarming things to come out of Covid was the willingness, or even enthusiasm, with which some elements of society were prepared to view the sick or vulnerable as disposable. Eugenics has made a significant comeback over the last 4 years, these days dressed up as wellbeing and anti-vaccination.

I totally respect the motives of the politicians that are advocating for a change in the law and the people on here that support this but, on balance, I am against it.

Thanks for posting that. Absolutely spot on.

And, my very best wishes.

 

[chip]

That's because assisted suicide is (you can guess the rest).

By the same token, driving a car is not illegal, but driving a car while sitting on someone's lap, with you doing the steering and your 'friend' operating the gas and break pedals . . . .

Another analogy, having a wee in a public toilet is not illegal, but if a 'friend' is holding your willy for you....

(and so on)

Not a good analogy that one, the driver assist in my car needs prosecuting.

And my point was that assisting someone in ending their own life should not be a crime. At present, this includes accompanying people to a clinic in another country where no crime is being committed. We already have all the laws we need to protect people from being assisted aginst their will. Like any other laws, some people will ignore them. I just don't think this is a matter for the state to stick its snotty nose in.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Hmm, have you talked to a lot of formally pregnant people who have told you their abortions were unnecessary? If they were pregnant, and did not want to bring the embryo or foetus to term, then that abortion was necessary.

I know of medical staff in the north, who are told to make it difficult to tell parents the sex of the baby when scanning, as daughters weren’t wanted.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not a good analogy that one, the driver assist in my car needs prosecuting.

And my point was that assisting someone in ending their own life should not be a crime. At present, this includes accompanying people to a clinic in another country where no crime is being committed. We already have all the laws we need to protect people from being assisted aginst their will. Like any other laws, some people will ignore them. I just don't think this is a matter for the state to stick its snotty nose in.

If the driver assist is sitting on your lap, they certainly do need prosecuting!
(It was therefore a very good analogy)

As for your second point, if it is currently a crime then it is a crime. Whether it ceases to be so will be a matter for parliament to decide.

Additionally, as others have eloquently explained, using facts, experience and knowledge, it is very certainly not the case that we already have laws that would protect vulnerable people from being assisted against their will.

That why the caveats have been discussed at such length on this thread.

Finally, (what may amount to) murder is definitely something the state should stick its nose into.

You appear to think that all assisted death scenarios are where a loving family surround the bed of a smiling terminally ill relative who, eyes wide open, and with joy in their heart, has made the independent and fully informed decision to end their own life, using the necessary assistance of others. If it were that simple there would be little need for a debate.

 

[ROSM]

Seven years ago, before I got incurable cancer, I would definitely have had said yes but now I would edge towards no. It’s difficult because the outcome could have very real implications for me. My concerns are these:

I don’t really see how the safeguards against bullying will actually work as pressure can be applied in subtle ways particularly when a patient is vulnerable and dependant. In a recent case someone I know with cancer was kept away from their friends and relatives by their partner who did absolutely nothing to give them a life. My friend just gave up and their partner was already planning his new life they were dying.

I am also concerned about the pressure that patients will apply to themselves. I am completely independent but it is quite likely that this will change. How will I cope with seeing myself as a burden? I can get round the 6-month terminal prognosis requirement by simply refusing the treatment that is keeping me alive. Having incurable cancer involves a constant battle to keep my head together; throwing in guilt could make things unbearable. This would be exacerbated if I knew that my death would give children or grandchildren the chance to buy a home.

Finally I am not re-assured by the evidence of Canada and think it could be a slippery slope. In Canada I may well have been offered it already. One of the more alarming things to come out of Covid was the willingness, or even enthusiasm, with which some elements of society were prepared to view the sick or vulnerable as disposable. Eugenics has made a significant comeback over the last 4 years, these days dressed up as wellbeing and anti-vaccination.

I totally respect the motives of the politicians that are advocating for a change in the law and the people on here that support this but, on balance, I am against it.

Thank you for taking the time to post this. It is food for thought.

I wish you all the best

 

[chip]

If the driver assist is sitting on your lap, they certainly do need prosecuting!
(It was therefore a very good analogy)

As for your second point, if it is currently a crime then it is a crime. Whether it ceases to be so will be a matter for parliament to decide.

Additionally, as others have eloquently explained, using facts, experience and knowledge, it is very certainly not the case that we already have laws that would protect vulnerable people from being assisted against their will.

That why the caveats have been discussed at such length on this thread.

Finally, (what may amount to) murder is definitely something the state should stick its nose into.

You appear to think that all assisted death scenarios are where a loving family surround the bed of a smiling terminally ill relative who, eyes wide open, and with joy in their heart, has made the independent and fully informed decision to end their own life, using the necessary assistance of others. If it were that simple there would be little need for a debate.

We definitley have laws against murder and coercive control. Do we really need more? I think we are philosophically miles apart on this, but do you really need to resort to being patronising while not really engaging in "debate" yourself? I quite understand why people have reservations.

I've seen palliative care in action, and quite recently. Not my idea of a humane or satisfactory death. I'm certain that others will think differently. I'm less certain that they have relevance to my thinking or why that should influences the choices that others have. I've known people (two) who have travelled to Switzerland to die, I don't have the illussions you attribute to me.

 

[Juan Albion]

I have been present with someone as they went through an assisted death. It was almost surreal to be having a normal conversation with her, knowing she would be dead within the next ten minutes because she had chosen to do this. She had brain cancer but there were no outward signs of whatever she was enduring. The fatal dose was administered by a doctor, but other members of staff chose to opt out of being present.

Having been through it with someone, I still cannot say I have a firm opinion either way on whether it is right or not. At most I would say that I don't think it is my right to make the decision for someone else. It has been legal here for a few years now and one thing I would add is that the sky didn't fall just because it became legal.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

We definitley have laws against murder and coercive control. Do we really need more? I think we are philosophically miles apart on this, but do you really need to resort to being patronising while not really engaging in "debate" yourself? I quite understand why people have reservations.

I've seen palliative care in action, and quite recently. Not my idea of a humane or satisfactory death. I'm certain that others will think differently. I'm less certain that they have relevance to my thinking or why that should influences the choices that others have. I've known people (two) who have travelled to Switzerland to die, I don't have the illussions you attribute to me.

I have commented at length on my views on this**. You clearly haven't read what I have written, so get off your high horse.

Your comments on assisted death have been sweeping and parochial and have glibly ignored the very real concerns about the issue.

Read the post above by @cheshunt seagull and have another think about this.

Just making assisted death legal, without including massive loads of caveats and checks and balances, is borderline grotesque. This seems to be your position, to the point of suggesting the state keep its nose out of it (if it was you that posted that quip, apologies if it wasn't*). That's madness.

Edit It was you*.

**See my post #68.

 

[heathgate]

Vote is on Friday.

Hugely difficult and emotive subject.

Thoughts?

I take the view that we are a society where it is vigorously promoted that a person can do/say or be whatever they want as long as they don't tangibly hurt anyone else in the process...... therefore, I say 'aye' .

 

[Triggaaar]

Not really a matter for MPs, doctors or judges. It should be entirely a personal choice.

I don't follow your logic. For it to be a personal choice, MPs have to make it legal.

 

[Triggaaar]

For me I'm very torn on it. I think if you're life is truly unliveable then I think you should have a choice

I agree.

Just to check, we are talking about Palace fans right?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't follow your logic. For it to be a personal choice, MPs have to make it legal.

Exactly the same as smoking crack which, I am told, some people think is a personal choice because....er, it should be

Assisted death is of course not the same as smoking crack. It is, in fact, a tad more dangerous. Apparently.

(Not being facetious about the issue, rather witheringly irritated by some of the discourse).

 

[Silverhatch]

Something you cannot generalise about . No cases would ever be the same. If someone is suffering then they should have the right to pass. That’s what happens with our pets??

Pass where?

 

[alanfp]

I'm pro the proposed bill. The fact that it is sometimes considered the thin end of the wedge is interesting.... in other countries who have gone down this path there hasn't been much traction in terms of trying to get the law reversed - in fact the opposite. There have been more assisted deaths than originally expected. I would say that's for a reason - it's what people want, having seen it in action in their country.

I'm always interested to hear different views, but IN GENERAL those who have seen loved ones suffer tend to be pro assisted dying and those who oppose it have never experienced such circumstances at close quarters. As I say, this is a generalisation.

Also, I have only ever heard of one person who has changed their opinion over the years from pro- to anti- but there are many who have changed their minds in the other direction when they start to get affected themselves. A high profile one is Brian Rix (BBC article here)

Terminally ill actor Brian Rix calls for assisted dying law change

Terminally ill actor and disability campaigner Brian Rix, 92, says the law on assisted dying needs changing, having previously opposed it in the House of Lords in 2006.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[drew]

Seven years ago, before I got incurable cancer, I would definitely have had said yes but now I would edge towards no. It’s difficult because the outcome could have very real implications for me. My concerns are these:

I don’t really see how the safeguards against bullying will actually work as pressure can be applied in subtle ways particularly when a patient is vulnerable and dependant. In a recent case someone I know with cancer was kept away from their friends and relatives by their partner who did absolutely nothing to give them a life. My friend just gave up and their partner was already planning his new life they were dying.

I am also concerned about the pressure that patients will apply to themselves. I am completely independent but it is quite likely that this will change. How will I cope with seeing myself as a burden? I can get round the 6-month terminal prognosis requirement by simply refusing the treatment that is keeping me alive. Having incurable cancer involves a constant battle to keep my head together; throwing in guilt could make things unbearable. This would be exacerbated if I knew that my death would give children or grandchildren the chance to buy a home.

Finally I am not re-assured by the evidence of Canada and think it could be a slippery slope. In Canada I may well have been offered it already. One of the more alarming things to come out of Covid was the willingness, or even enthusiasm, with which some elements of society were prepared to view the sick or vulnerable as disposable. Eugenics has made a significant comeback over the last 4 years, these days dressed up as wellbeing and anti-vaccination.

I totally respect the motives of the politicians that are advocating for a change in the law and the people on here that support this but, on balance, I am against it.

Firstly you have my deepest sympathy for your diagnosis. Both my parents died from cancers, my mother 8 years from diagnosis and my father about 6 months. In neither case did they receive treatment to attempt to cure, only to alleviate the symptoms.

You mention about the bullying/control of your friend, maybe the safeguards in place would have helped them in that if that partner had tried to go down the assisted dying route, your friend would have seen two separate doctors and a judge. Of course, it may not have made any difference as, being aware of the safeguards, the partner may have just continued to do what they were doing.

As for the pressure you say you might put on yourself, is that any different to now? People may put pressure on themselves and go on to take their own life as the law stands at the moment, most probably won't. If assisted dying is introduced, it still remains an option. There will still be many people that, irrespective of how bad their health becomes will not chose the assisted dying option.

 

[drew]

Pass where?

Probably not the thread for that. We all know what he meant.

 

[chip]

I have commented at length on my views on this**. You clearly haven't read what I have written, so get off your high horse.

Your comments on assisted death have been sweeping and parochial and have glibly ignored the very real concerns about the issue.

Read the post above by @cheshunt seagull and have another think about this.

Just making assisted death legal, without including massive loads of caveats and checks and balances, is borderline grotesque. This seems to be your position, to the point of suggesting the state keep its nose out of it (if it was you that posted that quip, apologies if it wasn't*). That's madness.

Edit It was you*.

**See my post #68.

I think you're the one smoking crack here. You know nothing of my experience but glibly ignore my comments, you are the one in stirrups on a Suffolk Punch. I have spent much time thinking about this since a friend took their own life. I haven't ignored anyones concerns, or tried to belittle them. I've thought about death, and my death in particular, a lot in the past decade. We each have an individual view, shaped by facts, knowledge and experience. We each take something different. You seem to think I'm advocating euthenasia, I'd just like a friend to pass me a filled syringe when I chose to leave this life. Others will have differing views and I'm not suggesting any interference in that.

You talk about vulnerable people, only the ones you like I suspect and have quite a controlling tendancy. You seem to know what's best for other people and lack logic or coherence in your argument. My point is simple, an individual has a right to end their own life. In no way is that any other person's decision or gift. But, my views are cleary unacceptable to you. Tough.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think you're the one smoking crack here. You know nothing of my experience but glibly ignore my comments, you are the one in stirrups on a Suffolk Punch. I have spent much time thinking about this since a friend took their own life. I haven't ignored anyones concerns, or tried to belittle them. I've thought about death, and my death in particular, a lot in the past decade. We each have an individual view, shaped by facts, knowledge and experience. We each take something different. You seem to think I'm advocating euthenasia, I'd just like a friend to pass me a filled syringe when I chose to leave this life. Others will have differing views and I'm not suggesting any interference in that.

You talk about vulnerable people, only the ones you like I suspect and have quite a controlling tendancy. You seem to know what's best for other people and lack logic or coherence in your argument. My point is simple, an individual has a right to end their own life. In no way is that any other person's decision or gift. But, my views are cleary unacceptable to you. Tough.

I'll pop you on ignore. Ta ra.

 

[chip]

About 20 terminally ill people in UK die in unrelieved pain each day, research finds

Office of Health Economics says it used ‘most conservative of estimates’ and ‘true number is likely to be much larger’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Debate is today.

Strong (and sensible) arguments on both side.