Assisted dying

[The blue phantom]

I think most of know all too well that dying is very often a cruel and painful business but state assisted suicide is not the solution as presented in this bill.

I'm fairly sure you're a very religious person and this is why you're against this bill.

 

[mosssideblue]

I think most of know all too well that dying is very often a cruel and painful business but state assisted suicide is not the solution as presented in this bill.

So you’re content to allow people to die in agony and allowing their families to see and remember this harrowing position of their loved one.

 

[mosssideblue]

Proper palliative care is what is needed, that is what 'normal people' want.

Normal people would not want to watch a family member see out their remaining days suffering agony.

 

[stonerblue]

What is in front of the HoC is a step to introduce state sponsored suicide. The real issue is improving end of life care but the proposed bill adversely affects everybody in this country. It actually constitutes a genuine threat to all of us by offering what seems a compassionate option for a very small minority which is in fact an official path to additional coercion for the majority which will not be prevented by medical or judicial safeguards.

Absolute fucking bollocks

 

[johnny crossan]

Normal people would not want to watch a family member see out their remaining days suffering agony.

Exactly so, they would want proper palliative care, which includes effective pain relief.

 

[johnny crossan]

Absolute fucking bollocks

Why?

 

[stonerblue]

Exactly so, they would want proper palliative care, which includes effective pain relief.

u wanna tell me what effective pain relief to give?

 

[mosssideblue]

Exactly so, they would want proper palliative care, which includes effective pain relief.

No it doesn’t. The “effective pain relief” results in someone being totally spaced out and no idea who is around them.

Have you ever witnessed a family member suffer as they fade to death?

 

[johnny crossan]

I'm fairly sure you're a very religious person and this is why you're against this bill.

This bill is deeply flawed. The creation of a state sanction for assisted suicide on the the basis of a six month diagnosis period is completely unacceptable and would allow coercion and undue influence on an an industrial scale. Opposed by all of the Health Bodies who would be involved in this. We already have legislation which allows assisted dying btw.
Religious affiliations do not affect these practical issues.

 

[johnny crossan]

No it doesn’t. The “effective pain relief” results in someone being totally spaced out and no idea who is around them.

Have you ever witnessed a family member suffer as they fade to death?

Yes, sadly several times. Pain management at the end of life is a complex process and it is perfectly legal to assist dying with such treatment but I agree the administration of a fatal morphine dose is legally unclear and sometimes it proves ineffective. The majority of those who opt for suicide in those countries that allow it do so to benefit others rather than themselves. Self-coercion based on their perception of themselves becoming a burden not fear of a painful end of life and death. Such people choose to end their lives saying they do so to end their suffering but in reality it is done for the benefit of others.

 

[supercity88]

What is in front of the HoC is a step to introduce state sponsored suicide. The real issue is improving end of life care but the proposed bill adversely affects everybody in this country. It actually constitutes a genuine threat to all of us by offering what seems a compassionate option for a very small minority which is in fact an official path to additional coercion for the majority which will not be prevented by medical or judicial safeguards.

If someone is dying then end of life care is quite simple. You give them as much pain control as you legally and responsibly can, without killing them. But in reality the patient needs so much to control their pain that the dosage required would kill them.

I'm passionate about this because I have seen a loved one go through unbearable suffering, a complete loss of dignity and they would have taken the option to end their life if it was available.

This isn't life v death it's death v death. The number of people talking bollocks about this as if perfectly healthy people are going to end up dead as a result of coercion is ridiculous. Think of the thousands of people who will die but face immense and unimaginable pain before they do. They deserve the chance to decide their end. And it is their choice. They have to have the mental capacity to make the decision. And if they change their mind they can.

I saw an MP talking about her daughter who was ill and it was touch and go for a while. Hugely moving story. But missing the critical point. She wasn't terminal and wouldn't have been eligible to end her life.

 

[stonerblue]

Yes, sadly several times. Pain management at the end of life is a complex process and it is perfectly legal to assist dying with such treatment but I agree the administration of a fatal morphine dose is legally unclear and sometimes it proves ineffective. The majority of those who opt for suicide in those countries that allow it do so to benefit others rather than themselves. Self-coercion based on their perception of themselves becoming a burden not fear of a painful end of life and death. Such people choose to end their lives saying they do so to end their suffering but in reality it is done for the benefit of others.

And the proof for our assertion regarding self-coercion?

 

[stonerblue]

u wanna tell me what effective pain relief to give?

@johnny crossan

 

[johnny crossan]

@johnny crossan

I think you are already aware there is some suffering that is beyond the reach of palliative care to completely eliminate.

 

[johnny crossan]

And the proof for our assertion regarding self-coercion?

That's the issue, you often can't identify it. For example, old people in a care home watching their legacy to their loved ones disappear by £000s every month may just say they don't want to carry on because of pain but really are sacrificing themselves for their family's financial security.

 

[mosssideblue]

Yes, sadly several times. Pain management at the end of life is a complex process and it is perfectly legal to assist dying with such treatment but I agree the administration of a fatal morphine dose is legally unclear and sometimes it proves ineffective. The majority of those who opt for suicide in those countries that allow it do so to benefit others rather than themselves. Self-coercion based on their perception of themselves becoming a burden not fear of a painful end of life and death. Such people choose to end their lives saying they do so to end their suffering but in reality it is done for the benefit of others.

If you say so

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

If you say so

At the end of the day, the choice should be there. Then people can opt in and out subject to their thoughts and or beliefs.

 

[stonerblue]

I think you are already aware there is some suffering that is beyond the reach of palliative care to completely eliminate.

and in those cases do we just let the patient suffer til the croak?

 

[stonerblue]

That's the issue, you often can't identify it. For example, old people in a care home watching their legacy to their loved ones disappear by £000s every month may just say they don't want to carry on because of pain but really are sacrificing themselves for their family's financial security.

So what?

 

[johnny crossan]

and in those cases do we just let the patient suffer til the croak?

Listening to the live HoC debate reference has been made several times to doctors administering life-ending doses of morphine in such cases before the Shipman murders but not after those horrors.