Assisted dying

Ifwecouldjust....... said:
The areas that are 'over funded' are those that are in the hands of private companies...where they do the work and make a huge profit (which is still counted by the Government as massive investment into the NHS )

The areas that are 'underfunded' are the expensive areas that private companies won't touch with a barge pole (cancer treatment etc)

See how it works yet?
Click to expand...
NHS is a brand name it’s partly run by fancy offices in Whitehall successive governments
have created the two tier system we have now.
The current labour government are not about to reverse the changes made since the days of Thatcher.
Every winter we hear there are no hospital beds available because patients are bed blocking they cannot be discharged home or into a care home, that’s a coercion we have on patients
.
Back on topic some patients with a stage four cancer diagnosis reject palliative care as an end. It is okay for some patients but others turn their backs on the prolonged prospect of suffering. AD respects their need for a pain-free death I don’t think the current legislation goes far enough.IMO.
 
N1985 said:
Bible thumping cunts who believe in fairy tales in disagreement with law shocker.

If you believe in a made up deity that created the earth your opinion is automatically moot.

Such big opinions or abortion and assisted dying when really it should have absolutely fuck all to do with you. Fucking cultists
Click to expand...
Perfect example to quote when people claim religion is fine ‘as long as they don’t bother anyone and keep it to themselves’. The reality is their brainwashed views permeate through society, law, policy etc and affect a significant part of life.
 
Blue Maverick said:
If there is a God he is not all powerful otherwise people wouldn’t die in agony and if he is all powerful then he is a cruel God for letting people die in agony, so which is it?
Click to expand...

Great point.

When my dad was on his deathbed in the hospice he was thrashing around in pain but not awake.
He was than given another jab to stop the pain.

Than a preacher came in to say some prayers. Something my dad would do as he was sort of religious but not church going.

As the preacher is doing his bit I just felt this enormous hatred brewing in side me. How the hell can people believe in religion when it has put both my mum and dad through such pain and suffering. I had the leave the room as i could feel myself about to lose it. I was so angry.

To all intest and purpose that last jab was the one that put my dad out of suffering. It was basically assisted dying without the wording.

My dad passed a few hours later peaceful in his sleep.

To see you loved ones dying in such pain because of some book written a couple of thousand years age is bonkers. Let them pass peaceful and with dignity.
 
Brightwell’s left peg said:
Perfect example to quote when people claim religion is fine ‘as long as they don’t bother anyone and keep it to themselves’. The reality is their brainwashed views permeate through society, law, policy etc and affect a significant part of life.
Click to expand...
Did you listen to the quadruple amputee MP on Kuenssberg this morning explain his concerns about this legislation's coercive effect and the fact that it would require the state to pay for an assisted suicide but totally fails to address the fact that it currently pays nothing of 70% of the cost of palliative care? These are the principal objections and the ones which I share which have absolutely nothing to do with religion. That doesn't stop tedious bozos like you turning up to churn out hatespeak about 90+% of the world population who have a religious faith though.
 
Last edited:
Marriedtoablue said:
If a person chooses to end their life due to the concern for others then they are absolutely being coerced into a decision.
Click to expand...
No, they are making a decision based on their own thoughts.
Marriedtoablue said:
If their reason for choosing to end their life is for no other reason than to prevent relatives suffering they are not making that decision for themselves.
Click to expand...
They are making that decision for the good of others as well as themselves. Nothing at all wrong with that.
Marriedtoablue said:
This is no different than someone choosing to end their life do their kid can inherit their money sooner - it’s purely based on other peoples needs and not theirs.
Click to expand...
This is nonsense. Are you talking about someone who has been given 6 months to live or someone healthy just deciding to kill themselves? If it's the latter then they can just give their kid the inheritance while still alive.


it will probably help if i give the definition of 'coerced or coercive' i'm working from;
noun

  1. the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.


 
johnny crossan said:
Did you listen to the quadruple amputee MP on Kuenssberg this morning explain his concerns this legislation's coercive effect and the fact that it would require the state to pay for an assisted suicide but nothing to address the fact that it pays nothing of 70% of the cost of palliative care? These are the principal objections and the ones which I share which have absolutely nothing to do with religion. That doesn't stop tedious bozos like you turning up to churn out hatespeak about 90+% of the world population who have a religious faith though.
Click to expand...
Surely if costs are your concern then AD would be your go-to method as it must cost a lot less than the 30% the government chips in for PC?
 
Marriedtoablue said:
This decision should NEVER be about those we leave behind - this is exactly why it needs tight control if it were ever to come into force.

To make the decision to end your life to prevent others distress would be a form of coerciveness.

This decision needs to be about the person and the person alone.

Sorry to say, (despite the well meaning of your post) your comments about those left behind highlights one of the biggest concerns in the whole debate. It’s not about the families suffering.
Click to expand...
I take your point, but I would know I didn’t want to die in terrible pain. That’s just nuts. The effect it has on family is awful, but the avoidance of needless pain is inhuman to allow and as an individual, not to have the right to say, fuck that, is awful. It should be my say.
 
stonerblue said:
Everyone is allowed an opinion. Why is his given more credence than anybody else's?
Click to expand...
because it makes sense?
stonerblue said:
No, they are making a decision based on their own thoughts.
They are making that decision for the good of others as well as themselves. Nothing at all wrong with that.
This is nonsense. Are you talking about someone who has been given 6 months to live or someone healthy just deciding to kill themselves? If it's the latter then they can just give their kid the inheritance while still alive.
it will probably help if i give the definition of 'coerced or coercive' i'm working from;
noun -the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.
Click to expand...
Don't you understand the danger of coercion when the death of the victim becomes an outcome?
 
stonerblue said:
Surely if costs are your concern then AD would be your go-to method as it must cost a lot less than the 30% the government chips in for PC?
Click to expand...
"The neglect of end-of-life care at the expense of a new euthanasia service is the point - also as evidence to HoC puts it
"Because of the utilitarian ethos of euthanasia, it will never be extended to those who society deems useful to society. It divides people into those who are at least potentially useful and those who are a drain on state resources. This is why disabled people strongly oppose the legalisation of ASE. Their lives are precarious enough already without them being given the green light for suicide whilst suicide prevention programmes are implemented for the able bodied."
 
Last edited:
johnny crossan said:
Did you listen to the quadruple amputee MP on Kuenssberg this morning explain his concerns about this legislation's coercive effect and the fact that it would require the state to pay for an assisted suicide but totally fails to address the fact that it currently pays nothing of 70% of the cost of palliative care? These are the principal objections and the ones which I share which have absolutely nothing to do with religion. That doesn't stop tedious bozos like you turning up to churn out hatespeak about 90+% of the world population who have a religious faith though.
Click to expand...

Ouch. ‘tedious bozo’ is a bit anti Christian. I though you were supposed to turn the other cheek?

Also, if the malign effect of coercive behaviour was a concern, we should be ruling out religion in the next act. That would be ‘exhibit A’ of coercion.

I’m definitely not a sky fairy believer, but if I were, you’d be making it harder to stay one.
 
Brightwell’s left peg said:
Ouch. ‘tedious bozo’ is a bit anti Christian. I though you were supposed to turn the other cheek?
Also, if the malign effect of coercive behaviour was a concern, we should be ruling out religion in the next act. That would be ‘exhibit A’ of coercion. I’m definitely not a sky fairy believer, but if I were, you’d be making it harder to stay one.
Click to expand...
that's me out for the count then...
article-0-12D2C31C000005DC-678_634x720.jpg
 
johnny crossan said:
No, this legislation saves the risk and bother of murder for an unscrupulous beneficiary - of which there will be many as the evidence from those countries already permitting assisted suicide quite clearly shows.
Click to expand...
Trying to convince yourself that the more time you say it( and by fuck you have), then it must be true?
 
johnny crossan said:
Did you listen to the quadruple amputee MP on Kuenssberg this morning explain his concerns about this legislation's coercive effect and the fact that it would require the state to pay for an assisted suicide but totally fails to address the fact that it currently pays nothing of 70% of the cost of palliative care? These are the principal objections and the ones which I share which have absolutely nothing to do with religion. That doesn't stop tedious bozos like you turning up to churn out hatespeak about 90+% of the world population who have a religious faith though.
Click to expand...

I did see that and I also saw he went down the Reinhard Jenrick route of claiming it will all be governed by European courts ( Spoiler - it wouldn't ) which, if thats his view, makes his utterances redundant and frankly quite vile if he is trying to make far right political capital out of a very serious subject
 
Blue Maverick said:
I wonder how life insurance companies will view this as far as I’m aware if you commit suicide they don’t pay out, will this be different?
Click to expand...
And you are completely wrong.
Nearly all insurance policies will pay out after a year has elapsed if you commit suicide.
They won’t insure you if you’ve ever tried and failed.
im-insured.co.uk

Suicide Life Insurance | I'm Insured

Suicide is a difficult, emotive, and complex subject to discuss. Intuitively, you might think that an insurer wouldn’t be prepared to pay. However, in most cases, life insurance will pay out in this situation
im-insured.co.uk im-insured.co.uk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top