Assisted dying

[supercity88]

And, I repeat, what has this to do with the issues at hand? It has passed in principle but many have said things with the bill have to be fixed to get past the next hurdle into ping-pong with the Lords.

There are plenty of things to resolve, but there is also more time now for MPs to digest what is in front of them. Some of the concerns raised, whilst heartfelt, were completely irrelevant and just illustrated how unaware many were of the specific details of the bill. I mentioned one MP talking about her daughter being touch and go for a while due to an illness, but that illness wouldn't have ever been determined to be terminal - it was an undiagnosed illness initially and took time to find the correct medication. So her daughter was never going to qualify for assisted dying. People seem to think this is going to lead to a mass culling of people and make it easy to coerce people into killing themselves. We don't want there to be any ability for this to open the door to more extreme possibilities (the mental illness and mental health side of things needs to be drafted to be water tight) but it is a positive for people to be able to choose this path if they qualify and wish to take it.

 

[Brightwell’s left peg]

We are, it's one of many challenging things that lots of Christians try to do but often fail to live up to in our daily lives. It's one I personally find quite difficult.

In fairness to Johnny C, 'tedious bozo' is quite a bit less unpleasant than some of the vitriol that's been aimed at him on this thread and it would be good if all perspectives can stay civil on this debate. There's still much to discuss as our parliamentarians try and get us to the best possible legislation.

is failure punishable by consignment to hell, or is it just a ‘nice to have’ in the eyes of Jesus.

If any religious person (Christian or otherwise) chooses to believe in sky fairies that’s one thing, but if you choose to believe in sky fairies and then make demands/influence policy on how the rest of us lead our non religious lives (or deaths in this case), then you’re going to invite Vitriol.

But, Johnny should just turn the other cheek…you know…practice what he preaches.

 

[threespires]

is failure punishable by consignment to hell, or is it just a ‘nice to have’ in the eyes of Jesus.

If any religious person (Christian or otherwise) chooses to believe in sky fairies that’s one thing, but if you choose to believe in sky fairies and then make demands/influence policy on how the rest of us lead our non religious lives (or deaths in this case), then you’re going to invite Vitriol.

But, Johnny should just turn the other cheek…you know…practice what he preaches.

We live in a democracy so people, whether it's you, me or Johnny can seek to make demands/influence policy based on our values be they secular or religious. Ultimately a democratic decision is made and that becomes the law of the land for us all. Pouring vitriol on someone because they believe something different to you simply mimics the intolerance of the dodgiest kind of theocracy. An authoritarian is an authoritarian whether they are dressed up in religious apparel or not.

Edit: just realised I hadn't responded to your bolded bit. No, I don't believe it is a 'nice to have' and that we are all answerable at our deaths in some way shape or form for the lives we've led and the choices we've made. I appreciate that might make you think I'm a loon and who knows, maybe I am; but as long as I'm not trying to impose my views on you, which I'm not, and you're not trying to do likewise I think we can coexist in peace.

 

[Brightwell’s left peg]

We live in a democracy so people, whether it's you, me or Johnny can seek to make demands/influence policy based on our values be they secular or religious. Ultimately a democratic decision is made and that becomes the law of the land for us all. Pouring vitriol on someone because they believe something different to you simply mimics the intolerance of the dodgiest kind of theocracy. An authoritarian is an authoritarian whether they are dressed up in religious apparel or not.

I know all that. Being a democracy doesn’t mean we don’t argue and push back against ridiculous notions that influence democracy, and you’d better believe people can and should get vitriolic when they’ve seen loved ones suffer and beg for the painless and dignified end, but for such to be forbidden off the back of archaic views founded on religion.

If half of the country were Christian Utd fans, and they voted democratically to pass a law that City weren’t allowed to win anything because we are owned by people who believe in a different deity, would you provide a vitriolic response to anybody arguing the rights of that, irrespective of whether they are entitled to such an opinion in a democracy. Of course not, you’d call it out for the bullshit it is. Passive acceptance of Relgious belief needs to end, for humanity’s sake.

 

[threespires]

I know all that. Being a democracy doesn’t mean we don’t argue and push back against ridiculous notions that influence democracy, and you’d better believe people can and should get vitriolic when they’ve seen loved ones suffer and beg for the painless and dignified end, but for such to be forbidden off the back of archaic views founded on religion.

If half of the country were Christian Utd fans, and they voted democratically to pass a law that City weren’t allowed to win anything because we are owned by people who believe in a different deity, would you provide a vitriolic response to anybody arguing the rights of that, irrespective of whether they are entitled to such an opinion in a democracy. Of course not, you’d call it out for the bullshit it is. Passive acceptance of Relgious belief needs to end, for humanity’s sake.

I'm not aware anyone on this thread is propagating a view anywhere close to the analogy you've laid out in your second paragraph. You seem to projecting all sorts of stuff onto people based on the fact they follow a religion and ascribing a level of cruelty and indifference that I haven't seen either on here or tbf in the debate in general. I watched my mum die a pretty horrible death from one of the nastiest forms of cancer so the idea that I would blithely adopt an unthinking position is wide of the mark. As has been said on multiple occasions this debate isn't really circumscribed by religion, there are plenty of secular people against and plenty of religious people for.

More broadly, whilst I believe in separation of church and state and have no desire to live in a theocracy I obviously disagree with you about whether religious beliefs have a place in the world.

 

[Brightwell’s left peg]

I'm not aware anyone on this thread is propagating a view anywhere close to the analogy you've laid out in your second paragraph. You seem to projecting all sorts of stuff onto people based on the fact they follow a religion and ascribing a level of cruelty and indifference that I haven't seen either on here or tbf in the debate in general. I watched my mum die a pretty horrible death from one of the nastiest forms of cancer so the idea that I would blithely adopt an unthinking position is wide of the mark. As has been said on multiple occasions this debate isn't really circumscribed by religion, there are plenty of secular people against and plenty of religious people for.

More broadly, whilst I believe in separation of church and state and have no desire to live in a theocracy I obviously disagree with you about whether religious beliefs have a place in the world.

This is going nowhere.

 

[threespires]

This is going nowhere.

Agreed.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

I'm not aware anyone on this thread is propagating a view anywhere close to the analogy you've laid out in your second paragraph. You seem to projecting all sorts of stuff onto people based on the fact they follow a religion and ascribing a level of cruelty and indifference that I haven't seen either on here or tbf in the debate in general. I watched my mum die a pretty horrible death from one of the nastiest forms of cancer so the idea that I would blithely adopt an unthinking position is wide of the mark. As has been said on multiple occasions this debate isn't really circumscribed by religion, there are plenty of secular people against and plenty of religious people for.

More broadly, whilst I believe in separation of church and state and have no desire to live in a theocracy I obviously disagree with you about whether religious beliefs have a place in the world.

Wait for the next iteration of the Conservative Party .....

 

[kaz7]

My brother had MS from his twenties , it was the type that gets worse as time goes on , in recent years he often told me he had had enough ,he was bed bound and his wife had to do everything for him , then he couldnt swallow and went blind

We had talked about suicide over the years and he wished he had done it whilst he could , he got cancer and wasnt fit enough to have treatment , he died last year in a terrible state, he would have taken an assisted death in a heartbeat

 

[Marriedtoablue]

Neither can i metal, hence my questioning 'coercion'.

Yes Coercion was perhaps a bad choice of phrase - lack of sleep for which you can blame metal and his snoring.

My point however remains the same, that if someone chooses to die that they should do so only for themselves, and not for others.

The research on perceived burden is plentiful and I would hate someone to feel that and take this decision despite not wanting to themselves.

 

[threespires]

Wait for the next iteration of the Conservative Party .....

Can't argue with that given the direction of travel at least some of them appear to have chosen to take, and we only have to look at the US to see where politicians co-opting religion can take us. That said I doubt any attempt to move towards authoritarianism in this country will have a religious flavour because the UK is now sufficiently secular that you can't weaponise religion in the way it has been in the US. Trouble is it's not only religious belief that can be co-opted to do terrible things; Stalin used dialectical materialism as a pretext to kill 100,000s of people a year before you even get to the millions who died through through famine etc.

My, admittedly flimsy, hope is the civility with which the current debate was conducted in the house gives pause for thought by enough politicians that we see a dialling back on the performative culture wars nonsense of previous recent parliaments. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[supercity88]

My brother had MS from his twenties , it was the type that gets worse as time goes on , in recent years he often told me he had had enough ,he was bed bound and his wife had to do everything for him , then he couldnt swallow and went blind

We had talked about suicide over the years and he wished he had done it whilst he could , he got cancer and wasnt fit enough to have treatment , he died last year in a terrible state, he would have taken an assisted death in a heartbeat

Sorry to hear that @kaz7 and apologies for taking something so raw and using it as a basis for debate, but MS wouldn't qualify as a terminal illness because whilst it is incurable it is something you can live with for a number of years. A terminal cancer diagnosis would (with 6 months remaining) but I know from reading about this issue extensively, many with MS would like this extended to them.

This, like many other issues with the Bill (on both sides) are why this has been so controversial. Why should people suffering from MS not be eligible? Or on the reverse side, if people with MS qualify then just how far do you extend this?

 

[supercity88]

Can't argue with that given the direction of travel at least some of them appear to have chosen to take, and we only have to look at the US to see where politicians co-opting religion can take us. That said I doubt any attempt to move towards authoritarianism in this country will have a religious flavour because the UK is now sufficiently secular that you can't weaponise religion in the way it has been in the US. Trouble is it's not only religious belief that can be co-opted to do terrible things; Stalin used dialectical materialism as a pretext to kill 100,000s of people a year before you even get to the millions who died through through famine etc.

My, admittedly flimsy, hope is the civility with which the current debate was conducted in the house gives pause for thought by enough politicians that we see a dialling back on the performative culture wars nonsense of previous recent parliaments. I'm not holding my breath though.

Unfortunately there is no chance of civility when it comes to wider debates. Those will continue to play out similarly to your religious discussion in recent posts! This is a sensitive issue and there are no political prizes awarded for strong opinions or slagging the opposition. But that all comes back into play on other matters.

 

[supercity88]

Yes Coercion was perhaps a bad choice of phrase - lack of sleep for which you can blame metal and his snoring.

My point however remains the same, that if someone chooses to die that they should do so only for themselves, and not for others.

The research on perceived burden is plentiful and I would hate someone to feel that and take this decision despite not wanting to themselves.

I was discussing this with my Mrs over the weekend. It's a real challenge. Most of us spend the majority of our lives doing things that benefit our family as a whole rather than ourselves. Faced with the prospect of a painful death in an expensive care home or ending it and saving money for the benefit of my kids, I think I would take the latter option. That's a decision that isn't only in my own interest of course but I don't believe it to be an issue if it's done with free will.

As much as pain itself, my Mum was desperate not to lose her dignity. She had bowel cancer so sadly she did! She wouldn't have wanted any of us to see her the way she ended up. Her decision wouldn't have just been just for her either, but preventing us from seeing the horrors she went through was important to her.

I get both sides to this, far more than my initial comments on the matter fwiw.

 

[threespires]

Unfortunately there is no chance of civility when it comes to wider debates. Those will continue to play out similarly to your religious discussion in recent posts! This is a sensitive issue and there are no political prizes awarded for strong opinions or slagging the opposition. But that all comes back into play on other matters.

I fear you're right, which is sad because we've had a fleeting glimpse of a better way of conducting things. Hopefully, at least for this piece of legislation, as its moves through the various stages in parliament the civility continues because it's very complex and whatever is ultimately decided will be imperfect so it needs all the consideration and collaboration parliament can muster.

 

[supercity88]

I fear you're right, which is sad because we've had a fleeting glimpse of a better way of conducting things. Hopefully, at least for this piece of legislation, as its moves through the various stages in parliament the civility continues because it's very complex and whatever is ultimately decided will be imperfect so it needs all the consideration and collaboration parliament can muster.

This isn't a political debate as such so that helps ensure it's a more positive discussion. There's no whip trying to get it through, there's no pressure from the leader of your party to vote one way or another. It's a sensitive discussion and there's nothing to win from making headlines with strong thoughts either way. Sadly we'll be back to political matters and back to the childish heckling and search for clicks and headlines and all usual attention seeking.

 

[stonerblue]

My brother had MS from his twenties , it was the type that gets worse as time goes on , in recent years he often told me he had had enough ,he was bed bound and his wife had to do everything for him , then he couldnt swallow and went blind

We had talked about suicide over the years and he wished he had done it whilst he could , he got cancer and wasnt fit enough to have treatment , he died last year in a terrible state, he would have taken an assisted death in a heartbeat

Horrible.

 

[stonerblue]

Sorry to hear that @kaz7 and apologies for taking something so raw and using it as a basis for debate, but MS wouldn't qualify as a terminal illness because whilst it is incurable it is something you can live with for a number of years. A terminal cancer diagnosis would (with 6 months remaining) but I know from reading about this issue extensively, many with MS would like this extended to them.

This, like many other issues with the Bill (on both sides) are why this has been so controversial. Why should people suffering from MS not be eligible? Or on the reverse side, if people with MS qualify then just how far do you extend this?

The bill does nothing for long term degenerative disease sufferers. My wife is making her own provisions to go out when she wants. After 20 years of MS she's had enough.

 

[supercity88]

The bill does nothing for long term degenerative disease sufferers. My wife is making her own provisions to go out when she wants. After 20 years of MS she's had enough.

I know mate and sorry to hear that. People believe widening it to make it available to people with MS or other degenerative diseases will start what they call the slippery slope to providing it for other illnesses that the majority of us would determine shouldn't be eligible now. The trouble is, once this comes in it becomes more normalised and then people naturally start to be more open to expanding it. That's where a lot of the concern comes from. Where does it stop?

 

[hilts]

Wonder what his arch-enemy Diane Abbot will make of that? Her issue with the bill is that its an NHS cost cutting exercise in the face of an ever increasing older population. The Dutch are currently debating extending state euthanasia to over 70s who are just "tired of life'.

Right to euthanasia for people ‘tired of life’ supported by most Dutch

Fifty-five per cent say physically healthy people should have right to end own lives

www.irishtimes.com

Diane thinks 2 plus 2 is 18,763 so it doesn't concern me tbh:-)