Assisted dying

[117 M34]

I would be in favour on the proviso that the illness is terminal, they have less than 12 months left to live and they are in pain and/or have little quality of life.

 

[threespires]

Depends on the question according to this

Are assisted dying polls skewed by loaded questions?

Ahead of MPs voting on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill this Friday, the most recent More in Common polling for The Sunday Times shows that two-thirds (65%) of Brits support assisted dying. Further, YouGov polling suggests that 73% support assisted dying in principle. But other...

unherd.com

If we are to join the small number of countries that allow this, imo there needs to be a better debate than we've had so far. Of late we've not got a great track record as a country of thinking things through. Historically Private Members Bills can be useful in achieving things that might otherwise not happen, and Kim Leadbetter appears to have done a good job, but in this instance I'd prefer a more meaningful public consultation than what seems to have happened so far. Debating it via our media is pointless because it's no longer fit for purpose and just encourages polarised slanging matches rather than discussion of what is an important and complex subject.

 

[supercity88]

There was a chap and his wife on bbc breakfast this morning, he needs 24hr care which his wife duly obliges and they are against assisted dying being brought in, why you may ask? On religious grounds mainly, they wouldn't want to use the option. This is the fuckwittery we have to deal with.

I'm not even going to discuss the Tory tosser who claimed type 1 diabetics and aids sufferers would be running to the nearest send me to my maker clinic.

That's the issue with the current debate. You have people on one side, often with terminal illnesses, making really strong arguments for bringing this into law. Then on the other side you have people either talking on behalf of others, or jumping ahead a few steps and believing it opens up the opportunity for a more widespread assisted dying where people will be killed left, right and centre against their wishes.

Deal with what's in front of you.

This is aiming to prevent people from suffering unnecessarily, if they want to end their life and if two doctors and a high court judge approve it. There's a high bar in terms of qualifying and three independent professionals all have to assess whether you are eligible. There's the chance to say no at any point up to that. But these will be people who are going to die, they're not going to survive. No one seems to be making that clear. It's not a case of "whoops I'm dead, I really wish I wasn't". It's a case of dying on your own terms, before unbearable pain rather than a slow and agonising death which is traumatic for the person and their family.

 

[johnny crossan]

That's the issue with the current debate. You have people on one side, often with terminal illnesses, making really strong arguments for bringing this into law. Then on the other side you have people either talking on behalf of others, or jumping ahead a few steps and believing it opens up the opportunity for a more widespread assisted dying where people will be killed left, right and centre against their wishes.

Deal with what's in front of you.

This is aiming to prevent people from suffering unnecessarily, if they want to end their life and if two doctors and a high court judge approve it. There's a high bar in terms of qualifying and three independent professionals all have to assess whether you are eligible. There's the chance to say no at any point up to that. But these will be people who are going to die, they're not going to survive. No one seems to be making that clear. It's not a case of "whoops I'm dead, I really wish I wasn't". It's a case of dying on your own terms, before unbearable pain rather than a slow and agonising death which is traumatic for the person and their family.

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.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

If this is passed today it still has to get through the House of Lords. In the meantime dying people still suffer every day while I listen to a debate ignoring the pain of dying people.

Anyone whose ever suffered pain will know how hard it is to get paracetamol/ibuprofen off the doctor imagine the horror end of life and painkillers are rationed we can’t give you any more morphine it might kill you.

 

[The blue phantom]

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.

A very small minority? There's thousands who try to take their own life who suffer from a terminal illness each year, with around 400 succeeding. We've all seen family/friends absolutely fuckin ravaged by Cancer and other diseases and left looking like a bag of bones bed ridden, all dignity removed. Suffering painfully every day until their last breath.

How the fuck can any normal person still want this to carry on.

 

[mosssideblue]

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.

Cannot agree with that at all.
I would also say even having good palliative care does not prevent pain and suffering as I well know from family circumstances.

 

[mosssideblue]

A very small minority? There's thousands who try to take their own life who suffer from a terminal illness each year, with around 400 succeeding. We've all seen family/friends absolutely fuckin ravaged by Cancer and other diseases and left looking like a bag of bones bed ridden, and all dignity removed. Suffering painfully every day until their last breath.

How the fuck can any normal person still want this to carry on.

Spot on and exactly the circumstances both my parents experienced. It’s cruel not compassionate to keep them going

 

[johnny crossan]

A very small minority? There's thousands who try to take their own life who suffer from a terminal illness each year, with around 400 succeeding. We've all seen family/friends absolutely fuckin ravaged by Cancer and other diseases and left looking like a bag of bones bed ridden, and all dignity removed. Suffering painfully every day until their last breath.

How the fuck can any normal person still want this to carry on.

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

 

[johnny crossan]

Cannot agree with that at all.
I would also say even having good palliative care does not prevent pain and suffering as I well know from family circumstances.

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.