Assisted dying

Mr Kobayashi said:
Not as clear cut as that.

People with MND appear to fall into four groups: around 50% are unaffected by cognitive change. around 35% experience mild cognitive change, with specific deficits in executive functions, language and/or social cognition. up to 15% develop frontotemporal dementia (FTD), either at the same time or after diagnosis of MND.

Motor Neurone Disease (MND) | Fact Sheet | Health Information | Brain & Spine Foundation

Motor Neurone Disease (MND) | Fact Sheet - information, support and advice from the Brain & Spine Foundation.
www.brainandspine.org.uk www.brainandspine.org.uk
Click to expand...

Thanks for this mate. Might still be a good case study cohort for the 50%. Horrible illness.

Ideally we’d have a cure for all these things rather than discussing folk wanting to kill themselves. I appreciate that’s wishful thinking as new conditions will come up all the time. Some of these conditions are as a result of our own ways of life - breast cancer, for example, was fairly rare (certainly not the big killer it is today) until the 1950s then it really exploded in cases - that explosion is down to the contraceptive pill. Something to do with the hormones which is why it is more common post menopause hence why we scan over 50s routinely.
 
metalblue said:
You’re probably right, I’m only going off what Mrs MB tells me who has over 8 years experience as a specialist palliative care nurse (who advise doctors on pain management in EoL patients). Her colleagues I saw over weekend said same as this thread discussion came up. Interestingly they all said they would leave medicine if they were asked to even provide tablets to patients, which I was surprised at.

When my dad was at EoL he was on something like 120mg PRN and his doctor said to Mrs MB (who was their in her capacity as a relative not professionally) shall we put him on a syringe driver starting dose of 20mg? Mrs MB reminded the doctor that policy would suggest he be on 80mg start with view to add breakthrough dose if required and increase SD as necessary. This is an example of how it goes wrong, individual errors, not that the drugs aren’t available nor the expertise to ensure a good death.

Now there is a fine balancing act here as morphine reduces the respiratory system which will naturally lower someone’s stats, too much and you may hastens someone’s death (their roles is to neither hasten nor delay death) so they work on the principles of “you can always increase doses” however these specialist nurses can usually tell when someone is in the final hours so if they are not symptom controlled they will, time allowing, increase doses but that should be very rare that someone on their caseload gets to that stage still suffering from pain or terminal restlessness/agitation.

Anyway you saying it is complete bollocks, how so?
Click to expand...
Firstly, massive respect to your mrs MB for doing what must be an incredibly difficult job.

I'm looking at this with my mrs in mind. Diagnosed with MS 15 years ago she has had specialist 'care' ever since. This care, and the medication that goes, with it merely slows down the degeneration and attempts to relieve pain and other symptoms.
Nothing will 'cure' her disease. She is currently on experimental drug after all the others became less and less effective at slowing down her decline. There is (currently) no other drug to try after this one. She could have the best healthcare in the world and it won't make a blind bit of difference to the predicted and inevitable end.
The wife has been getting everything in order for when she's had enough of struggling through life going downhill rapidly. Right now she cannot face another winter and the future shows no sign of getting any better for her. In fact, it is guaranteed to get worse. Nothing will change for the better regardless of what the doctors try. They can merely delay the inevitable.
 
stonerblue said:
Firstly, massive respect to your mrs MB for doing what must be an incredibly difficult job.

I'm looking at this with my mrs in mind. Diagnosed with MS 15 years ago she has had specialist 'care' ever since. This care, and the medication that goes, with it merely slows down the degeneration and attempts to relieve pain and other symptoms.
Nothing will 'cure' her disease. She is currently on experimental drug after all the others became less and less effective at slowing down her decline. There is (currently) no other drug to try after this one. She could have the best healthcare in the world and it won't make a blind bit of difference to the predicted and inevitable end.
The wife has been getting everything in order for when she's had enough of struggling through life going downhill rapidly. Right now she cannot face another winter and the future shows no sign of getting any better for her. In fact, it is guaranteed to get worse. Nothing will change for the better regardless of what the doctors try. They can merely delay the inevitable.
Click to expand...

I’ve no words to make anything better for you but much love and respect to you both mate.

Not ashamed to say your words brought a tear to my eye, I know Mrs MB would look to focus on you both being able to do small things that bring happiness, and I truly hope you can both get enough out of life to make it feel worthwhile, nobody should be thinking how your wife is. Are you both getting psychological support? It can be an area overlooked particularly when having active treatment. If not do talk to your specialist about how you are both feeling mate.
 
metalblue said:
I’ve no words to make anything better for you but much love and respect to you both mate.

Not ashamed to say your words brought a tear to my eye, I know Mrs MB would look to focus on you both being able to do small things that bring happiness, and I truly hope you can both get enough out of life to make it feel worthwhile, nobody should be thinking how your wife is. Are you both getting psychological support? It can be an area overlooked particularly when having active treatment. If not do talk to your specialist about how you are both feeling mate.
Click to expand...
Thanks MB.
Didn't mean to lay it on so thick but our situation is the same for thousands of people.
Being in control of how and when it's time to call it a day would at least bring them some peace and relieve a lot of the depression that comes with facing a horrible end to life.
I don't think a frontline medical professional should be put in a position where they have to decide if a patient is given a pill/liquid/injection to end life painlessly and peacefully. Give those in that situation the means to end their life and let them decide when or if they use it.
 
So on the news this morning

1. Tories want to change the payments made to the Disabled (Personal Independence Payments) as ''one size doesn't fit all''

2. Tories want to debate Assisted Death for the terminally ill.


Anyone joining up the dots yet?
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
So on the news this morning

1. Tories want to change the payments made to the Disabled (Personal Independence Payments) as ''one size doesn't fit all''

2. Tories want to debate Assisted Death for the terminally ill.


Anyone joining up the dots yet?
Click to expand...

Add our 115 charges in and it could have been posted in RAWK ffs.
 
stonerblue said:
Since when has it been aka 'legalised suicide'?
The negative connotations of the word paint a picture that is usually wrong regardiing those who are facing a bleak future through ill-health.
Click to expand...
Suicide has not been a crime for many years now but assisting suicide is still illegal, though the DPP has advised prosecutors not to press cases where the victim is terminally ill and there is evidence that they wished to die. Assisting, subject to safeguards, is what would be legalised, especially for doctors faced with the dilemma.
Frankly, the failure to provide the conditions for this is not civilised. After all, I had my ill cat put to sleep when he was suffering. Why can I not do this for a loved one?
 
metalblue said:
I get the romantic bravado of it all, it seems so simple and nobody wants to think of dying in pain or having to be fed like a baby but there a deeply practical, legal and moral issues at stake here.

You are asking a medical professional to administer a lethal dose whose oath is to neither hasten nor delay death. How can you possibly force them to do so just because it’s lawful to? You can’t so you won’t be pitching up at your local hospital and going through the process - you’ll be needing to travel to a specialist centre - assuming that you could staff it with enough people who are willing to do this.

Then there is a whole debate to be had around consent. You need to have all your faculties and be able to make an informed decision at time of administering it. Medical professionals cannot rely on a pre signed piece of paper to say you agree as you may have changed your mind and they can’t confirm or otherwise so they won’t do it. To overcome this you will be choosing to die whilst you still have a reasonable quality of life.

Once you make it possible for a medically fit person to be killed you open up all sorts of moral and legal issues.

It is certainly an important debate the country should have and be heard to have. I doubt many people have really thought it through and that’s before you get the religious nut jobs involved.
Click to expand...
Some doctors will decline and the law can make provision for this.
A living will can be executed while the subject is compos mentis in anticipation in cases such as MND.
I doubt that in cases of a medically fit person, the facility would be available, to safeguard against cases of temporary mental illness.
It is a matter of evidence being important.
 
As we are all religious - and aethism IS a religion - i feel the following points need to be brought out in this debate.
1. If a person feels THEIR existence is cruel and far too painful to go on then their wishes should be respected WITHOUT laying their nearest and dearest open to crimal charges for assisting their death.
2. As we all know PRESSURE will be put on some people to die by their supposed family or indeed by a supposed caring government.
3. Medics must be protected from having to agree to implement this law. Most become doctors to save life and under no circumstances should that precept be violated. NEITHER should a medical job offer OR terms and conditions be dependent on agreeing to implement assisted death

So long as point 1 can be met and points 2 and 3 defended against, then I can't see the problem myself in allowing assisted death.
But as we all know 2 needs a bullet proof legal process in place and we all know how difficult that is.
Point 3 also doesn't tend to work in the long term (see retail work on Sundays as an example) - it can't be modified in any future variation to the legislation or the hiprocratic oath they all took could be violated END OF. Individual doctors may thing that avoiding cruelty is part of the oath - most do not and feel life is a inviolate part of the oath. It won't become a local NHS service and that's for sure - not if you want an NHS anyway.
Point 2 means relatives of an individual, or indeed the government cannot decide what should happen. Only a living will can provide sufficient safeguards against unscrupulous relatives - I'm afraid "Power of attorney for health" doesn't cut it as the rules need to be set in stone.
 
Last edited:
BlueAnorak said:
As we are all religious - and aethism IS a religion - i feel the following points need to be brought out in this debate.
1. If a person feels THEIR existence is cruel and far too painful to go on then their wishes should be respected WITHOUT laying their nearest and dearest open to crimal charges for assisting their death.
2. As we all know PRESSURE will be put on some people to die by their supposed family or indeed by a supposed caring government.
3. Medics must be protected from having to agree to implement this law. Most become doctors to save life and under no circumstances should that precept be violated. NEITHER should a medical job offer OR terms and conditions be dependent on agreeing to implement assisted death

So long as point 1 can be met and points 2 and 3 defended against, then I can't see the problem myself in allowing assisted death.
But as we all know 2 needs a bullet proof legal process in place and we all know how difficult that is.
Point 3 also doesn't tend to work in the long term (see retail work on Sundays as an example) - it can't be modified in any future variation to the legislation or the hiprocratic oath they all took could be violated END OF. Individual doctors may thing that avoiding cruelty is part of the oath - most do not and feel life is a inviolate part of the oath. It won't become a local NHS service and that's for sure - not if you want an NHS anyway.
Point 2 means relatives of an individual, or indeed the government cannot decide what should happen. Only a living will can provide sufficient safeguards against unscrupulous relatives - I'm afraid "Power of attorney for health" doesn't cut it as the rules need to be set in stone.
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much all of your post, with the exception of the first ten words.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
I agree with pretty much all of your post, with the exception of the first ten words.
Click to expand...
Each to their own, but...
Aethism is a belief system. in that respect It is no different than a religion. It's adherents claim that those who are not aethiests believe in sone sort of sky fairy.
Some aethiests believe those who are not aethiests are heretics, whereas some believe each to their own so long as they don't impose their belief on others or injure others in the process of following their belief.
Do try and prove me wrong if you want - but maybe that should be in a different thread.
 
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