The Assisted Dying Bill
Discussion
Personally, from what I've read the bill is a good first step. There are several protections contained within which should mean it passes through the commons.
In practice, case law will be established over time which will clarify interpretation.
I hope in time the scope is expanded to cover a range of of illnesses such as alzheimers.
This of course needs careful consideration to avoid exploitation, however currently we have the ridiculous situation where those with degenerative mental illnesses can choose their own end only if they can afford treatment in a third country.
In practice, case law will be established over time which will clarify interpretation.
I hope in time the scope is expanded to cover a range of of illnesses such as alzheimers.
This of course needs careful consideration to avoid exploitation, however currently we have the ridiculous situation where those with degenerative mental illnesses can choose their own end only if they can afford treatment in a third country.
gregs656 said:
There is a recent thread on this already I think.
A fresh discussion is valid now the framework has been stated.There are so many checks and requirements within it that I can imagine it being very difficult to take this path even if the law is passed. You need a diagnosis of less than six months to live and then burn up at least one of those going through the reviews and checks.
Personally, it doesn't go far enough; I have a degenerative muscle condition, which means it is possible that my end state could leave me incapable of self-administering whatever was required, assuming everyone else had agreed that my (by then) incapacity would mean 'less than six months...'.
I can say today that if (in however many years, possibly decades) I reach the point where it is 'right' for me to say goodbye, with at least a scrap of dignity; I would take it. But it is entirely possible I'd not have the physical capacity to do so.
Looking at the various definitions of assisted dying/euthanasia etc it seems like the Canadian model might be appropriate for me. I appreciate that opens up many more issues and have little doubt that others with my condition will have views right across the spectrum on this topic.
But where we are now means inevitable suffering for many and their loved ones in the final phase of life, I saw this with my own mum earlier this year. There need to be more options and they need to discussed and considered. So to me, even though I doubt it will help me when I will need help, it is a vital first step.
There are other countries with similar mechanisms already in place, but people in other countries often demonstrate different decision making and behaviours to British people (look at e.g. littering, recycling and alcohol) so what works elsewhere may not necessarily work in the same way here. The bill seems to be heading in the right direction though, although how quickly it will get to its final resting place I don't know, there's definitely some vocal opposition to it.
I would like to be able to say now that if I am not able to recognise my family or wash and do my bodily functions unaided that I be able to end it.
I do not want to be remembered as being helpless. Also the effect on my wife of seeing m degenerate and not know who she is.
Not saying I would want to be put to sleep if diagnosed with cancer and given X months/ years to live. I would fight it until the end of until my criteria are met.
I do not want to be remembered as being helpless. Also the effect on my wife of seeing m degenerate and not know who she is.
Not saying I would want to be put to sleep if diagnosed with cancer and given X months/ years to live. I would fight it until the end of until my criteria are met.
I’m in favour of it in principle, and this seems like a good and balanced starting point for legislation.
I have a friend who’s dying of cancer at the moment, in significant pain and with very poor quality of life.
He wants to be dead, and who am into say he should sit there and suffer?
I have a friend who’s dying of cancer at the moment, in significant pain and with very poor quality of life.
He wants to be dead, and who am into say he should sit there and suffer?
I'm all for it, but as others have mentioned, there appear to be some pretty big hoops to get through.
I wouldn't be surprised though if the bill doesn't go through - Muslim MPs won't vote for it on religious grounds, & I dare say many others will not vote for it either for religious reasons or that they think their electorate won't like it.
We'll see, but right now we have the primitive situation where your pet dog can be put out of its misery, but you can't.....
I wouldn't be surprised though if the bill doesn't go through - Muslim MPs won't vote for it on religious grounds, & I dare say many others will not vote for it either for religious reasons or that they think their electorate won't like it.
We'll see, but right now we have the primitive situation where your pet dog can be put out of its misery, but you can't.....
llewop I am very sorry to hear of your condition and wish you all the best.
I'm totally for people being able to choose to end their own lives when they choose to. It's always going to be a tricky balance with this and stopping it being abused, but it's their life, they should be able to do with it what they wish and that's not just in the last 6 months.
I'm totally for people being able to choose to end their own lives when they choose to. It's always going to be a tricky balance with this and stopping it being abused, but it's their life, they should be able to do with it what they wish and that's not just in the last 6 months.
croyde said:
Why is it that anything for the majority is restricted by the minority that might abuse it.
Hardly democratic is it.
I don't want my decisions taken away from me by the rapidly reducing bunch that believe in fairies.
Democracy is just an illusion. Our political masters will just do what they think will appeal to those who shout the loudest or avoid taking the hard decision lest they offend some group or another.Hardly democratic is it.
I don't want my decisions taken away from me by the rapidly reducing bunch that believe in fairies.
Back on topic, the bill is just a rushed attempt to do something and from i can tell is worse than useless - as pointed out above - last 6 months is b
ks when you have a life limiting illness and struggle.There have been a few threads about this subject but they all seem to have disappeared. There was one about two months ago. In the most recent one I linked a bunch of articles about MAiD in Canada and how it has gone slightly awry.
"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
pavarotti1980 said:
FMOB said:
I think the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Canada is a good example of 'mission creep'.
God forbid people may want to die with dignity. Canada is a good example of 'mission creep'.
It might seem a little cold but please explain your view of dying with diginity? I think everyone has a different view of that and somehow this bill needs to be all things to all people under any circumstance.
rodericb said:
There have been a few threads about this subject but they all seem to have disappeared. There was one about two months ago. In the most recent one I linked a bunch of articles about MAiD in Canada and how it has gone slightly awry.
"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
This one perhaps"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
FMOB said:
It is an acknowledgement that making good laws is difficult at the best times without all the emotion the current topic has, your comment is an example of such emotion that makes legislating on this topic so difficult.
It might seem a little cold but please explain your view of dying with diginity? I think everyone has a different view of that and somehow this bill needs to be all things to all people under any circumstance.
Having the ability in a situation of a terminal illness to plan the time at which you can pass away without ending up in hospital with no control over bodily functions, no quality of life for the patient or family and ultimately having to be pumped full of drugs to control symptoms prior to death. Seeing patients with "the rattle" is not nice and I imagine not to clever for the patient either. It might seem a little cold but please explain your view of dying with diginity? I think everyone has a different view of that and somehow this bill needs to be all things to all people under any circumstance.
Having worked previously in a hospice and also experienced it within the family and also most recently with a colleague whose partner spent 3 weeks in a hospital bed in the living room before dying in excruciating pain and constantly ending up in their own s
t and piss. The irony is that we don't put our pets through this suffering but unable to extend to ourselvesAs I understand it the proposed rules are:
- Terminally ill
- 6 month life expectancy agreed by two doctors (presumably independent?)
- Mentally capable of making the decision
- Agreed by a High Court Judge.
- Self-administered drugs to bring on death
Is there any talk of how many people would take this path annually?
My first thoughts are that the High Court could be a blocker if the numbers are significant. Does the Judiciary support them having the final say?
- Terminally ill
- 6 month life expectancy agreed by two doctors (presumably independent?)
- Mentally capable of making the decision
- Agreed by a High Court Judge.
- Self-administered drugs to bring on death
Is there any talk of how many people would take this path annually?
My first thoughts are that the High Court could be a blocker if the numbers are significant. Does the Judiciary support them having the final say?
gregs656 said:
rodericb said:
There have been a few threads about this subject but they all seem to have disappeared. There was one about two months ago. In the most recent one I linked a bunch of articles about MAiD in Canada and how it has gone slightly awry.
"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
This one perhaps"Organised death" is nothing to be taken lightly. It will undoubtedly help many people but it can lead to some unintended outcomes.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
As much as I hate to be so negative, there's no chance in hell this is getting voted in. The rats in government don't like doing anything good for the public and will claim they have moral reasons for voting against but in reality they probably have their mates in the pharma industry who will no doubt heavily profit from keeping people alive unnecessarily.
Incidentally, I think this should be voted for by the public and not MPs as they're all lower than a snakes belly and can't be trusted.
Sounds harsh but any MP who votes against, I hope they die the most long, drawn out, painful, suffering death possible.
Incidentally, I think this should be voted for by the public and not MPs as they're all lower than a snakes belly and can't be trusted.
Sounds harsh but any MP who votes against, I hope they die the most long, drawn out, painful, suffering death possible.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff