Assisted Dying Bill

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk...ssisted-dying-law-change-proposed-2024-10-16/

The debate is set for November 29th and not before time. People should be able to die with dignity. We treat animals better than humans. People seeing their savings dwindle away paying to stay alive in pain, and feeling a burden to loved ones. As Kim Leadbitter says it's about ending dying sooner. If you are never going to get better and stick indoors all day in pain, needing around the clock care, then you deserve the right to decide when you wish to end your days.

 

Agree, lost a very good friend to MND and when he was talking to me 2 months before he died ( voice bank) he said the same and wished he could " just go"

 

Although, while I support the ability for a person to decide that they wish to end their lives, we have to be careful that we don't make that decision for people - especially the disabled - so it isn't open to abuse.

TBF though, if I'm in the position that I need to consider euthanasia, I'm finding enough ketamine, heroin and cocaine to stop a herd of elephants and having one last good night rather than worry about going through doctors.

 

I'm very much for and have written to my MP.

I'd gladly take part should the day come, so would my wife, and we've first hand experience where her dad has Parkinson's and an early dementia diagnosis and her mum is withering away after a mental breakdown... Both are in a care home. It's their choice what they would wish to do, but the cruelty of keeping those alive who don't wish to be is barbaric. Yes, there need to be safeguards, but that should be pretty easy in the scope of what is being asked.

 

That's an option if you're physically able to go and source those things. If you are in a position where you require someone to assist you with doing that, then you're leaving them in a lot of trouble.

 

I agree that people should have the right to decide themselves, one of the complications is going to be around insurance.

How many insurers may use it as an excuse no longer to payout on life insurance and such like. It's certainly going to have to cover quite a few bases to get put in law

 

Yeah, it does leave a potential loophole. I'll just pop down the local dealers now and get stocked up. Just in case.

 

Also the variables of what is deemed to be accepted for euthanasia or not. That doesn’t sound right, but I know what I’m trying to say. For example, people in this post have mentioned physical problems and physical pain. But there will be an argument arise at one point regarding people with bad mental health problems wanting to take their own life. I guess it could be combatted by ‘people who have been deemed to have a critical illness’ but again would be countered by people saying depression for 60 years, for example, is critical and to somewhat I’d agree with them.

it’s sensitive, it’s dangerous in a number of ways but if it can be done right, regulated and legislated correctly, then I would probs vote for it to be in.

 

The thing thats surprised me most is the complete reduction in quality of life in my mother in law. She's just given up, all joy has gone for her. She sits in her room all day and doesn't interact with anyone. Her husband, despite having two debilitating illnesses is living his best life. Of the two, I can see which one, if they felt they could, would choose to go.

I've a worry this bill will fail or someone will run the clock on it (Chope would be my guess who has history) because its a private members bill with very little time to debate it.

It will need a robust system that touches on NHS, Social care, powers of attorney, palliative care, insurance, judicial structures and many more that likely haven't been considered yet for many niche cases.

But its parliaments role to think through all those things and come to a system that is humane, ethical and alleviates years and years of pain and suffering... Including the emotional pain of relatives being helpless to aid the ones they love without criminality.

 

Whilst I agree that a person of sound mind should have this as an option, it is a much more murky situation for someone who is not of sound mind, and a third-party is making the decision.

There are some very worrying stories coming out of Canada, where this option was legalized a few years ago, where I believe it is morally and ethically being misused by the government.

 

Mental health is already a thing in the Netherlands.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ticism-decision-insulting-says-die-weeks.html

I don't agree with that.

 

Whilst I agree with the principle that one should be able to make the choice, when you start your argument with "seeing savings dwindle away", that rings alarm bells for me. A financial consideration, shouldn't be a consideration, too open to pressure from those waiting for an inheritance.
I don't know the answer and it's far too emotive and complicated a subject for me to pontificate on without me giving it a very long time thinking of the correct words.
But having had young family members taken far too early who fought and fought in vain for every breath of life, we need to be very careful how easy we make it for potential undue pressure to be put on those who may feel they are a burden.

 

Whilst the consensus argument seems to be going in the direction of being in favour of approving of assisted dying, I would like to put an alternative view from actual experience. I worked in a voluntary capacity for several years for an organisation called Survivors of Bereavement by Suicide, in which my role became mainly to be a listening ear to folks who had had the traumatic experience of losing a friend, colleague, or relative to suicide, usually in the way of someone taking their own life. However, one client who came along had had his wife go to the Netherlands in order to have her life ended at a clinic such as Dignitas. He certainly had felt under huge pressure from his wife, who wanted to have her life ended and to which he ultimately agreed. From this experience, the impact on the surviving friend, colleague, or relative of someone who opted to have their life ended for them should not be underestimated. In the prolonged period of bereavement, the man suffered huge trauma and, in effect, could not be free from the thought that, in agreeing ultimately to her wishes, he had, in effect, been complicit in her murder. Once she was gone, he had only his own thoughts and pain to cope with, which was greater than for a bereavement by natural causes. Its impact psychologically should not be underestimated. Whilst I can see an strong argument that good folk who are terminally and painfully ill should be allowed to 'die well' through palliative care, I would want the ministers who consider passing this bill to be mindful of the traumatic impact on those friends and relatives who survive such a bereavement. From the actual experience of this one man, it is far from a simple solution, or choice.

 

Would the be eligible for that though with a dementia diagnosis and a mental breakdown?

 

I want this to become lawful so much. I have a huge fear of being in pain and unable to do basic care for myself and being forced to live against my wishes. Just knowing it was an option would make me happier. It’s the lack of control that’s scary, knowing that a painful death would be dragged out as long as possible, even when all quality of life is gone. Knowing the option is there may keep people going for longer, some feel the need to end it earlier in more dramatic ways, in case they can’t when they have less capabilities.

 

Given the outline of the law they wish to vote on won’t be laid down for a month, nobody would be eligible for anything as yet.

You missed the Parkinson’s aspect which having seen it at its worst in my wife’s gran (the cruelty of fate is something to behold) I would expect/hope that would have some consideration once diagnosed.

 

A personal view, but I would much sooner leave this area to the professional discretion of doctors and medics. I do believe they are able to provide end of life care in a manner that preserves dignity and removes exposure to pain. Sometimes it is best to leave the grey areas alone. I base this on personal experiences which I don't care to relate on here.

 

I think this idea is good in principle. Its well meant. Who in their right mind wants to be in continual pain and/or wants to see loved ones in pain? Good people on this forum make a good case for this in a sensitive way. However, there are many relatives/partners/'friends' out there who aren't very nice individuals and would try to manipulate the system for some kind of advantage. There will, inevitably be some corrupt doctors/medics who manipulate things. Its not as clear cut as it sounds. It 'sounds' like a good idea in principle but it needs extremely careful planning and safeguarding if it ever becomes law.
I'm in favour in some respects but against in others.

 

Was just a question not a dig. I just don't think anyone who's had a mental breakdown or dementia will be allowed this treatment. I could be wrong but just can't see it, I think it will be for people with terminal cancers etc after seeing my gran go with terminal cancer I wouldn't wish it on anyone in her last days.

 

They want to die,and are getting there wish,if they wanted to still av life insurance I'm sure they would hang on and any family member that wanted to argue with the insurance companies should be ashamed of themselves,were talking pain and suffering no-one wants it and no one should it's so cruel,they may be some that try to old on for the insurance there's some badass folk out there,what ever anybody decides to do godless em and I hope it's worth it to you.