Assisted dying bill (TW assisted suicide discussion)

And yet palliative care doctors- the ones who see the most ‘deaths in a hospice’ that you suggest all should be exposed to - are the medical group most against the bill.

That’s not because they fear their jobs or they have a God complex about what palliative care can achieve. More that they see the vulnerabilities of people making choices. And the absolute grey areas of prognosis and consent.

I have watched three close relatives die, one of which was breast cancer. It was not the most painful or hardest to support or longest lingering death of the three btw.

So should I say you are “ignorant” and you need to see deaths that are worse than a cancer death before having an opinion?

Please try to understand that those of us with a different opinion from you may have also experienced observing traumatic deaths instead of presuming that anyone who disagrees “hasn’t got a fucking clue” .

Even parents who have watched their children slowly die for years are against this bill.

“The hand wringing about safeguarding and poor little old ladies being bullied into it is frankly ignorant and insulting to those with terminal illnesses.”

This comment of yours is misogynistic, ageist and utterly callous.

After 4 months they went to a hospice knowing it was time.
On day 5 of being there the doctors offered test for cancer.
Why ?
No doubt chemo would be next - the family said 'no'

I would expect the test was so they could properly determine cause of death. The discovery of cancer doesn’t automatically result in treatment.

I've tried to avoid the discussion in truth, because having watched my Dad die a horrific (and I genuinely mean horrific) death from liver cancer, I think that those who haven't seen someone die this way hasn't got a fucking clue. He had a great palliative team, but the reality is that when your organs start failing especially the liver, you can be injected with all sorts but it does nothing. Palliative care is like sticking a plaster over a broken leg.

The hand wringing about safeguarding and poor little old ladies being bullied into it is frankly ignorant and insulting to those with terminal illnesses. Everyone with a vote on this needs to spend a day in a hospice and see the reality of a cancer death before making their opinion.

I feel that as medical advancements have helped us live longer lives we’re of the thinking that reaching mid 80s is a good run regardless of the state you’re in.

So Logan’s Run style maximum age of 85 and then they go to a facility and are euthanised because they’ve had a “good run regardless of the state” of their health? Awareness? Wish to live?

As pp have said, your thinking reflects alot of the slippery slope concerns.

The stakes are much higher, if you are coerced into an abortion, your life goes on. If you are coerced into death, your life is over.

Some would say the consequence of coercion is therefore too high to legalise assisted dying.

And when we had the death penalty, we weren’t executing hordes of innocent people who were victims of a false conviction for murder. We still abolished it because of the handful, the teeny tiny minority of executions were of innocent mostly men.

Assisted dying is likely to result in mostly women being coerced into death. I suppose that’s less important though.

Yeah, exactly. Sepsis is one of the most painful and agonising ways to die. Imagine having terminal cancer AND sepsis from an untreated infection?

Me too. I’m going to get an advanced directive that says no care apart from pain relief if I lose capacity I think but genuinely I’d rather be euthanised.

Where is the line drawn?

When the patient is deemed a potential murder victim in the eyes of the medical professional who is overseeing the death if they suspect coercion or pressure or the patient doesn’t meet the criteria of having an incurable diagnosis where death isn’t reasonably expected within 6 months

Rightly or wrongly it doesn't work like that, @Onand, since medical professionals quite reasonably point out that they're not legal personnel

I suppose there could be some process for reporting back to the "judge" who'd signed off the procedure in the first place, but even if time was allowed for this it could be almost impossible to prove coercion once the person was dead

They probably won’t detect it every time

@Onand And that is why it shouldn't be passed.

My friend in australia's parent was admitted to a hospice with advanced cancer. In there, he learnt from one of the other patients that euthanasia was now a legal option. He requested it immediately to end his suffering - he was wracked with a horrible cough and could barely eat or swallow anymore. There was a two weeks grace period where lots of paperwork needed to be signed. Two middle aged nurses arrived from Sydney with the lethal injections, asked him to confirm it was his wishes, he understood what was happening, etc. His family including my friend were all in the room. He said his goodbyes to everyone and then just peacefully passed away. The nurses were very kind and matter of fact, helped the family with the paperwork, and were back on a plane to Sydney later that day. My friend said it was such a peaceful end, and they were all so grateful.

@Gloriia

Sadly an aged, dependent population are part of life and of course dementia sufferers are not included in this bill however your comments highlight how people understandably judge the quality of other people's lives.

We can't just euthanise those with dementia as care homes are expensive and their QOL is poor. What we can do is educate staff and family members not to advocate aggressive medical management of those with debilitating cognitive issues.

I wouldn't want a 90yr old loved one with dementia transferred to a hospital with an acute illness and resuscitated yet it happens all the time. That is what needs changing.

THIS
A elderly lady I know suddenly took a turn for the worse 4 months before she died.
Respite and carers were implemented.
She not been very well previously but had managed
She had heart problems and lung/ breathing problems, kidney problems.
Anyone of which would fail at any time.
After 4 months they went to a hospice knowing it was time.
On day 5 of being there the doctors offered test for cancer.
Why ?
No doubt chemo would be next - the family said 'no'
A respect form had been signed by patient months earlier any way.
She died on day 10
Why put them through all that?
It would not have Helped.
She was 80 odd.
She'd suffered enough.

The thing is that I myself would like to be euthanised if I get dementia. I wish there could be an advance directive.

Who are these staff? Recruited from where? Or do you expect that Macmillan or hospice bereavement teams will be playing a part in this process?

What happens to the doctor who facilitated the lethal dose if they subsequently find out that there was coercion? Finding they were unwittingly party to murder, rather than a mercy killing, could take a hell of a toll on their mental health. Given the piss poor state of our mental health services, how many subsequent suicides are acceptable as collateral damage?

Veterinary medicine has a high suicide rate amongst vets, are we going to allow the same for the medical profession?

Is it also the case that’s it’s also irrational to NOT want to spare yourself and your family that?

Is it by implication unreasonable to NOT be thinking of the inheritance benefits of that cost?

If there is money involved and financial benefits and gains them there is risk of coercion.

Sadly an aged, dependent population are part of life and of course dementia sufferers are not included in this bill however your comments highlight how people understandably judge the quality of other people's lives.

We can't just euthanise those with dementia as care homes are expensive and their QOL is poor. What we can do is educate staff and family members not to advocate aggressive medical management of those with debilitating cognitive issues.

I wouldn't want a 90yr old loved one with dementia transferred to a hospital with an acute illness and resuscitated yet it happens all the time. That is what needs changing.

Kim Leadbeater (the MP bringing the bill to parliament) was the guest on ‘Leading’ podcast yesterday. I found it really interesting and found her to be impressive:

@ThisAquaCrow I was under CAHMS aged 4, anti depressants aged 10 followed by Quetiapine a couple of years later. Very suicidal. I can just see me falling into that loophole at that age, it would be cheaper than a month's worth of my prescriptions and nothing is more worthy than money(!)

Won’t ever happen. And even if it does, does it really matter? A few dozen or hundred’s of elderly or disabled dead people being coerced isn’t that big a deal surely? Have you SEEN how much a care home costs these days?

@ThisAquaCrow I totally agree.

And what if someone is being coerced and the doctor doesn't detect it? That's one case too many. But what would be the fallout? Would you prosecute a doctor forced to kill people?

There’s no way that mental health issues would EVER be used as a criteria……

That’s inconceivable in a civilised society where mental health services are prioritised, funded and accessible to all. EXACTLY the situation we have in the UK….🙄

@Onand How will they always detect it?

And you don't support it for mental health illnesses?