To be very anxious about the assisted dying bill?

Unless you're being abused or coerced of course...

Difference is that those of us who didn’t want Brexit have had it inflicted on us anyway. Assisted dying affects only those who opt in.

So did brexit...

Why would it be.? It’s a conscience vote, not a party line. It reflects the opinion of the public.

I would not want to be a burden on my kids either but seriously, sitting in a nursing home - have you done that recently, it's horrific, even if it's a good one. I don't want that for myself. I really do not want other people to feed, clothe and toilet me and in old age that's not going to improve - I'd rather be dead.

Actually, I don't see why trying to avoid being a burden isn't a good reason to want to die. I certainly wouldn't want my children to be lumbered with caring for me if that seriously ruined their lives. Nor would I want them to have to spend thousands on keeping me in a miserable care home. I'd rather die. Obviously, it wouldn't be right if people were made to feel they were a burden - but that's a different story. With no discussion or coercion at all, I definitely do not want to make life difficult for my children.

I support it. Currently watching my dad deteriorate day by day in pain with no quality of life and my mum doing literally everything. We’re just waiting for him to die to end his suffering.

@Zimunya I think the key thing is we need to ensure we are making sufficient sustained national competent effort to get rid of the NEEDLESSLY being in pain / suffering in addition to AD for people to have genuine choice - and that’s what we are falling down on!
Then we can legislate it and do it well.
I just don’t see an appetite for that, and I’m so sorry your friend died in pain. It’s not what I aspire to in the job I do.

Respect your opinion, @noodlebugz but for me, as long as people are needlessly dying in tremendous pain, I think they need to be given the right to end that awful process, as soon as it feels right for them. By your own admission, palliative care is a lottery. I recently lost a friend to cancer, and it was horrendous how lack-lustre the efforts to manage his pain were.

I have elderly parents who spent a lot of time in hospitals, rehab units and nursing homes. The sight of how people in there live is enough to make my bloody run cold - I do not want that for me. Shoot me - whatever but bloody hell, don't make me endure the torture people go through in these places in their old age is enough to scare anyone into AD. My Mum's aunt had 4 years of being envious when someone died, she was in huge amounts of pain...how can that be right? I'm so glad I have an option now, I'm still haunted by the elderly people I have seen in pain or distress.

My added paragraph to the H&W was very specific about circumstances- if I had not just dementia, but any condition where I was unable both to care for myself and speak - with full mental capacity - for myself.

I am confident that whoever will then have P of A - probably dds - will stand by wishes made known when I did have full mental capacity.

I’d be more anxious about being force fed antibiotics should I be incapacitated with dementia etc. in a care home.

Years ago,
it wasn’t uncommon for visiting district nurses to help the terminal patients on their way, drifting off peacefully in their own bed with a shed load of morphine.

I don’t want us to end up like Canada but there has to be a way for people to end things on their own terms.

No, I don't think we shouldn't - I think we really need to listen carefully to legitimate concerns, which is why we should focus on them and not get sidetracked by ridiculous exaggerations.

The idea that people will choose it because they're worried they'll be a burden and society would also take on this viewpoint isn't particularly far fetched.

There are plenty of legitimate concerns which need to be taken into account. Bringing a far-fetched idea into the debate doesn't help anyone.

Do you think we shouldn't look at what potential problems or unintended consequences might come about from this bill...or in fact absolutely any bill/law?

It's 'not impossible' that we might have a law that everybody has to be done away with at the age of 50, or have compulsory sterilization after one child, or any other outrageous idea you can think of. Whether something is possible bears no relation to what's probable or likely.

And trying to belittle and mock concerns is exactly what I'm talking about so thanks for proving my point.

No. What I'm saying is it has potential to become the socially acceptable choice. I don't think it's impossible that we will come to a point where the narrative will be that if you're a responsible citizen, of course you wouldn't want to be a burden on your family and the state.

Absolutely this. PP is behaving as though it will be mandatory!

That's a ridiculous extrapolation. Maybe you should try writing comedy sci-fi?

Risk of coercion is inevitable in the treatment of medical conditions unless you remove any and all patient choice and place all decisions into the hands of clinicians or some other third party. I can't imagine anyone arguing for such a thing. You can't have medicine, and all manner of life and death decisions, and zero risk of coercion at the same time otherwise.

Ultimately we live in a liberal country and the fact of some people having difficulty making a choice is not sufficient grounds for removing that choice from everyone. Life is precious but no society can function on the basis that preserving a hypothetical life (and in this circumstance, kindly, only slightly longer) is worth imposing an unconstrained amount of suffering on other unwilling parties.

I don't think comparing cars to human lives is a useful exercise. Apart from the amount of rules regulating the operation of one, there are penalties for causing accidents including losing one's license to drive. A human life can't be brought back after a mistake. That's why in principle we oppose the death sentence. At any rate, I did mention that I have no clear answer on this, I am merely looking at all sides. Does the right of one person to end their suffering trump the mistaken taking of the life of another? I'm sure we'll find out in time.

@Comedycook

Wrong. keeping something in pain and suffering against their will is not having more empathy for them nor is it valuing them.

Again… we don’t ban abortions in case some women are coerced in to them…