To be very anxious about the assisted dying bill?

Why don’t you tell us seeing as this keeps being used as a valid point although I can’t figure out why

Why can’t we have BOTH an assisted dying bill AND increase funding for palliative care?
Just killing someone is far cheaper than keeping them alive. It is inevitable that AD will not lead to further funding for palliative care, when there is a cheaper option.
So just because it’s not possible to eradicate ALL suffering, that means we shouldn’t try and reduce it at all?
Of course we absolutely should. I don't think that this bill does this, on balance. For some people it would, for others it would increase suffering.
How will this bill cause more suffering to the vulnerable in societ
y?
I'll let Disability Rights UK answer that:

Our focus as a society should be to ensure that all citizens live well. This is not the case at present. Disabled people and those with health conditions find ourselves battling to get NHS treatments, receiving inadequate care and support and having limited access to palliative care.

The UK Government has been found guilty of ‘grave and systematic’ violations of Disabled people’s rights by the United Nations. This includes an increase in the reliance on institutionalisation, limiting our access to basic necessities, and dehumanising us as 'economic burdens' on society.

The COVID-19 pandemic vividly demonstrated the fragility of our rights in the UK as blanket Do Not Attempt Resuscitation notices were used, and our access to critical care was denied. 60% of COVID deaths were those of Disabled people.

Assistance to die should not be easier to access than assistance to live. Parliament and Government should not allow assisted dying when political choices undermine our lives, and rights, every day.

We recognise this is an issue many feel strongly about, and not everybody (including some Disabled people) will agree with our position.

However, until access to good quality support and services become the norm, we believe that opting for assisted dying may not be a real choice, and the proposed change in the law poses a danger to Disabled people.

I couldn't care less.

Seems pretty clear from it's most recent statement that I can see dated 16 May that its concern is how much money its members will get.

Legal capacity is different to actually understanding consequences my son will say he understands if he punches the door for example it will hurt (he plays VR this happens a lot) he still plays in the wrong spot and punches the door for over 12 months he has been playing VR in the wrong spot and punching the door (i do move him btw) but he would most likely be judged as having capacity in fact social services decided he could decide if he saw his father or not at age 8! Because "he knows his own mind" yes he does but he still doesn't get consequences

My next of kin is my sister with whom I'm LC anyway. Any decision I might make about my life is none of her business.

Why can’t we have BOTH an assisted dying bill AND increase funding for palliative care?

So just because it’s not possible to eradicate ALL suffering, that means we shouldn’t try and reduce it at all?

How will this bill cause more suffering to the vulnerable in society?

Why are you anxious?

😂😂

So what do you think their motivation is for opposing this bill??

It’s not just about pain - although it’s naive to think extreme pain can always be alleviated. It’s about quality of life. I want my life to be worth living and to be able to end it when it’s not.

But you can't explain to an animal why they're in pain, can't tuck them into a bed, give them painkillers & care for them. The kindest thing is to 'put them out of their misery'.

All of that applies to people in extreme pain. They just want it to stop.

Not everyone has the same experience with dementia my nan lived in that past and given enough cake sweet things and the TV remote was happily carrying on because she was living a life where her husband was alive she went to parties saw people daily etc she lived unfortunately her kidneys failed took her out within a fortnight in a brutal manner

It’s really not meant as a threat. No doubt we’d all choose to die peacefully in our sleep but the reality is that we do need to be prepared for that not to happen.

I would prefer to know that I have the choice to die on my own terms rather than have a longer painful life which is really just prolonging the inevitable.

Reading the opinions on this thread is really interesting as it’s clear that there are some people absolutely opposed to AD. As previously mentioned it is similar to the debate around abortion. You either agree with it or you don’t. And that’s fine. This is about choice. I’m glad I had a choice about whether I wanted to go ahead with my pregnancy and I’ll be very happy if I could also have the choice to end my life if I was terminally ill.

I also don’t think for one minute that if someone chooses not to have an AD that the NHS would provide anything less than the dignified death that the person chose.

It would be a bit weird if it did. I don't imagine British American Tobacco is that fond of the generational smoking ban or that the Independent Schools Association supports VAT on private schools either.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists said:
The Mental Capacity Act does not provide a framework for assessing decisions about ending one’s own life: The Mental Capacity Act was created to safeguard and support people who do not have the capacity to make decisions about their care or treatment or matters like finances. Should the Bill become law in England and Wales, implications for both the Mental Capacity Act and Mental Health Act need to be considered. How would clinicians assess the new kind of capacity to decide to end one’s life that is framed in the Bill? How would clinicians protect and empower people with terminal illness to decide whether or not to end their own life, while at the same time detain those who are at risk of suicide so that they can be urgently treated?

From what people have been saying is that they're scared of dying in unbearable pain. This is something that can be overcome with proper palliative care. No one needs to die in pain.

I volunteer at our local hospice where people are supported & they die with dignity, no pain, no suffering. We make sure that they and their loved ones are supported. Even after the loved one has died, I'm trained as a counsellor & part of a team who visit & maintain contact for as long as they need us.

My feeling is that this bill is going to mean that palliative care services are going to be further sapped of money & resources. It's just cheaper & easier to bump people off rather than look after them properly.

I'm a farmer's daughter, have been around animals all my life & been present when plenty of them have been 'put down' by vets. But you can't explain to an animal why they're in pain, can't tuck them into a bed, give them painkillers & care for them. The kindest thing is to 'put them out of their misery'.

But we're not animals & shouldn't be 'put out of our misery' like an elderly dog, pony or whatever. There isn't any need for humans to be in 'misery' when we have the wherewithal to alleviate it. Hospices to fantastic work. People die with dignity, their pain is alleviated. My local hospice needs a huge amount of money to keep it going every year & every year is in danger of closing.

So - go on then, bump people off rather than spend money on giving them the care that they need & the good death that they deserve.

obviously The Association of Palliative Medicine doesn’t support the bill, it’s hardly objective.

What do you mean?

It cannot come soon enough. We treat our pets with more care for end of life suffering than we do our family members.

Have you watched anyone die a horrific, slow, painful and drawn out death, OP? Because I have. I will defend the opportunity for them to be able to leave this world on their own terms with everything I have.

I don’t think there’s a special definition of capacity defined for this bill. It couldn’t be more obvious that if someone doesn’t understand what they’re agreeing to then they don’t have capacity. And obviously The Association of Palliative Medicine doesn’t support the bill, it’s hardly objective.

The Association of Palliative Medicine is against this bill, a larger number of Hospices are against this bill.
People who have experienced exactly what you have described, are against this bill.
Even people who have come out in favour of the principle of alAD are against this bill.

i don’t care what anyone says, my view is that people whose illness means they will only get worse not better, who are in pain and misery, who have lost all dignity etc should not be forced to keep suffering if they don’t want to. How could you deny someone in that situation that basic righ
t?

• The vast majority of people don't want to see anyone suffer, I certainly don't.
• I would strongly support a huge increase in funding so that everyone who needs it has good access to quality palliative care. They don't at the moment.
• It is not possible to completely eradicate suffering, it is a part of life
• This bill will cause MORE suffering to the vulnerable in society
• You yourself said that you don't care what anyone says, so why carry on talking about this? Nothing I could possibly say would be sufficient.

Absolutely. If you've sat by the bedside of a dying person, who's in horrible pain and indignity and begging you to help them die, and you have to sit there and say no, then I cannot imagine that you would not be in favour of assisted dying.

We watch our pets with terminal illnesses get to this stage and we know that the kindest thing is to put them to sleep - "better a week too soon than a day too late" we say. I am glad that we can now make that decision for ourselves.

I don't think you should get flamed at all. I'm glad, for both of you, that she avoided a long, drawn out death

@CorneliaCupp

you haven't actually answered my question

i don’t care what anyone says, my view is that people whose illness means they will only get worse not better, who are in pain and misery, who have lost all dignity etc should not be forced to keep suffering if they don’t want to. How could you deny someone in that situation that basic right?

They do in the way that this bill discusses capacity. Again, this was brought up in the committee stage, an amendment suggest, and rejected.