To not want to live to an old age

The whole what age debate reminds me of Tommy Tiernan

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D84A-ZN_y1U

No Xenobitch, most of us don't die tidily, but more do than don't. My opinion remains that if you are taken ill at 50 then you get the full on all stops out treatment; at 60, all reasonable avenues explored, including novel treatments because you are still young enough to be a useful guinea pig for trials; at 70, the system should give you enough therapy to get through, with your determined effort to succeed. At 80, probably not.

And I write this at almost 70.

I am not on about care home residents. I was responding to a PP saying anyone over 80 should be left to die. Most people do not go into care homes.

Make your mind up!
Can someone who wants to die be allowed to? And is someone over 80 allowed to have treatment to live if they want it?

@XenoBitch . it's lovely to think you are giving people more scope for a lovely life and fab experiences, but I don't think that's really what care home residents would prefer. DMIL thought the care home was as dull as ditch water intellectually and misbehaved every time she felt well enough.

I’d like to be ancient if I could be like my parents. They lived well into their 90s (they were both in their 40s when I was born).

Both seen off by extremely short illnesses. Neither needed care, lost faculties or fitness. Both were driving, walking, playing golf and bridge, doing the telegraph crossword, gardening, eating out until the very end. age never withered them.

They loved life until the very last knockings.

I have friends with much younger parents who are frail or demented. Several miserable in care homes. I’d probably prefer an earlier death.

Yes but money and resources are finite and spending money keeping very old people alive diverts funds from other areas.

I certainly don't think people should be able to choose to exercise their right to die and have it happen immediately. There should be a cooling off period where they can change their mind.

I don't disagree with a single word of that @Mumptynumpty . All very sound, but I am already 69. I'm in great shape thanks to dog walking and x2 weekly Pilates, but your post is patronising. I am older than you and thank you very much I already fucking know what's involved in staying fit.

So someone over 80 who gets a UTI should be offered palliative care instead of a simple course of anti-biotic?
That just sounds like a way to hasten death, and often in an unpleasant way.
A lot of things that would affect 80 year olds can be recovered from... and a lot of things that affect younger people wont be recovered from.

I attended a conference on aging years ago. The only thing I took from it was "you are the old person you think old people are". Meaning, if you think them useless, frail, vulnerable then you will become useless, frail and vulnerable.

Of course if you think they are joyful, fit and full of vitality you will become that.

My mum died at 54, overweight, unfit and vulnerable whereas my dad was 79 but very fit, vital and living life. (Both cancer).

Invest in your old age, take fitness and health seriously, stay/get active, take up and maintain interests, eat well, actively seek joy, and stay plugged in to life.

Do you know what @OonaStubbs , I am starting to think that's not the worst option. At least the NHS would be able to concentrate on those most likely to recover.

I know being 80 isn't a diagnosis, but reaching 80 is great, and any past glories achieved will be remembered and memorialised.

Fucking hell, being 80 is not a terminal illness.

My grandad died in his late 80s, but had so many health issues. He said if he had been offered a button to press to end it all, then he would have done it at 75.
But then my mum has a friend who is pushing 90 and is still very active physically and socially. She loves life.

DMIL93 fell out of her bed, in her care home, at 7 am one morning, It took 27 hours for an ambulance to transfer her to hospital where she lingered for six weeks with infections etc, in a geriatric trauma unit where most of the other patients screamed in pain or anguish for 20 hours every day. Eventually, the hospital and doctors admitted there was no way to make her well. She was discharged back to the quiet care home and died five hours after. It was the worst version of death I can imagine. DH had to listen to her screaming "mummy, daddy, kill me".

Euthanasia is actually the kindest option in advanced age. I have said yes to putting to sleep two adored pets, because it was the right option to spare them more pain. Nobody wants it; but it ends the suffering. DMIL had asked me to go with her to Dignitas when the time came, and I agreed to do it, but by the time she wanted to go, her health (intellectual and physical) no longer allowed her the choice.

You ask your local council or your GP for help, and they tell you that there's a long waiting list or application process for help, but there's an easier, sensible solution which is available right away

My DMIL would have opted in immediately. She always believed fervently in her right to choose her end date, and she was incredibly miserable when it drifted interminably and her health deteriorated. as it does almost inevitably after 85.

I interpret your drift, but I hope that more people like their older relatives and would wish to see them shuffle off peacefully. My DM managed it beautifully, but DMIL was angry for a few years that she was alive and failing in her 90s. Not robust enough to be independent, so not safe to be left alone. Having seen the reality of life over the age of 90, I would prefer to die a little younger.

Yes, this

Saving money is fine. Saving money by killing off people whose quality of life could have been improved, or might have felt differently another day = not fine at all

That's not how it's working for some poor and vulnerable people, though, @OonaStubbs . If you're terminally ill and in great pain and are ready to die, and your decision just happens to save the NHS some money, that's one thing. But imagine being elderly, disabled, perhaps mentally confused, living alone in poor, insecure accommodation with no support from anyone, barely having enough money to survive on. You ask your local council or your GP for help, and they tell you that there's a long waiting list or application process for help, but there's an easier, sensible solution which is available right away... Similarly, vulnerable disabled and elderly people can be pressurised into a euthanasia decision by family members who don't want to look after them and do want to inherit their house. In Canada, there's great unease at how people are signing up for euthanasia when there's not actually that much wrong with them, but their life has become very difficult because they can't access financial or practical support from the state.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saving money. I’m also unbothered by the direction of Canada, euthanising children in Belgium or depressed people in the Netherlands or the other cases that make the press. I believe unbearable suffering is subjective and is really between a patient and their doctor.

I hope that when I’m old and ill euthanasia is on offer here. Id like to decide when my life is not worth living to me and if that saves the NHS, ( and the DWP( state pension) and the local council ( if I need care)) a few quid then good for them

I think I’m more pragmatic than most though.

What is wrong with saving money?

I'm constantly surprised by the naivety of people who think there would be robust safeguards beyond the initial period

Even the safeguards which were supposed to be there for the initial period are disappearing, @Dancingsquirrels

Before this was voted on supporters had a great deal to say about how "It'll all have to go via the courts", but they went awfully quiet when that was predictably scrapped

It's chilling, isn't it? I'm constantly surprised by the naivety of people who think there would be robust safeguards beyond the initial period

Healthcare is hugely expensive. And people who can't pay / advocate for themselves are hugely vulnerable if euthanasia (rebranded as "right to die" to imply autonomy and choice) is introduced. Sadly I think it will be introduced, but for all the wrong reasons. This is about saving money, not helping ill patients

Look at what's happening with the "right to die" in Canada. It started off in 2016 as being just for people whose death was "foreseeable". Then a few years later it was extended to people whose death was not foreseeable but who had a "grievous and irremediable condition" (room for flexibility there). It is soon being extended to include mental illnesses. There has also been talk of extending it to include children. People have reported being encouraged to opt for assisted death because, for example, they were autistic, or they were asking for mental health treatment because of thoughts of suicide, or in one case because the woman had applied for financial support to get a stair lift fitted in her house, and the request was refused. It's saving the government a huge amount of money on healthcare costs, apparently. It discriminates against the poor, who may opt for death, and even be encouraged to, because they're turned down for benefits or are homeless.
A few European countries already allow the euthanasia of children and of people who are suffering from a mental illness. A few years ago a 23 year old Belgian woman was euthanised because she was suffering from depression and PTSD after having witnessed a terrorist bomb go off at the airport.

So you really believe if you're 81 and live a good healthy life, are loved by your family, paid taxes all your life, generally very healthy, but get a treatable infection, you should be denied any treatment, yet a 40 year old drug addict on benefits, unable to work and only takes from the system, should be treated and resuscitated every time they overdose? Or how about a 25 year old schizophrenic who has to be regularly hospitalised?

Clearly you favour eugenics but in that case you should realise that age is not the only definer of who is a net taker from the system.

I take it you don't have healthy family members over 80.

Yes the survival.instinct is strong. I expect vast majority of people who claim they would end their life at the first signs of dementia would not do so

Euthanasia (now rebranded as assisted dying to imply autonomy and choice) terrifies me. Initially, there would be robust safeguards, but i have no doubt these would be watered down over time, especially for those who can't afford care home fees and / or don't have family to advocate for them. Sadly, I think it will be introduced, as it'll save the Govt £££££

As a parallel, see abortion legislation. Legislation only permits abortion in v limited circumstances. In practice, available on demand, women's right to choose. Dont wish to derail thread by starting debate on whether that's positive change. Just highlighting that law does not operate as originally intended