To think Gill Pharaoh had the ideal end of life

You are wrong on the whole post you made telling me what I believe and what I was thinking, which was a complete fabrication on your part and I would be grateful if you would not do that again.

If you want to know what I am thinking and believe that I haven't written, please ask, politely, don't make things up.

I really don’t understand this. Just because she might’ve had 10 more “good” years doesn’t mean she should’ve carried on living. She made a decision to end her life at age 75. Why is this a problem for some people?

Yikes, I’m 74 and you’re making me nervous. My mother lived to be 97 though and it was only after 90 that her life became very difficult.
I’m not against having autonomy over our own bodies but I wonder if the people saying that 75 is elderly will feel the same at that age.
I’m not super fit and certainly won’t be hiking up mountains or running marathons but there isn’t actually anything wrong with my health either. I have a lot of interests and a good quality of life. Most of my friends of the same age are okay too, although a few are having problems and a few have died.
The letter explaining her decision and motivation sounds like someone with low level depression who has lost interest in life.
It’s tricky because I saw people in a very bad way when my mother eventually went into a nursing home and I wouldn’t want that.
Perhaps some sort of advance directive would work, a bit like doing a POA. 75 seems very young to jump out of fear of what might come next when you could have ten more good years. Be careful about stereotyping older people.

Agree with this.
It’s not easy to humanely leave this life and many do it before they’re ready. If you are done, then you are done. If I am diagnosed with cancer or dementia I want a safeguard in place so I can go quickly and peacefully when I want to.
I don’t think there should be a set age- you get there and be absolutely fine! DM is 84 in quite a bit if arthritic type pain but loving life and not ready to go.

Both unfortunately are illegal in the Uk.

Euthanasia and assisted dying are different things. It does not help to keep using the terms as if they were the same thing.

That is what some people want!! I want assisted dying for ANY reason, not just for the terminally ill. I want the choice to die when I’m fed up of living.

I wasn't suggesting there are more coerced abortions now

My point was that, in terms of legislation, pregnancy may only be terminated in v limited circumstances. In reality, people can now choose to terminate a pregnancy if they feel too young, too old, their family is complete etc

If assisted dying is permitted, I have no doubt that within 2 or 3 generations, it would be rolled out to people far beyond those who are terminally ill and in great pain

74 seems a tad young with no serious health issues, but then she was a nurse and I can imagine she has good personal reasons from her own experience. 75, I am beginning to realise, can be 'elderly' - my in-laws, for example, were pretty spry at that age (finally slowing down as they approach 80s) , but you see posts on here from people with parents in their mid 70s who are very sedentary, or not very social and are pretty much 'elderly' in terms of mobility and activity outside the home.

I have to say, I don't especially want to live beyond early to mid 80s - I know I will develop arthritis due to a congenital problem, so, barring major medical developments, I will not be able to be one of those super fit and active older people who can keep pretty enjoyable lives past that kind of age.

I agree!! Her decision sounded very rational to me. If she became physically or mentally incapacitated she wouldn’t have been able to make that decision. She needed to be “compos mentis” to do so.

Well stop thinking about it then and mind your own business. She was entitled to do as she wished with her own life.

If a consenting adult wants to be euthanised why is that a problem for some people? Living, when all you want to do is die, is cruel and causes immense suffering. The UK has a chronic shortage of medical personnel like nurses, doctors and carers. We also have a severe crisis in Adult Social Care. If someone wants to die to preempt this, they should be allowed to safely with assisted dying. That is a humane way to die. Keeping people alive “against their will” is inhumane.

The point of abortion is not to end life, though. The point of abortion is to cease to be pregnant, and not be a mother. Yes, one leads to the other, but women don't abort because they just really want to kill a foetus, they simply want to be not-pregnant, and that's the only way to do so.

Do you genuinely think the safeguards for abortion being watered down has led to a lot more coerced abortions? If so then why aren't you doing something about it and fighting for this cause rather than offering no view?

If abortion safeguards being watered down hasn't led to more coerced abortions then why are you so sure it will lead to this with AD? If anything it would prove the counter point.

Interestingly most research indicates that more coercion actually exists around external parties wanting to continue the pregnancy against the mother's wishes rather than abort it. Ring any bells? Why are we coercing, no forcing people to live when they don't want to. Why is this so much better than an unproven and theoretical fear around coercion related to AD?

Why are you congratulating me? On what counts am I wrong, and why? Can you actually put forward any arguments, or is it all snarky defensiveness?

There isn't a consensus when 'life' begins. It depends what perspective you have and if you're talking from a biological or legal perspective. Even then we as a society treat the beginning of life differently.

If a fetus is aborted early on then many believe it wasn't a life in the true sense however many that have suffered an early miscarriage believe that a life has ended and grieve accordingly.

I don't think you can definitively say that abortion isn't about ending life in the way you suggest therefore it isn't really that different from euthanasia.

Yes age is nothing to be ashamed of. And actually I am proud to be the age I am.

I don't have prejudices about older people.

But why do you feel the need to define people by their age?

I am a person. Who happens to be the age i am. And the person I am has been shaped by my life experiences.

I am not defined by societies' perception of peopke in my age group.

Been watching this thread with interest. Am always very conflicted by the whole subject.

I have done four direct deathbeds of close family members. None were easy. Three cancer related, one frail and elderly whose decline was so badly managed that despite a strong will to live, the flesh was unco-operative. At the point of no return, the tight control of palliative drugs to ensure they played no part in death seemed counter intuitive.

That said, I am uneasy about the possibility of mission creep around AD, and the subtle promotion of euthanasia framed as best for avoiding the suffering of one's nearests and dearests, in terms of having to watch a difficult demise, or in the interests of overburdened, financially hamstrung states.

We are complex organisms. We dice with death on a daily basis, one way or another, yet the drive to thrive and survive persists. Over-riding that with nudges about resilience, stoicism, and pragmatism in the face of inevitability is an interesting philosophy.

The PP upthread who was accused of flippancy by referring to their being no need for suicide prevention if we should all have the right to just decide when to die and with state sanction and assistance raises a point worth debating in my opinion.

Flipping the zeitgeist from wanting to die due to mental suffering being seen as something to work against and to offer support to overcome, to actually it being a rational decision to be respected and facilitated is rather mind bending.

I'm 57 and although in reasonable physical health, I feel otherwise obsolete. My son is in his 30s, I have no grandchildren, and none are likely. My DM, my DH, my DF, my DMIL have all died in the last 6 years. Complications from my DHs death have seen me lose my business, become isolated from my community for a raft of complicated reasons, and my friends are down to 3. Attempts to re-build are actively hampered by my age, financial restrictions and a lack of relevant qualifications and skills in the current market.

I basically live to keep my two cats alive. Every day I wake up mired in depression and berate myself for my failings.

This thread has certainly given me food for thought.

"Hope I (do) die before I get (really old)."

Being described as elderly conjours up the picture of a person who is frail and dated and in some way not competent to deal with day to day life.

That’s on you then. Now we have it. I suggest that you examine your prejudices. Being elderly is just that: old age. It’s the way it is and nothing to be ashamed of and certainly not something to be loaded with negativity as you are doing.

I'm sorry you have had difficult experiences.
And I accept you don't have negative views of elderly people. But society as a whole definitely does.. And people cease to see older people as people. It just sees them as being defined by being old..

I don't think elderly people are a drain on society and it's definitely an achievement to have reached our 60s/70s, particularly as it sounds like we have both lived through tough times. A sibling of mine died as a baby through something today would be treated with antibiotics, several cousins are long dead, an uncle died at 40 and some of my grandparents died in the 50s. I'll keep going as long as I can.

Being described as elderly conjours up the picture of a person who is frail and dated and in some way not competent to deal with day to day life. That is why I am so against it as a descriptor. It takes away from the person. It makes them appear as an acronism, some one who has no place in today's society.

The attitude to ageing and older people in today's society is appalling. That is why I fight against being defined by my age. I am the same person I always was only with the tweaks that life and experience has wrought on me.

I am actually quite proud to be me atm. It's one of my achievements: I have survived a very difficult and quite unhappy life and I'm here living an iinependent life and gleaniing as much pleasure from it as I can. Why should I allow people to diminish me as one of " the elderly " - one of those drains on and nuisances in society?

Ah, good point. That definitely wouldn't be ideal.

Yes I agree but what might happen instead is that removing meds can just lead to pain instead, so chest pain on off, kidney infections on off, oedema affecting mobility and so on.

You seem to find any description of you other than a person as offensive. Are people allowed to differentiate between being a woman or a man, be described as a spouse, schoolchild, grandparent, etc? As I stated up thread, I didn't make the language up. I'm in my 60s myself and it doesn't matter what people call me I'm still the same person but I'm definitely not young or middle-aged. I'm old. I know by the time I'm 70 I'll be described as elderly.