Looks likely a vote on assisted dying is imminent

[fragrantdog]

‘A vote to introduce assisted dying across the UK could be imminent after Downing Street reiterated that it would not obstruct a private member’s bill on the issue and indicated it would support an MP in drafting it.’

Is the difference that with assisted dying the patient administers an oral concoction themselves, rather than iv injectables? The main issue with animal pts can be finding a vein if they’re very poorly, or needing sedation first if they are agitated.

With PAS physician assisted suicide you’d administer oral drugs yourself. Euthanasia would be injected drugs I assume.

@Lovelysummerdays there's a clinic in Switzerland whereby they set up the IV and you then trigger it or open the IV yourself.

Oral ingestion is just fraught with risks,m mainly potential to vomit even with antiemetics or absorption issues. For people who have bowel conditions it would be a risk.

It’s easy enough, just overdose on fentanyl. Why the need for this bizarre ghoulish document.

scaremongering.

If you look at the report you see the paid positions that the writers have and it therefore is biased research.

a quick look at their website shows they don’t support the bill,

livinganddyingwell.org.uk/?cn-reloaded=1

Personally, I’d still prefer that to the alternative.

I am Dutch.
There are many, many hoops to jump through before someone is euthanised.
In the case of my gran - she died naturally before the second doctor had assessed and agreed she was ready to go. Her death was relatively quick and she ran out of time to sort it all. I think she died a week before the date set for her potential passing. In her case, I think she left organising it too late and the process took longer than she thought. She’d battled cancer for many years and was on palliative care, but in a lot of pain and bed bound.
In the case of my dad - he died before the paperwork could be drafted and the necessary examinations could be completed. As I said, many hoops! Four agonising days of lung cancer slowly suffocating him to death, the fear in his eyes, utter horror for all concerned.
In the case of my uncle - paperwork in place. Advanced cancer, he was tired of fighting. He set a time and place to be euthanised. He planned his funeral. He said goodbye to friends and distant family. He died peacefully in hospital listening to his favourite music with his wife and son by his side.

I know, out of the above three, which death I want!

So because you believe in a fictional deity, you would impose forced births and extend trauma and pain at the end of of someone's terminal life to everyone.

No one is forcing YOU to abort or die with dignity but you would happily remove that choice from every other person. Wow, it's shocking how "followers of lord jesus Christ" are so unbelievably selfish. I thought God wanted their followers to put others before themselves. Clearly not.

I won't judge you. I will however stand up against any attempt from you and yours to impose your religious rules on me and mine. This is not Iran or Afghanistan. Law should be secular and based in rationality, not faith. Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Don't like assisted dying? Don't do it. Leave those of us who feel differently the choice to not be dictated to by your faith.

@Mabs49 the authors are not impartial? Colour me unsuprised. Useful info but still better than living in excruciating pain.

I'm a member of Dignitas now since a week ago and have started to take the steps to assisted dying dependent on a particular bureaucratic decision. It will take months. I am glad that Dignitas exists as non-assisted suicide can go very wrong.

Just also to say that the case of ST is a complex one and it is worth reading more about it for anyone who reads the brief Christian Concern paragraph above.

The poor woman died about 5 weeks after the first judgement was published, while the different parts of the case was still ongoing. The judgment was online because i rwad it, but i cant now find the link. The crux of the hospital's case was that she did not or could not take in, weigh or believe what her treating team were telling her - that she had an untreatable condition and was near to death. And as a result she could not be said to have mental capacity for the decision to refuse palliative care.

It is relevant to assisted dying, because ST wanted to request treatment (to continue ventilation and full intensive care multi organ support as she had had for over a year, to be resuscitated repeatedly as she already had been, to travel for a clinical trial, which incidentally didn't exist). We are all allowed to refuse treatment of any sort if we can show that we understand refusing can lead to death. But we legally cannot request treatment, or rather we cannot force medics who believe the treatment is of no benefit to provide it. In both the cases of ST and of assisted dying more generally, we would be shifting to being able to require doctors to give us treatment. I assume that, as in the case of abortion, medical professionals would be allowed to opt out. I do agree with the vet PP above that it would have a significant effect on the clinicians involved, and in the end that might scupper a legal change, or would restrict how available it really is.

I am also concerned that there is an assumption that anyone who is terminally ill and suffering will be desperate for this.

No there isn't. You've just made that up in your head.

It could happen. On discussions about this issue, I have heard many people say they'd opt for this route ..it's on this thread too. This may well end up being the socially acceptable stance that people are expected to take.

You’re naive if you think it won’t happen.
In the same way that people are expected to want to abort a disabled baby the expectation will be that anyone with a terminal illness will want to be helped to die.
There’s already been suggestion on this thread that people should want to be euthanised early with progressive illnesses to make sure their children inherit rather than the money be spent on care fees

The data from countries where assisted dying is legal does not support your argument. Just because some people choose to end their life at a time of their choosing that doesn't mean it's the norm in those countries where the option exists.

It doesn’t have to be the norm, and nor will it ever be. It just has to be allowed for those that want it.

I am all for it when people have a dreadful incurable deadly illness like locked-in syndrome, but I do suspect that, sadly, eventually, it will subtlety become an *insist on you dying^ message from society and family. (Free up those beds. Save that inheritance.)

I hope I'm wrong on this but I wouldn't hold out much hope of there being any significant shift on this issue. I know there is a lot of public support for this (the same public that voted for Brexit!) Previous bills in 2015 and 2021/22 made little progress. This country seems to be years behind many progressive countries in Europe with their thinking on this. Doctors make far more decisions in areas that are impossible to legislate for - it's not possible to prescribe courses of actions for every conceivable situation - they have to rely on their ethical training, the support and experience of their colleagues as well as guidelines: difficult decisions are actually everyday bread and butter decisions - I'm sure it's not beyond the medical profession to devise protocols that describe how best to handle the issue of assisted dying.

My access to all health care has been stopped. If it becomes necessary I will sell my house and put the money in a trust fund for the children then go to Dignitas. They move slowly so there's time. Otherwise I will have to go back to the UK, spend my money on private health care to access the services I need and when it runs out I'll be without treatment anyway. The NHS cannot provide in the area I need significant support and I don't want to carry on in severe pain.

My children need me but if I have to go home to the UK I can't be with them anyway and I don't wish to live in constant pain. Best for them to have their Mum but if they can't then better they have some money to give them a start than none.

My choice. The existence of Dignitas gives me that choice.

It's a good thing laws aren't passed based on what you think is and isn't moral. People have the right to autonomy over their bodies. Women have the right to get an abortion and hopefully soon people will have the right to end their own lives.

Same. We are still quite young but I'm glad dignitas is an option BC that will be our plan, that and leave our inheritance to a load of animal sanctuaries and charities.

@Childfreecatlady
These issues are complex and people not surprisingly have very different views. It is an area where people's opinions are less likely to change. I think it's important respect other views.

It's a yes from me. My mum died in June, it took 8 days aged 92 with only mouthwashes.
I'm convinced she was in pain and had to beg the care home for a syringe driver. She died 18 hours after it was administered. So sad and unnecessary.

Fwiw the bureaucratic disaster has been sorted out in my favor.

Staying a member of Dignitas but will be stopping taking it further.

Exactly this. What was the purpose of those 8 days? We had it too with our very very dear mum who was so very loved. It’s hard to bare the thoughts sometimes of what she went through. Why keep them here for such a short amount of time that was surely horrific.

The law is an ass is sometimes said. It’s very much the case here.

Why is it that animals are put to sleep but not parents in agony?

Mabs49. So sorry you had to go through this too. Besides being absolutely awful for our loved ones, it's terrible for us too, having to watch this horrific nightmare.
At the moment all the memories I have of my mum are those last 8 horrible days.