Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Assisted Dying Bill tomorrow.

526 replies

TooBigForMyBoots · 28/11/2024 20:21

I really hope this goes ahead.

I'm from a family who die from cancer. It's a genetic thing. Over the years I've watched numerous loved ones die from this cruel and ravaging disease. It has taken a massive toll on us. From PTSD to immense guilt, complicated grief and fear of the future.

Not all of my family would have accessed Assisted Dying, but I know some did want it and requested it in the weeks / days leading to their death. They should have had the option of shortening their suffering. Having witnessed what they went through, I want that option for myself.

I want it for my mother. For the past 20 years she has told me when she wants out and how I will have to help her achieve it. I don't want to. She apologises for putting it on me. She shouldn't have to.

No one will be saved if this Bill is stopped, but fear and suffering will be reduced.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
TheTidyBear · 29/11/2024 17:02

MitochondriaUnited · 29/11/2024 17:00

More importantly , MPs voted with their heart. They voted remembering the deaths they’ve witnessed.
They didn’t vote with their heads. What’s doctors experiences around death/DNR etc…
They didn’t vite around the profound ethical dilemma that introducing a law that promotes death and suicide will have on society. A huge change from one that has always (until Covid at least) maintained that life was the most important.

This is a law that should have been Gping through a really rigorous process, seeing how complex it is and how deep the implications if it are.

It hasn’t and has been voted on emotion instead. That, in itself, is a really bad move (but perhaps not surprising seeing the way politics has gone)

No law has been passed.

SockFluffInTheBath · 29/11/2024 17:03

Comedycook · 29/11/2024 16:53

These are the parameters being discussed now...but I don't think it's beyond imagination that they will widen.

I think that’s a very different discussion. Allowing terminally ill people to choose to hasten their death is a world away from a third party being allowed to make that decision for a vulnerable person without capacity. I would expect a very different outcome for a vote on that.

MrsSchrute · 29/11/2024 17:03

Vaxtable · 29/11/2024 16:59

I don’t get the hysteria around this and the comments about being killed off.

It works in other countries. And from what I have read here it needs permission of two drs and a high court judge, and you have to only have 6 months to live, ( although I am not sure how that would work out as people are told 6 months and are here much longer!)

someone I know looked after her mother who, despite the highest pain relief she could have, screamed in pain every time she was moved, which was needed to stop bed sores, and who wanted to die, why would you put someone through that?

The time I would be concerned is if they start to water the bill down, but I am comfortable with the proposed guidelines at the moment.

Virtually every country where this is legal has expanded who is eligible for this.

I'm really worried about the implications that this has for all kinds of things. What will it mean for suicide prevention funding? Why should we be putting money into organisations that work to prevent suicide when we have said that in some situations the state will help you die? Why do we need to fund palliative care - seems like a luxury when you have the option of assisted dying.
The unintended consequences of this are going to be horrific.

NotOneOfTheInCrowd · 29/11/2024 17:04

The debate was a disgrace.

People were being emotionally coerced into this vote IMO with people telling their heart rending stories of deaths they’ve witnessed in order to sway people to their way of thinking.

A law like this needs to be based around facts alone, without bringing personal emotion into the equation.

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:04

MrsSchrute · 29/11/2024 17:03

Virtually every country where this is legal has expanded who is eligible for this.

I'm really worried about the implications that this has for all kinds of things. What will it mean for suicide prevention funding? Why should we be putting money into organisations that work to prevent suicide when we have said that in some situations the state will help you die? Why do we need to fund palliative care - seems like a luxury when you have the option of assisted dying.
The unintended consequences of this are going to be horrific.

Again, this Jerry Mandarin is ridiculous. Because Kim led better said that this act, particularly says terminal illness. obviously, if you're going to commit suicide because you have a mental health problem, this country will sort that out.

StandingSideBySide · 29/11/2024 17:04

MitochondriaUnited · 29/11/2024 17:00

More importantly , MPs voted with their heart. They voted remembering the deaths they’ve witnessed.
They didn’t vote with their heads. What’s doctors experiences around death/DNR etc…
They didn’t vite around the profound ethical dilemma that introducing a law that promotes death and suicide will have on society. A huge change from one that has always (until Covid at least) maintained that life was the most important.

This is a law that should have been Gping through a really rigorous process, seeing how complex it is and how deep the implications if it are.

It hasn’t and has been voted on emotion instead. That, in itself, is a really bad move (but perhaps not surprising seeing the way politics has gone)

Exactly and as stats show DNRs issued by doctors go up with age of patient and are higher for women than men I do worry greatly about the lack of consultation.

Dulra · 29/11/2024 17:04

dollyop · 29/11/2024 16:50

Something this big should have had a hell of a lot more public consultation. It's been shockingly rushed.

Now if you agree with assisted suicide, you might think 'well, whatever, I agree with it so I don't care about that'.

But what about the next thing, that you're strongly opposed to, that goes straight to a Commons vote without any real scrutiny of how it'll work?

Yes I would recommend a model such as the citizens assembly for complex emotive issues like this. It has worked very well in Ireland as part of the democratic process.

citizensassembly.ie/about/

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:05

NotOneOfTheInCrowd · 29/11/2024 17:04

The debate was a disgrace.

People were being emotionally coerced into this vote IMO with people telling their heart rending stories of deaths they’ve witnessed in order to sway people to their way of thinking.

A law like this needs to be based around facts alone, without bringing personal emotion into the equation.

So people suffering whike dying are not facts then yes it's emotion to but the facts are folks suffer

Patienceinshortsupply · 29/11/2024 17:05

But it's not promoting suicide.

This isn't normal death from aging or a chronic condition.

This is death from a terminal illness.

There is an ocean between the two.

MrsSchrute · 29/11/2024 17:05

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:04

Again, this Jerry Mandarin is ridiculous. Because Kim led better said that this act, particularly says terminal illness. obviously, if you're going to commit suicide because you have a mental health problem, this country will sort that out.

Is it obvious? Isn't your argument that this is all about free will and autonomy? So if someone with mental health problems who are you to say they can't? It's that discrimination.

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:05

Dulra · 29/11/2024 17:04

Yes I would recommend a model such as the citizens assembly for complex emotive issues like this. It has worked very well in Ireland as part of the democratic process.

citizensassembly.ie/about/

As i've said above, it's going to be a further two years of consultations before it gets voted again plus it could even be extended longer than that.This is not a quick fix

MitochondriaUnited · 29/11/2024 17:06

@Vaxtable there is no hysteria going on.
But there is fear.
Fear the U.K. will do the same than Canada or the Netherland because laws aren’t fixed. They change all the time and, as far as I know, there is no reason why this wouldn’t happen here.
Because once you accept that doctors role can be to save lives but also to kill, then the boundary on who it is acceptable to let go/commit suicide etc… will change too.

SockFluffInTheBath · 29/11/2024 17:06

NotOneOfTheInCrowd · 29/11/2024 17:04

The debate was a disgrace.

People were being emotionally coerced into this vote IMO with people telling their heart rending stories of deaths they’ve witnessed in order to sway people to their way of thinking.

A law like this needs to be based around facts alone, without bringing personal emotion into the equation.

Respectfully, I disagree. I think it’s important that we see the people in this, the experiences, and the reasons for tabling the bill. The facts are that in some cases terminally ill people are forced to drag out their days in pain. That’s not right.

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:06

MrsSchrute · 29/11/2024 17:05

Is it obvious? Isn't your argument that this is all about free will and autonomy? So if someone with mental health problems who are you to say they can't? It's that discrimination.

Personally, I say go ahead, but this act isn't going to do that. It was stated. Do I think it doesn't go far? Enough no I think it should be for other illnesses too, but that is not what they have decided, so there we are

Churchbelle · 29/11/2024 17:06

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:04

Again, this Jerry Mandarin is ridiculous. Because Kim led better said that this act, particularly says terminal illness. obviously, if you're going to commit suicide because you have a mental health problem, this country will sort that out.

Sorry, I know this is a very serious matter, but Jerry Mandarin really made me laugh.

IMustDoMoreExercise · 29/11/2024 17:06

Comedycook · 29/11/2024 16:44

Because what's worse? You not being allowed that choice or someone being forced or coerced into that choice?

Me not being allowed that choice becaues very few people are going to be coerced and we can tighten the law on coercion.

Should we stop people driving because 1 person has been killed on the roads? If not, why not?

Which is better, millions of people being allowed to drive or one person not being killed on the roads?

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:07

Churchbelle · 29/11/2024 17:06

Sorry, I know this is a very serious matter, but Jerry Mandarin really made me laugh.

I am sat in a cataract clinic. I can hardly see, so i'm using typing by speaking l o l

CandyMaker · 29/11/2024 17:08

We choose to drive knowing there is a risk. Assisted dying risk is about simply being disabled or older, there is no choice. It is not comparable.

IMustDoMoreExercise · 29/11/2024 17:08

SuperfluousHen · 29/11/2024 16:51

This is a sad day for the UK.

Without a doubt vulnerable people will be coerced to submit to the needle, on a promise of “dignity”.
Just awful.

How many people will be coerced though, if any?

Which is better, millions of people being allowed to drive or one person not being killed on the roads?

Churchbelle · 29/11/2024 17:08

@Littlemissgobby Hope your appointment goes well. Thanks for making me smile as I've had a rotten day.

TheTidyBear · 29/11/2024 17:10

CandyMaker · 29/11/2024 17:08

We choose to drive knowing there is a risk. Assisted dying risk is about simply being disabled or older, there is no choice. It is not comparable.

That makes no sense.

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:10

IMustDoMoreExercise · 29/11/2024 17:08

How many people will be coerced though, if any?

Which is better, millions of people being allowed to drive or one person not being killed on the roads?

As was stated by AM, P, why would you coerce when they've only got 6 months left? Anyway, it's not like you're gonna get much faster if you die now before the six months

CandyMaker · 29/11/2024 17:10

Patienceinshortsupply · 29/11/2024 17:05

But it's not promoting suicide.

This isn't normal death from aging or a chronic condition.

This is death from a terminal illness.

There is an ocean between the two.

It is suicide. But assisted suicide. There have always been people who have undertaken suicide as a result of terminal illnesses.

TonTonMacoute · 29/11/2024 17:11

Having lost three parents/in laws, I am still ambivalent about the assisted dying question.

However, this is an appalling bill, it hasn't had anywhere near enough scrutiny and I'm concerned that it has been passed.

Leadbeater herself said that she thought that 'not wanting to be a burden' could be grounds for assisted dying and in my view that is already a very long way down the slippery slope. This is assisted dying - to prevent unbearable pain and suffering right at the end of life. It's not the same as assisted suicide.

It is assumed that killing people is easy. In Oregon where assisted dying is legal, there are cases where death has still taken hours or even days, because it is still not an exact science.

There is nowhere that has AD where it has not given rise to several extremely worrying cases, and it will do here too. Inevitably.

CandyMaker · 29/11/2024 17:11

Littlemissgobby · 29/11/2024 17:10

As was stated by AM, P, why would you coerce when they've only got 6 months left? Anyway, it's not like you're gonna get much faster if you die now before the six months

Get hold of an inheritance more quickly.