Assisted Dying Bill tomorrow.

[TooBigForMyBoots]

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.

Yeah, because letting someone suffer immeasurably is far better.

What has been the impact on palliative and hospice care in places that have it? Switzerland, Australia, Netherlands etc.

There is nothing reasonable about thinking we do not need hospices.

These threads are bringing back memories of the awfulness of my parents deaths.

Oh @SoupDragon, it's so hard isn't it.<<unmumsnetty hugs>>

Tbh Vivienne after reading the bill it’s a long way off from being anything.

A pp mentioned the bill had data and facts ( regarding research backing the bill up etc ) …there’s absolutely no data or facts! So still nothing here then.

Agree it has been really difficult.
I do think it was important, for people to talk about their experiences, it was just sad to read people who are against the bill being dismissive and argumentative just to get their point across and speaking to people with such disrespect.If you’ve lost a loved one to a terminal illness, of course it’s relevant to how you feel.There’s a long way to go with this bill, l’m relieved it hasn’t been dismissed, is under consultation.

Why do you think those of us who are against it haven't experienced the unpleasant death of a loved one?

These countries probably don't have a failing outdated healthcare system the way we do. I don't think a fair comparison can be made to be honest.

@Comedycook I’ve said how l feel, just like you have throughout the thread.I’m most certainly not going to get into an argument with you as it’s been a difficult and upsetting day.

You have already spoken about your cousin's death. Others have spoken about their experiences. This is a discussion that requires listening and understanding from all those invested in it.

Did you watch or listen to the debate today @Comedycook ?

I've lost many family members. Yes I've listened to the debate. In theory I think it would be good for people to have a choice. I'm well aware people suffer. The debate didn't sway me or tell me anything I didn't already know. But I don't think we can safeguard fully against coercion and abuse. It's too risky imo.

You know in the Netherlands assisted dying accounts for 5% of all deaths and the lowest age at which it's available is 12. It's chilling.

What I am saying it's David Davis stood up. I have just watched a debate again and stated that quite clearly, people were saying that doctors were given a bit more morphin on the sly, to help people slip over to the other side. But that soon stopped after Harold Shipman did what he did now. I understand why? Because obviously the doctors did not want to be accused of murdering people, but what I am saying is that that was all legally questionable, but it was happening. So for this bill, it's good because it then puts things in a clear legal way that hasn't had for some time.

I'm glad you see and support the theory and principles involved @Comedycook.

What do you want to see in the Bill in terms of safeguarding?

I don't want it to go through because I even though we can have the safeguards written down in theory...in practice, they can never be full proof. We have safe guarding in many situations and organisations and still errors are made

Thank you for making your position clear @Comedycook. You are opposed to it whatever. No assisted dying bill will be palatable to you.

I am not of the same opinion. I and many others. Thank you for your contributions to this thread.

I am for this and hope it is in place in time for my parents and myself.

Looking at the details though it seems really impractical. You have lengthy cooling off periods which I do understand but then you have to make the decision in advance of when you need it or it won’t happen.

How can you really know when you are still well enough to be doing all this paperwork. The doctor has to be sure you have settled on the decision but I would want the option there just in case.

I know you can change your mind and not do it (of course) but I think people will change their mind and want it when it is too late.

I personally think that 5% is reasonable or even higher. I think if 66% of the population support it then a reasonable proportion of them would use it depending on the nature of their deaths. Another argument is that people feel reassured to have it in place and lots don’t use it or use it later than they would have taken their own lives in other ways.

I do see why it has to be restricted to adults but can also imagine desperate cases where children wanted it and didn’t have that option.

I watched some of the debate and the proxy discussion was interesting. It can be a person of good standing in the community or someone you have known for 2 years but not a relative. I don’t think I would be comfortable doing this for or asking a friend to do it nor a random accountant or something.

I’m guessing it needs to be someone you have known for two years so that they are more likely to tell if you are
being coerced? than a complete stranger.

The Problem is that the availability of hospice care is abysmal in this country. See the fact it’s mainly funded through charities rather than the NHS.

So yes you might have people chose AD because palliative care is simply not available to them. If they had chosen to live with good palliative care then they’ve been coerced into choosing AD instead.

IF we had a great palliative care system in the first place, then the situation would have been different.

Background: my FIL died own his own of cancer. No palliative care so he spent his last 3 months in a hospital bed where he contacted hospital acquired illnesses on the top of his cancer. Where he was treated as if he still had years in front of him rather than doing their utmost to make him comfortable. And he had no visit allowed at all because Covid and said acquired illnesses etc…
Had he been in hospice care, the situation would have been very different.

Talking about AD without talking about palliative care is simply coercive imo.

My mum was told she did not meet the criteria for a hospice. Although she only had a few weeks to live, the criteria was things like uncontrolled pain. She died in a hospital like a lot of people.

Btw, talking about AD with patients requires doctors able to have those conversations.
They are very tricky conversations and tbh doctors are often failing there.

Im wondering what makes people think they will be handled better than conversations around DNR or around choosing one treatment vs another.

Agree
I don’t think a doctor should be bringing up the option at all but be fully versed to explain it if the patient wants that discussion.
If someone wants assisted dying then they should request it.
A doctor suggesting this as an option feels a little coercive to me.

Advertisement

Black Friday6
Talk AIBU?
AIBU?
Follow topic
Love AIBU? Follow us on WhatsApp to be notified about trending threads
Unwatch
Save
Share
12···202122232425
Assisted Dying
613 replies

Show more
OP posts:See all
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
LuckySantangelo35 · Today 14:29

ThisAquaCrow · Today 14:02
To me ( and to many others who have made the same point repeatedly on these threads) it is saying that human life is of the same value as a dog.
Show quote history
**
well, your misinterpreting it. People are saying that humans should be afforded the same level of compassion that dogs. You wouldn’t leave a dog suffering with no change of getting better would you? so why should humans have to endure that? Luckily we’re on the path to ensuring that those who don’t want to suffer don’t have to.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark

Rainbow321 · Today 14:34

Having nursed my terminal mum for 11 weeks , I'd say the last 3 weeks for her were the worse, and she would have wanted to go before it had come to that .
I know if the same were to happen to me , I'd gladly say my goodbyes to family and choose when to go.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Dramatic · Today 14:39

SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · Today 14:21
I disagree and you have just swept away one of the much touted safeguards that Leadbetter promised to the public and MPs. The safeguard being that the person is freely choosing AD as opposed to being suicidally depressed.
When you are terminally ill but not depressed, making the most of the time you have left does matter alot to both them and their relatives.
Show quote history
Being suicidally depressed is different to being depressed because you know you're going to die soon.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Africa2004 · Today 14:44

safetyfreak · Yesterday 18:27
I am pleased, people who wish to pass away earlier should be allowed that right.
However, that doesn't mean good, quality pallative care should be taken away or reduced.
Who on earth has suggested good palliative care is taken away??
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · Today 14:46

I honestly don’t understand the romanticising of assisted dying. The methods are to either to overdose on drugs you orally ingest or to push a button and have a lethal injection of the same sort that some countries still use to execute criminals.
There is no dignity in dying by overdose or lethal injection.
A few posters have mentioned parents ‘choking to death’ I don’t think they realise with the AD method of this bill of oral ingestion that aspirating on your own vomit while unconscious is a common side effect. So AD doesn’t avoid choking to death. You also shit and piss yourself while unconscious. Prior to falling unconscious there can be nausea, stomach cramps, tingling/pins and needles, spasms. Muscle relaxers and anti-emetics are added to the cocktail to reduce the risk of vomiting and to reduce the appearance of the writhing and spasming so attending relatives think the person dying isn’t feeling discomfort- they are they’re just artificially slightly paralysed.
A study done on the rates of PTSD, and negative feelings about how their relative died comparing assisted deaths to unassisted deaths found no difference. Both are equally traumatic.
There are numerous studies on just how inhumane lethal injection is by observing hundreds of executions.
It’s ok to be in favour of AD, what I really dislike is the romanticising of it through the use of language saying it’s dignified, painless, and avoids all suffering. The reality of it falls short of this.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark

SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · Today 14:47

Dramatic · Today 14:39
Being suicidally depressed is different to being depressed because you know you're going to die soon.
Show quote history
If you are depressed and terminally ill and apply for AD due to the depression, that means you are suicidally depressed. Attitudes like yours will mean that the terminally ill will no longer have their mental health supported.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Africa2004 · Today 14:48

TheLyingBitchintheWardrobe · Yesterday 19:11
Could my child kill me if they have power of attorney?
Only if you'd granted them the power to make those decisions on your behalf
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · Today 14:50

Africa2004 · Today 14:48
Only if you'd granted them the power to make those decisions on your behalf
Show quote history
A child can easily coerce a parent into consenting though. There was a case of this in Oregon.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Baileysandcream · Today 15:20

ismu · Today 10:21
** suicide has been decriminalised but society does not help people to do it and actively tries to stop them, at the moment.
If a judge denies someone AD under the bill, then they would be in a grey area and would need to find illegal means to end their life. This is not always possible or practical. Aiding and abetting suicide is a crime- as it should be, for safeguarding reasons.
Even with AD in this bill, no one has a right to end their lives. It's very hard to stop someone that is determined, but we'd try anything stop them. I hope we never lose sight of that.
Why should I not have a right to want to end my own life if I have a 6 months left to live and know that many of those months will not have any sense or quality of "life" in them?
I do not want the last months of my life to be in chronic pain, possiblly paralysed, unable to speak, swallow or support myself in any way. Why should my choice to bring forward a very unpleasant and very inevitable death be stopped?
I just don't understand?
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Startinganew32 · Today 15:32

Baileysandcream · Today 15:20
Why should I not have a right to want to end my own life if I have a 6 months left to live and know that many of those months will not have any sense or quality of "life" in them?
I do not want the last months of my life to be in chronic pain, possiblly paralysed, unable to speak, swallow or support myself in any way. Why should my choice to bring forward a very unpleasant and very inevitable death be stopped?
I just don't understand?
Show quote history
Yes I also don’t know why there is this desperation to do anything to stop people from dying if that is what they want. A terminally ill person who is in pain and wants to die with dignity is in a completely different position to a young man who feels there is nothing to live for because his girlfriend left him. We shouldn’t lump them together. One person is suffering from a temporary mental illness and suicide deprives them of the ability to recover and have a good life. The other is doing it because they have weighed up the options and would prefer to die before they deteriorate further, lose control of their mind and body and their loved ones have to watch them suffer.
Not even the countries that allow euthanasia for some mental illnesses wouldn’t allow the vast vast majority of those who commit suicide to make use of assisted dying laws.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark

Redburnett · Today 15:35

Interesting articles in the Times by Janice Turner who is just about in favour, and Hugo Rifkind who is against.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
NagathaCrispy · Today 15:41

To me the key issues are choice and the ability of the patient to make that choice. If a person is terminally ill, in pain, suffering and wishes it to end earlier than it otherwise would if nature were left to its own devices, then that choice is a fundamental human right.
Luckily, I am not in that position, but if I were, I would want to be able to make that choice.
I'm delighted and relieved it was passed and look forward to it coming in to law in due course.
Quote
Thanks
Add postReport
Bookmark
Littlemissgobby · Today 15:43

I watched alot of the debate again last night and the mp leila moran lib dem, said the ones that are against this bill no matter how much scrutiny will be done in the next 2 to 3 years. How much consultation and panels will now ho head and add amendments etc to bring the bill back. They need to be honest that be it because of religion they would never vote doe this bill. That's how I feel on mumsnet
Sure there are those that are against the bill as they don't feel it's watertight, which is fair enough, but as I have said, it's going to be another 2 to 3 years before it gets to come back to the house of parliament. But it's the other people that annoying me. They are not being honest that they would never ever vote for this. Anyway, or want it, and that's fine. You can look after your mortal soul all you want, but you don't get did it take to others.
Kit malthouse or david Davis, I can't remember which stated to the people that are saying we would get like Canada. That is such a bad thing to say because we have a Parliament. That is a thousand year old, and we are perfectly acceptable to make our own rules. As they stated, we have abortion in this country just because some other countries have it to near where you give birth.We would never do that in our country yet.That doesn't mean to say that we stop all abortion.In this country. I thought that was a really good argument.
Now, on channel four on youtube, it's said, but on the island of jersey, they're practically going to be doing it next year, they've done their discussions, the isle of man is near enough doing it soon. Plus scotland will be having this discussion soon.Too, so it's about right that this is done.
The other thing that's really annoying is that I saw the 2 sides of campaigns outside the house of Parliament yesterday, and it was disabled people saying, this is a bad day for disabled people. There is nothing absolutely nothing in this bill. That is saying, disabled people are going to be put down This is literally so hard you have to have six months to live, and yet you might even have a two year diagnosiss. I guess that means you're going to have to wait till you get to 6 months. I'm wondering if people are egging it on for these disabled people so they get worried because there is literally nothing.That is targeting the disabled people, so i'm trying to understand why they are so concerned when this legitimately has an act that says terminal illness only

Ignore that i was trying to copy my answer from similar post

I watched alot of the debate again last night and the mp leila moran lib dem, said the ones that are against this bill no matter how much scrutiny will be done in the next 2 to 3 years. How much consultation and panels will now ho head and add amendments etc to bring the bill back. They need to be honest that be it because of religion they would never vote doe this bill. That's how I feel on mumsnet
Sure there are those that are against the bill as they don't feel it's watertight, which is fair enough, but as I have said, it's going to be another 2 to 3 years before it gets to come back to the house of parliament. But it's the other people that annoying me. They are not being honest that they would never ever vote for this. Anyway, or want it, and that's fine. You can look after your mortal soul all you want, but you don't get did it take to others.
Kit malthouse or david Davis, I can't remember which stated to the people that are saying we would get like Canada. That is such a bad thing to say because we have a Parliament. That is a thousand year old, and we are perfectly acceptable to make our own rules. As they stated, we have abortion in this country just because some other countries have it to near where you give birth.We would never do that in our country yet.That doesn't mean to say that we stop all abortion.In this country. I thought that was a really good argument.
Now, on channel four on youtube, it's said, but on the island of jersey, they're practically going to be doing it next year, they've done their discussions, the isle of man is near enough doing it soon. Plus scotland will be having this discussion soon.Too, so it's about right that this is done.
The other thing that's really annoying is that I saw the 2 sides of campaigns outside the house of Parliament yesterday, and it was disabled people saying, this is a bad day for disabled people. There is nothing absolutely nothing in this bill. That is saying, disabled people are going to be put down This is literally so hard you have to have six months to live, and yet you might even have a two year diagnosiss. I guess that means you're going to have to wait till you get to 6 months. I'm wondering if people are egging it on for these disabled people so they get worried because there is literally nothing.That is targeting the disabled people, so i'm trying to understand why they are so concerned when this legitimately has an act that says terminal illness only