Esther Rantzen "too frail" to travel to Switzerland (Dignitas)

[ItWasnaMeGuv]

Hopefully a family member of friend will take her and she can get her wish.

What point is that? Most of the post is about the misery of visiting or caring for a dying relative who is sometimes incontinent, smelling bad, and frightening their grandkids. How are those even mentionable as reasons for euthanasia? If you want to have a chance to convince people this isn’t going to be abused by people eager to get their inheritances, then focus on how AD benefits the dying person, and the suffering of the dying person rather than how it would be so much nicer and easier for their relatives.

Not at all. You have completely misunderstood. My dying relative did NOT want this. Because they did not want their children and grandchildren to remember them like that. They wanted to die with dignity, which they did not get. And the grief that everyone felt upon losing them was made even worse by the knowledge that their manner of death was absolutely not what they wanted. You have totally misunderstood.

Yes, I agree with the point you've made. This is a sad reality for many people. And now that the AD bill has been defeated in the UK, it will continue to be so.

No. There are only the rules that have to be obeyed about how much pain medication can be given. That medication is often not enough. Anaesthesia is never used.

When my mum was in hospital on end of life care the nurses giving morphine had to enter pin codes and double confirm the dose with another HCP, I didn't see the meds being taken out of the cabinet but I imagine it was locked and also double checked. She wanted to go home but the feeling was she wouldn't survive the journey.

My MIL died following multiple strokes and was on the Liverpool pathway. It was in the news at the time and I was a bit scared of seeing her but she was very peaceful. She wasn't conscious but also displayed no signs of distress.

From the descriptions of the medication involved in AD, in the link above, it is also likely to fail, take days, and/or be extremely painful. It's not all slipping quietly following an injection, within half an hour.

But this situation wouldn’t be impacted by the AD bill

Yes - there do seem to be a lot of people assuming that AD would be the answer for dementia or for cancer that's terminal but with a prognosis of a year or more.

I may be wrong but I think in countries like Switzerland the legal framework requires that the patient retains the physical and cognitive capacity to complete the process of dying independently ie they drink and swallow the drug themselves.

So you might be able to travel but not have the capacity to swallow or lift your arms or lift a glass to your mouth when you get there and it’s that that stops you from travelling.

I once watched a tv documentary (was it the Terry Pratchett one; I’m not sure?) that has haunted me ever since following a very brave British couple on their trip to Dignitas which showed the actual process and the husband, who I think had been diagnosed with MND, had to drink a very bitter concoction of drugs. The process was quite straightforward in his case but at the same time it was utterly harrowing, especially for his wife who was right beside him throughout. She was incredibly brave and dignified too.

Obviously dying from MND I imagine is very harrowing also.

Whereas in France, assisted dying does actually mean assistance under strict criteria, if the patient is physically incapable.

I just find the entire subject upsetting tbh and I can’t entirely make my mind up about what is right. On the one hand I believe that every individual is innately valuable, separate from their capacity to do things. But on the other hand there was incredibly dignity, bravery and pragmatism in that gentleman’s decision.

I definitely think it would be a terrible thing to introduce AD in to the UK at the moment when the NHS is so stretched and the elderly are receiving really poor care in some post codes; the potential dangers are obvious in such circumstances.

Spain has AD and I intend to use it if necessary. My son lives there and would help me so nobody would get into trouble or be prosecuted.

The first (of several) criteria for AD in Spain, according to Wikipedia, is:

To request this procedure, five requirements must be given, which are expressed in this way in the law document:[35]

• To have Spanish nationality or legal residence in Spain, be of legal age and be capable and aware at the time of application.

Would you qualify for legal residence?

But you wouldn’t be eligible surely. Don’t you have to be a Spanish citizen? Or at least have permanent residency? I know that’s the case in other countries.

It really muddies the waters by talking about the elderly. The AD bill had nothing to do with the elderly or dementia or many other things that have been mentioned. They wouldn’t have qualified for AD anyway. It was only for those terminally ill with fewer than six months to live, and with capacity.

Maybe those rules could be reevaluated, just for the case of people with capacity who are certified by 2 doctors to be incurable, have a short time to live are suffering and repeatedly ask for die. Being under anaesthetic is like being nowhere for no time - no dreams or discomfort of any kind. Slipping away from thirst or infection would not be noticed by the person who chose this, surely.

But the "rules/clinical guidelines" are based on the law, which isn't now progressing to a change.

I could get residency as have an Irish passport.

The whole bill was about people with terminal illness of about 6 months to live and was distorted by people saying anyone mentally ill, disabled or too old was going to be topped. A totally hysterical and childish reaction to a grown up conversation. Interesting that the far left, Corbyn, Abbott, Long-Bailey etc have colluded with the right in voting it down. Why I am I not surprised?

So you would end up needing to move at least 2-3 months before you wanted the AD process (so you could register residency) and would have to go through serious living and healthcare changes whilst in a terminally ill state?

It's a scenario that hasn't yet occurred

It's a possibility though. Laws can be and are changed.

And what if the parent wants to end it? You're denying them the right to have a say in what happens to their own life.

My late DF died five days after having enough pain relief to make him unconscious. At no time did I find sitting with him "unrelenting misery", I was just pleased that he was in no pain. It was all very peaceful and I just sat and talked to him.

It's sad, but anyone who helps her can face criminal charges for assisting a suicide. 'Can' being the key word obviously.

@SheilaFentiman
Ok… but (taking the NL) - AD is for life limiting and severe illness so someone dying as a result of AD would most likely have died of cancer, heart failure etc within weeks or months of their AD death date.

That’s not true. In both NL and Canada you can access AD even when your death is not reasonably forseeable. The threshold is unbearable suffering.