The EU referendum campaigns have barely started, and already the 'scaremongering' accusation is being thrown around - and I am sick of it! I want to know the risks, as well as the benefits of my options - I don't just want to be told it will be all unicorns and fairy dust if I choose this option over that one.
Whilst I agree that both sides need to tell us why we would be better off if their side wins, I think we also need to know the possible negative consequences too, if we are going to make a properly informed decision.
I believe that neither option is perfect - there could be negative consequences to both remaining in, and leaving the EU, and I would rather know what these could be, before I decide on how to vote. Obviously, if one side is suggesting there is a big risk of something happening, and the other side can disprove it, they should do - but they should engage with the facts of the argument, rather than just labelling it scaremongering.
I used to be an operating theatre nurse, so I am looking at this from the viewpoint of the informed consent that surgeons have to obtain before an operation - the surgeon should explain not only the benefits of the operation, but also the possible risks, especially if the risks are great. If a surgeon did not tell a patient of the risks inherent in the operation, the patient would not be giving informed consent.
So - AIBU to think that we need to know both the pros and cons of voting in or out, and that telling us the cons is not scaremongering?