To say that if the assisted dying bill isn't passed....

[OnceUponATimeInTheWest]

that, regardless of where you personally stand on the issue, it will finally be undeniable that we do not live in a truly representative democracy at all?

Given the latest poll in the Times, it is clear that the vast majority of the population support the bill (65% for and 13% against) and yet most of the media seems to be full of story after story about this person or that coming out against it (unsurprisingly, often people with a religious background). I don't remember seeing nearly as many stories about someone telling us they support the bill. The narrative feels as though it is being steered in only one direction.

I mean, it's already fairly much clear that our elected politicians prefer to tell us what to do and what we should think, rather than actually representing our wishes. Otherwise immigration and transgender issues would not still be dominating the headlines. The fact that an amendment to remove bishops from the house of lords failed recently should also tell us that religion still plays far too much of a role in what is an overwhelmingly secular society.

If this bill fails, then anyone in future trying to tell us that we live in one of the greatest democracies in the world is, at this point, just gaslighting us.

Yes, but the point is it’s not EVERYONE and so it’s not comparable to an actual democratic vote.

Taking myself and my friendship group as an example, we’re all the same age and social group, but we all have different views on this bill. It’s not enough to say “well there’s a split of age etc” on there and so that’s = everyone.

These polls aren’t comparable to an actual country wide democratic vote.

MillicentFaucet · Today 14:27
**
I think that if the state wishes to get into the business of killing its citizens then it should start with murderers and paedophiles

Hyperbole. No-one is proposing the state killing its citizens. It’s a personal choice, to be carried out by the individual concerned.

And all of the non self-selecting polls that say the same?

Does that help? Hope so!

Logically that makes sense but look what happened last time we left an important decision up to a referendum.

I wonder how many MPs have actually been responsible for hands on caring for a dying relative or friend and seen the pain and indignity involved. Obviously they have families and friends and at least some must have had someone close to them die, but given the full time nature of the job, that it involves travelling away from home often and doesn't necessarily allow spontaneous leave even in major circumstances I wonder if many of them haven't. Other family members may step in.

Ideally I think that reality is something we should talk about more, but understandably most people don't, or only with very close friends and family. People don't want to relive the worst moments of their lives, they want to protect their loved one's dignity and memories. So unless you've been there and done it or been very close to someone who has the concept of death is a very sanitised one. It's easy to believe that hospices and palliative care teams (who do an absolutely amazing and essential job) can fix everything, but they can't...

No, but they are indicative. I would very much welcome a referendum on this.

A referendum of something like this, which seems simple at the outset but is beset with the logistics and ethics which escapes most people would be a disaster of Brexit proportions.

All they are indicative of is that those who happened to see it voted a certain way. I agree I’d welcome a real open vote though.

I think those arguing other points here are blissfully unaware that sooner or later this issue effects everybody. We are all going to die of something, I have seen elderly relatives at the end of their lives and it's was horrific. The pain, the lack of cognitive awareness for one, the constant screaming, the lack of control. And it went on and on and on, this wasn't a case of weeks but months and for one years.

I would never wish to live through that, if you can call it living. And anybody who expects somebody else to endure that just to make them feel better is selfish. Of course it needs to be addressed on an individual basis, but allowing people to suffer like that I totally inhumane. We don't even allow animals to live like that.

We vote for people to represent us in Parliament, whom we then trust to vote according to their best judgment. If they voted according to the popular opinions of their constituents we could be back to capital punishment and other regressive positions.

I agree with @LlynTegid that PR could help generally, though in this matter the free vote is necessary and helpful.

Except it's not being carried out by the individual concerned, it will be carried out by another person who has been allowed to do so by an Act of Parliament. That is why it's called 'assisted suicide' and not just 'suicide'

Exactly. Thank you for posting this.

I'm very frightened about assisted dying

I am certain that, in a few short decades, robust safeguards will be watered down, and you will be extremely vulnerable if you keep poor health, can't afford to pay for your own care and don't have supportive family advocating for you

A nice elitist attitude there. That kind of thing didn't work out so well for the Democrats in the US recently did it.

But that is how representative democracy works. We choose representatives and then they vote.

It shows we don't live in a direct democracy, but we knew that already.

And I think lots of people have no experience of being disabled and therefore don't understand the very real fear (indeed expectation on seeing what is happening in Canada) that our lives will be deemed of insufficient worth to society and the only 'support' we'll be offered is assisted dying.

I tell you what's pissing me off. [And I haven't read anybody else on this post, so if i'm repeating a similar argument, then let me know. ] so the thing that's annoying me is that the government says it's going to be neutral on this debate, yet so far, we've had big massive ministers come out against it health minister, say he's against it And now, the justice minister, because probably of a bloody religion, has written to her constituents against it to.
so annoyed I can see it not being passed sick of how behind this country is

I agree with this. Our democracy doesn't alway reflect public opinion. In the case of the death penalty and assisted dying, I'm OK with that.
I genuinely don't know what a better system is. Would PR be better ?

🙄

So you think that people were in a position to make a good and informed decision on the shape and outcomes of Brexit...or did they take a gut punt?

100% agree with you. We can see from Canada how quickly assisted dying moves to the disabled having their lives deemed to be of insufficient value to society

Then I found out that my local M, P, who should have been a labour one, but it was 1 of these independent Muslim ones had these prayers at a local monthly meet up that he does anyway, claimed that people had written to him saying they didn't want it, possibly because we have a lot of Muslims in our area bolt as somebody who went and Sara said he was biassed right from the start. So no I don't think they're going to pass it. I also think a lot of this is religion as well.

A representative democracy should still, you know, at least try to pretend to represent its citizens. What we really have is an elitist technocracy (tending towards gerentocractic oligarchy).

Possibly we should have a referendum?
Yes in favour
No not in favour

Personally I think that anyone who has seen a loved one dying slowly in agony and despair and STILL opposes assisted dying is a monster.
And if they haven't experienced that, they have NO fucking clue, and should shut up.
I've watched 3 relatives die like that. Now have another close family member recently diagnosed with a terminal illness. People own their own lives, it should be their own decision.

Firstly if you know about how our law is built, we have common law and part of that is built on the acts of Parliament and the government itself would then have to change a slight term of the bill which would have to go through Parliament again. It isn't as simple as watering anything down. It's different to how canada does it?And actually, the proposal is much stronger than what canada has, but I tell you what you worry about that let everybody else have their own choice to decide what they want with their own lives

I agree that the result of this vote is unlikely to represent the will of the people. I wrote to my MP and got a letter back which said, in essence, "I understand you want this and your reasons why but us clever people have to think of more". I understand there will need to be safeguards but, in the meantime, people are suffering and dying without a shred of dignity.

It's all very well saying we need to improve palliative care, and we do, but that should not be held as an alternative when there is no reasonable prospect of that happening in the near future