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.

@RedToothBrush
The whole point is there are so many of these prejudices and ignorance stacked up in this desire to 'have the option'.

Some of it it is dangerously close to eugenics at times. It's really quite scary.

Precisely. There's a distinct lack of disabled voices in the conversation presumably because they aren't saying what people want to hear. There's far too many healthy able bodied people shouting about a hypothetical condition they may be in one day which they would find unliveable, while we aren't listening to real people living with those conditions now. Better off dead was such a short insightful documentary, I'm surprised anyone interested in this bill hasn't watched it.

To a private complaint who make a profit from killing people? That'd go down well in certain quarters... I mean someone was talking about the conflict of interest in keeping people alive and profiting before. Cos of course if we legalise this under the umbrella of public services this isn't problematic. And it doesn't stop the possibility of privatisation in the force either.

How would anyone feel about, I don't know VirginDeath or GlaxoKleinAngels?

Again it highlights need to discuss this type of thing because I do think people would think differently about the service depending on who was implementing it.

Every politician able to vote should watch it.

I find it hard to imagine that any government (right or left) would have much interest in running a euthanasia service. Particularly if the decisions might impact medical provision on the NHS.

Firstly, my view that disabled people are better off dead is not my view. I never said that I do not believe your research at all because there was one man who literally couldn’t move anything after a major break in his neck after climbing and he really wants to die I’m really sorry maybe someday but there is a hell of a lot that don’t want to live And at the end of the day who are you to decide that they don’t get that choice?

Completely agree. I fear they haven't though. I don't think it's possible to come out watching it with enough confidence to vote for this bill right now.

Maybe no they shouldn’t maybe if somebody wants to die let them die and if they survive it then they survive it but maybe we should all have that written. What do you want to do because presently and I kept saying this before I can put a do not resuscitate on me and I can go to the Reservoir and try to drown myself somebody could get me before I die and the paramedics could do CPR on me even though I have said I want to do not resuscitate because they might think oh she’s suicidal. Would they still do the do not resuscitate on me because that’s a way of getting round this anyway?

Fair enough you take the example that I put and you explain it for other people I am talking as an individual person you should have the right and maybe suicide does go up because maybe the sad reality is there are very many people living that don’t want to live, but they are too cowardly to kill themselves. I would put my hand up and say that And think that about myself there is many people like that. What is life if it is just an existance

This people don’t know what they’re going to be in. I’m find that very patronising. You have to look at the thread on this group on mum‘s net with people waiting for their parents to die. I’ve just been reading it. It sounds horrific that people are watching their parents absolutely in front of them. It’s dreadful very dreadful and yet you say it’s just people in hypothetical futures. I don’t think it is after reading what somebody put about their mum on here.

I saw your previous comments about this imaginary scenario. I think you have a very simplistic view of DNRs. If you're drowning in a reservoir it's unlikely they'll have actually identified who you are and your medical records before they rescue you. A DNR order is usually something you have in place with a doctor or healthcare team that are treating you for a condition you have, not something you can put as a blanket over yourself that in any emergency situation would be applied. Like if your house was on fire, the firemen and paramedics on scene are thinking of saving people (because we generally value people's lives..) they're not going to waste time wondering if anyone in that fire has a DNR and therefore they shouldn't bother rescuing them. The problem with a bill like this is that we already don't have enough of a culture in the NHS where DNR orders are appropriately discussed between doctors and patients, so throwing in assisted suicide when doctors can't even broach DNRs in situations they are appropriate and they're otherwise being applied to disabled people without discussion could be disastrous.

@Littlemissgobby

Yoh seem to be proposing we no longer er intervene to prevent suicide - in that case, it’s not just this bill - you’ll have to overhaul the whole mental health act, mental capacity act and deprivation of liberty laws also - and since they have been waiting for much needed updating for many years now and it keeps getting kicked down the road, I think (thankfully) that’s unlikely.

i speak as someone with a lifelong mental disorder - I have tried to take my life many times in many different ways. I am eternally grateful that when I was at my lowest and no longer able to keep myself safe, the STATE stepped in to do so on my behalf.

I would not want to life in a society when the state has absolved itself/stepped back from the most basic responsibility to keep its citizens, and particularly its most vulnerable citizens, safe and alive.

I did hear on the radio that you need to put it in the fridge so the paramedics understands you’ve got a DNR what I want to know is if I discussed having a DNR tomorrow would they let me if they believe I’ve got mental health issues?

I I am suggesting that just read that in Canada they haven’t allowed it for mental health reasons they may do it in 2027. They haven’t quite decided yet. I am deciding that because there are some of us that want to be here and yes you keep saying you keep committing suicide attempting. I’m glad that you are here and you are happy with that decision but what about the amount of people that do it? And they are not happy with the decision to be brought back to life and they don’t want to be living any longer. Think that everybody with depression does get a better life I have borderline personality disorder myself. I don’t think that actually you can always get better even with a shitload of therapy.

I don't think it's patronising to suggest that people give 1 hour of there time to watching a doc that centres the opinions and loved experience of disabled people. It's not even guaranteed to change your mind but if you won't even listen to these groups how can you be confident they'll be safeguarded when you're so dismissive of there fears you won't even listen?

I fundamentally do not agree with euthanasia. I do not agree with the state putting people down that don’t want to be put down. I am talking about people who want a choice who want to die I have never understood why people can’t have that choice even in the other countries that do it they are not putting people down who are not asking for it.

I also have borderline personality disorder so I do understand - but chronic suicidality is extremely common for people with this disorder but it can and often does get better over time - and I’m talking years and decades, which sucks - but I am so glad I survived my teens and 20s and can now enjoy my 40s - and yes it takes shed loads of therapy and even more determination and work from the person - if you’d asked me then I’d have said it was never going to get better - but it did - it’s not untreatable.

I actually get the opposite impression to you - that there is a concerted attempt to shut down any opposition to the bill. Harriet Harman objected to Wes Streeting airing his views and now Charlie Faulkner falsely accusing Shabana Mahmood of opposing the bill purely on religious grounds. She isn’t - her letter to constituents outlines the legal difficulties.

What are the safeguards to protect against co-oercion? We keep hearing that they are the most effective but I’m yet to hear what they are

I oppose the bill on the grounds that I think disabled people and other vulnerable people are not protected. I do accept that others feel different. I therefore feel that if the bill is passed then there should be an opt out similar to organ donation that means it would be illegal for any medical or legal person can approach you about AD once you opt out and only you can reverse it

It's absolutely not hypothetical people - I'm concerned about real people with long term medical conditions or disability being thrown under the bus in the rush to be nice to all the more important people who haven't had a disability but have then had a terminal diagnosis...

...you just can't help it with the frankly emotional abuse and blackmail though can you?

As long as you have capacity you can apply for one. However as I said I think you have oversimplified them in your head. They aren't legally binding in that you'd get no medical treatment in an emergency and a DNR is referring to if your heart or breathing stops, not other medical treatment and they aren't legally binding as such. Of course if you're applying for a DNR because your suicidal and planning to kill yourself a doctor is going to raise concern, that's their duty. If you're genuinely so concerned that a medical professional would ever try to save your life perhaps don't publically attempt suicide?

You mean like the car crash that is cervical screening which is near impossible to opt out to despite my best (repeated) attempts.

You know, just in case I've changed my mind.

Yeah it’s a nice idea (opting in/out system) but in reality it would be like organ donation etc - even where you’ve opted in/out, they still ask if it’s current - in case you’ve since changed your mind but not updated your preference.

I know it's off topic but it's usually quite simple to opt out of cervical screening if you submit the correct form direct to the screening agency (if you're in England). GPs etc are useless

But people do have that choice, suicide isn't illegal in this countru. When you are asking the state to provide the means and assistance, then it's not a simple as an individual choice.

That’s why I suggested it be illegal for any medical or legal person to approach you about AD. Unlike the rules around organ donation

There's a distinct lack of disabled voices in the conversation presumably because they aren't saying what people want to hear. There's far too many healthy able bodied people shouting about a hypothetical condition they may be in one day which they would find unliveable, while we aren't listening to real people living with those conditions now

Sadly I wouldn't expect them to be included, @Usernamesareboring1; after all like Shabana Mahmood and Wes Streeting who've just been mentioned they might say inconvenient things to upset the narrative of those driving this

Doubtless, should this, pass, we'll have a pretence of "rigorous consultations", which will bring a hollow laugh from those who've ever been involved in one - and I'm not talking about online surveys, but group meetings where all are asked for their view and then told what's going to happen anyway

Since there have been no proper answers to the many concerns people have expressed, I guess the best we can hope for is enough who'll prevent this going through ... not to dismiss it forever, but to allow time for proper consideration and maybe a bill less full of holes