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.

Interesting article in the Spectator about Gordon Brown’s comments the other day (he’s against it). Here’s an extract about polling:

“As well as much reading as ever, Brown was involved in the commissioning of new polling via Focaldata which he leant on to form his arguments. On the surface, the headline figure of that polling showed that more than 70 per cent of the British people record support for assisted dying. Brown knows that the natural instinct of decent people who see terrible deaths is that where there is pain we want to prevent it, and where there is suffering we want to alleviate it. But when we dig deep into what people really want to happen, we find a more complicated picture. When asked whether ‘Labour should prioritise sorting out palliative, social and end-of-life care first before even thinking about assisted dying’, 66 per cent strongly or somewhat agree, and just 20 per cent per cent somewhat or strongly disagree.

Further, there is even more support for a statement which says: ‘Before parliament considers introducing assisted dying there should be a royal commission to examine the future of palliative and end of life care’. Here, more – 69 per cent – are in favour with those against now reduced to 15 per cent. There is a majority for a prior commission which pre-empts any legislation even among those inclined to support assisted dying.

The reasons for this apparent paradox – support for an assisted dying law and yet for a commission and strategy on end of life care before such a law is introduced – becomes clearer when we dig deeper still into the public’s views. People don’t think end of life care is or will be good enough. Only 31 per cent are confident that the government will be able to pay for their end-of-life care in the future as opposed to 53 per cent who are not. And 53 per cent believe – as against 28 per cent who dissent – that given the state of the NHS it would push people into assisted dying if it was made legal.”

As a vulnerable person i say fine because we are adults maybe we shpukd have the right as it stands only rich people can afford to dignitas uts alot of money so therefore if u poor u will suffer

I find it hard to believe it's not being discussed at least.

Which would be fine were it not for the fact that this law affects everyone in the country. So making a change for you, affects everyone, and the risk to vulnerable people is, in my opinion, too high to allow this law to pass.
Plus all of the arguments around this being proposed as a private members bill, the lack of time to properly scrutinise it properly ...

Absolutely agree.

It would still need a vote in parliament, just like this current bill.

Ditto.

Who's to say you will be able to afford this? I have seen nothing anywhere, certainly not in the bill, to say that it is the NHS who will be providing these life ending drugs.

My argument is this can palliative care gold standard look at Janey godley was in hospice which is more than some get she still looked to me like she was suffering . To me even if you got the best care you will be in pain some cancers are very painful plus I don't want yo live a few more weeks doing that just put me to sleep why can't we have that

If course it would be it woukd be done with doctors

Lots of doctors are private. And my understanding is that the majority of doctors are unwilling to do this kind of work, particularly as they took an oath to do no harm, so it is just a small number in each area who have indicated that they are open to administering these drugs. It is yet another unanswered question around this bill.

I would agree too.

If I was being truly cynical, I would guess that a referendum is not being offered here because they know it would pass, whereas with this bill they can pretend they are looking at it and acting in our actual interests (as most people want it) but then fail to pass it because 'they aren't sure all of the safeguards are in place' or 'it hasn't been considered for long enough' and boot it even further down the road.

any way that's by the by...

there are 3 questions I would ask

1. should assisted dying be legalised?
2. Is this bill well enough considered and written to be safe and effective?
3. Is there an appropriate, safe way to deliver assisted dying if passed?

1 is the moral question and I think no....but if you think yes what about 2 and 3 ?

practically speaking this is probably the least well thought out bill on this subject that i have read, it is light on detail and makes a lot of assumption

eg
We know when someone is 6 months from death...doctors are often wrong (I am one)
We are not called to exclude depression (common in early diagnosis)
they are of a settled mind ...what does this even mean?
they have capacity and are not being coerced...how would we check for coercion and how would we account for societal pressure which is coercion but disguised?

2 doctors are supposed to assess this and then a High court judge.....if we took other jurisdictions as an example we could be looking at 3-4 percent of deaths. There are only 108 judges that sit in the high court and they are all pretty busy (the crown and high courts have over 400000 cases outstanding for over 2 years (2023 statistics)

Is there an appropriate, painfree, safe and ethical way to deliver medication to end life?..please look at the debate over in the states regarding the death penalty whiere they use similar drugs, barbiturates and sedatives
Failure of death in assisted suicide is not uncommon....what happens then?
And if you legalise assisted dying by suicide we would then get challenges in equality for people who are dying but couldn't take the meds themselves (can't swallow, cant move hands etc.) it would be likely discriminatory to deny disabled people with a terminal illness to deny them but moving from suicide to active killing is part of the slippery slope which people talk about (and has been seen in other parts of the world).

Finally, no where in this bill does it talk about the relief of suffering, the most common reason that we use in debate...its aim is to give autonomy to people who can exercise it.

If the bill passes, will doctors be forced to carry out this procedures? I wonder how many would want to do this. There could be issues if an insufficient number of doctors are prepared to undertake this.

The question is, what are people in favour for?

Are you in favour of assisted dying? What a lot of people will hear in that question is ‘do you want cancer-riddled granny to be out of pain?’ Or ‘do you, with no lived experience of disability, think being disabled is so awful that you’d do anything to not live with it?’

There’s little to no nuance in a debate that quite literally is a matter of life and death.

I agree with this so much spot on I have been saying it isn't gonna pass we are backwards in the uk. Other countries legalise weed not us other countries are more progressive. We are such a old minded island uts stupid.

Even if you had to pay won't be as much as Switzerland

Really helpful, well written post. Thank you.

This bill is only if you have 6 months left to live not just being disabled

It's one thing to be in favour of assisted suicide laws. It's quite another to trust the government and NHS to run such a scheme without abusing it.

Even now, the benefits system and the NHS become very different beasts once you actually need them because you've develop a serious life long condition, without giving them the option to suggest you kill yourself instead because they prefer not to dip into their budget for your sorry arse. Anyone who thinks this wouldn't happen has either never had that particular experience of being ignored to the point of wanting to smash one's own head off a brick wall or is very naive indeed.

No, the bill includes a 'conscience clause', so doctors are free to refuse.

Even when it’s the citizen himself who is begging to die because of the pain they are in?

I can’t see the bill being successful unfortunately. I am fortunate that I have the knowledge and means for a swift pain free end but I feel for those who can’t afford a £10k trip to Switzerland.
I don’t actually think many people would choose AD when it came to the crunch, but it would provide great comfort to many knowing it was an option.

This is a sobering interview. These are basic questions.
https://x.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1856475110300901604

@Anotherparkingthread to witness your elderly relatives go through that must have been horrific. However I don’t think legally available assisted dying would have alleviated their suffering more quickly. As your relatives would have had to give consent for it to happen and as you say they then lacked cognitive awareness.
I find the debate quite bewildering to be honest especially as if the OP states most are in agreement with the bill.
My DF died from cancer, I and the family nursed him at home. At the end of his illness he was put on the Liverpool Care Pathway (with his consent) as he was suffering greatly. He essentially was given a cocktail of drugs in a driver syringe that kept him very heavily sedated and he died peacefully a few days later probably as a consequence of dehydration combined with the advanced cancer. It seemed to me at the time to be a way of assisting someone to die.
Now shortly after my DF died there were I believe a lot of relatives complaining about their loved ones being placed on the LCP? (I wasn’t one of them).It was discredited. Why did this happen if so many people are in favour of assisted dying for themselves and loved ones? Were people being put on LCP without their consent? It seems like we had a way of assisting people to die but it was done away with because the system was abused? Hopefully someone who knows more about it than me will come along soon.

The problem it won't stay just for terminal illness.

In Canada 28% of people think homelessness (41% among young people) should be included as an allowed reason for assisted dying and 27% for poverty.

www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2024/01/23/a-matter-of-life-and-death-theos-polling-on-assisted-dying