Assisted Dying

[Nordione1]

I dont know what section to put this in. Im more upset about the vote for it than I thought I'd be. I feel like we have crossed a rubicon somehow.

Yes, transparency would be key.

Sadly, the reality is, even with the best palliative care in the world, some people will suffer. The level of analgesia required for a painful cancer death is extremely high with massive side effects. Sometimes they need to choose being awake against pain and that’s barely an existence. What about tumours that burst out and smell, this can be so upsetting and leaves them with no dignity, palliative care cannot solve that.
we need good palliative care AND choices.

The histrionics on this thread are laughable. It’s called an assisted dying bill, not a forced one.

Do people seriously think that if someone chose to gain consent for AD, and then changed their minds that they would be forced to do it anyway?!

“I’m sorry, we got your diagnosis wrong and you’re not terminal after all but unfortunately you still have to take these drugs to end your life because a judge and two doctors agreed you could”

I totally agree with you. This isn’t an Either or thing it can be both. I think it was Kit Malthouse I can’t remember now but I watched the debate again yesterday and they said that they had spoken to a doctor where they work where this is already legal and they said they actually find it works in both ways so some people won’t take the choice up and some people will and they will still get palliative care and one of the guys stood up and said have you ever seen a patient get artery cancer? Apparently it actually attacks the artery wall and blood is just pouring out and that’s how they die. Can you imagine that I don’t know? I just don’t think palliative care is gonna help everything totally 100%.

Also, it says that even if you agree to it, you can change your mind to any point in time if you ask them to do it and you’ve got six months left you may not even do it until the point you finding it really hard to live with what you’ve got.

You are quite right. It can go wrong, people can have reactions to the medication. One case in Oregon the patient took six days to die.

There have been other cases that have seriously disturbed me, like the doctor who euthanised a woman who had changed her mind. For clarity the woman had signed a directive to say she wanted to be euthanised if she had dementia, and she did develop dementia, but she also changed her mind. The doctor sedated her and then asked the family to hold her down while she gave her a lethal injection.

There have also been cases of disabled infants being euthanised too I believe.

These cases may be few and far between, but it is disturbing that people don't know about them. I hope that this issues are fully discussed before this finally passes into law - if it does.

That was a very cruel thing for the nurse to have done. Did you know which nurse did it and speak to him/her?

It’s as if people think it’ll be, day:1 - you’re told you’ve got 6 months left, day 2: you gain consent for AD day 3: you die

Surely people will use it as a back stop - they know that’s it there when/if the pain becomes unbearable or their quality of life has seriously declined. They may decide to carry on for as long as they can manage to.

First of all I don’t know why you’re bringing children. This is not even going to apply to children so let’s scrap that okay this is a terminal illness. Act that’s what it says. That’s why it cannot be changed or something Unless the government would have to put another acting place
And you’re worried that people take six days to die bloody hell there are people taking 10 days to die now before we even allow this. Maybe it’s a possibility that could happen but it’s also a possibility you will die a long time suffering even with great palliative care without this so why not give people the choice? This is about choice. Nobody is going to be forced to have it.
And it doesn’t even imply to people that have got dementia, not this we are going to be much stricter

After listening to Henry Riley on LBC who has an article about religion and the fact that some MPs are not being honest enough that this is about religion and they would never ever vote for it under any circumstance. I do generally believe there are people in our community in this country who are being shall we say hyperbolic about stuff because of their religion and their morales and no more or any bill would be in their favour? They would never want it because they don’t agree with this. They believe life is sacred. Well I say that’s fine do not dictate to others.

in answer to all the people who seem to think that going through the process and receiving the prescription means that you MUST take it, in Oregon 30% of the people who go through the system and receive the prescription don't use it. I can't find a link but this was stated this week on one of th BBC's factual presentations.

where have these cases occurred and under what legislation?

I am not averse to assisted dying in extremely controlled circumstances.

I couldn't agree more. The thought of getting dementia really terrifies me.

In a way for some patients assisted dying has been there already. As a nurse administering prescribed morphine to someone whose breathing is already impaired is assisted dying.

The woman with dementia was in the Netherlands:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/doctor-netherlands-lethal-injection-dementia-euthanasia-a7564061.html

I don't know about the others, except obviously the first was Oregon under whatever their legislation is and obviously was a case of something going badly wrong with the medication.

Dementia is the one thing I fear. I am caring for my Mum who is in the latter stages, and it is harrowing at times. A dementia diagnosis would have me measuring my days as much as I could, hoping that I would still be rational enough to know when is the best time. I would kill myself regardless of this bill, but knowing someone who loved me could be there would give comfort.

People talk a lot about the quality of life. But the quality of your death is to me of equal importance. I watched my Dad die a quiet, pain free death, after a good and loving life. I spend my days now caring for someone who is struggling daily, would be horrified at her behaviour towards those she loves sometimes, and probably still has her worst time yet to come. All we can do is support her, care for her, show her love. This is the true face of a terrible death. Harrowing for all concerned. Life is a bed or a special chair, and needing 24hour round the clock care. For her to fall asleep quietly and simply not wake up would be a mercy. So I say no one else gets to choose for me.

All those things you described are not included in this bill - dementia, disabilities, children

I’m so sorry for your loss. I lost a close family member almost 7 years ago now and we had 10 days of horrendous pain and suffering. I too could only remember that for some time after. I just wanted to let you know that the other memories come back and the awful ones are now seldom thought of. Much love xxx

If they could have had an injection that let them drift away peacefully it would have been welcomed. X

What is it exactly that you think makes us so different from Canada that we would not go down the same path? Our parliament may be a lot older but theirs is based directly on ours. They have a house of commons, an upper house and the same constitutional monarch. Like us they have a national health system which is in crisis because of an ageing population. Like us, they have a human rights framework which can be appealed to if a person believes a particular law violates their rights.

Canada's law originally only covered terminally ill people. It was broadened in response to human rights claims.

In the UK, 74% of those who support assisted dying both in principle and in practice think it should be extended to non-terminal conditions.

https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/Internal_AssistedDying_241120_exefTJ4.pdf

So why would similar human rights claims not be brought in the UK?

This is a good point. My family member died from sepsis, on a bay with no privacy, no syringe driver that we were promised and still being turned on the day they died…which caused them to scream in pain, so much so we had to leave the ward as we couldn’t bear to listen.

Just like how other countries have abortions near enough to the time you give birth we decuded thst was wrong We have a 24 week limit. Every country will decide their own laws. Not every body that does assist suicide, which, by the way, is in a lot of countries now has gone the canada model.
There are other countries apart from Canada. You know that, does this

Oh my goodness. I have never ever considered anything like this occurring. Thank you for sharing this. We absolutely need knowledge of such cases.

That doesn't really answer the question. Given the overwhelming support for widening the criteria among supporters of the UK bill, and given equivalent frameworks for a legal challenge - why wouldn't one be brought?

You do understand that this is just the first passing. They are going to spend 2 or 3 years now. Discussing it great length, trying to get it back to a better more tight regulation plus the act itself only says terminal illness. It was designed to do that so as you say, it can't go any further. If it was to go further, it would have to bring it back to parliament in many years down the line and design something else potentially, I wouldn't be opposed to that, but that is not what is going on