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.

What value system does predicting rain fall under?

One that isn't religious. A religious one would involve praying to god for rainfall tomorrow and then believing it will happen.

I don’t think anyone is coerced into drinking themselves to death. It takes a lot of effort and a lot of daily, repetitive choices for decades to drink yourself to death. The marketing and peer pressure of alcohol is yay have fun, let’s party, you will feel top of the world.

How can that even remotely compare to someone being tricked into being euthanised? It’s not “misuse” like addiction or drug abuse. Coercion into euthanasia is more like a bullying campaign that pushes someone to hang themselves or jump off a bridge or shoot themselves.

I am not against consenting euthanasia when you only have months to live, I think that your alcohol abuse comparison to coercion into dying is a stretch beyond the point of snapping.

That sounds Pagan to me.

Alcohol is an addictive substance, people are coerced into drinking it because that's what's normal in this Country. Some people become addicted to it and then can't consciously choose to stop drinking and end up dying.

If you're concerned about coercion than this would be a far better place to put your energy, because not only does it cause deaths, it also causes massive amounts of harm and misery for people.

This is just whataboutery. Alcohol addiction is a problem already getting alot of resources and attention. It isn’t at all like bullying someone into drinking a lethal dose of drugs. You might as well be comparing cycling deaths to shark bite deaths for all the comparability they have.

And this is a form of coercion as far as I'm concerned.

I think you need to do a little reading around value systems and ethical/legal decision making. It’s clear you’re pretty far out of your depth on the subject and it’s not adding anything of ‘value’ to the thread.

Perhaps I should read the bible to get onto your level of thought too.

I think you have misunderstood the concept of capacity. Its not a binary yes/no thing, its "Can this person, at this time, in these circumstances understand the particular issue and the consequences of each choice and therefore are they capable of making a choice in this matter at this time in these circumstances" For instance if I ended up in hospital pissed out of my brains then even though under sober circumstances there would be no question that I had full capacity, in those circumstances its possible that I would be judged not to have capacity to make an important decision but might be judged to have capacity to make a minor decision. You might well be able to convince one of the people who you volunteer for that assisted dying would be a good idea but you (and they) would struggle to convince 2 doctors and a high court judge, and not all together but on three separate and separated occasions, that the person had sufficient capacity to choose to die.

orthopaedics. My bum knee joint tells me when its going to rain.

Various Pagan beliefs do have this.

Various shamanist tribes do have rain dances and rituals for rain.
Rain dance in Australia and N. America
Aztecs main god was the rain god Tlaloc. They’d sacrifice humans for rain.
Druids would sing for rain- Tacitus

You don’t know the difference between advertising/marketing, addiction or coercion.

Strange how people who are the most concerned with coercion keep trying to force their arguments onto me..

Like you’re not forcing the coercion into euthanasia is just like alcohol abuse argument.

How about I say that since you think everyone who is an alcoholic is a victim of coercion that causes 10,000 homicides a year…why don’t you propose to your MP a bill completely prohibiting alcohol. Ban it all and a 14yr prison sentence to anyone caught selling or giving away alcohol?

Ya know since it is just like pushing a vulnerable person into drinking bleach …

I agree. They need to really be careful here if they want to avoid following in Canada’s footsteps.

Efficacy and safety of drugs used for ‘assisted dying’
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9270985/

Wow that article you linked to is really disturbing Alanthecat. Just reposting the link here. Everybody needs to read that. Especially MPs. So many MPs yesterday claiming to be voting for an end to painful lingering death. Then this article shows the reality.

Barely any research done into what actually happens. Other countries not bothering to research or even record the different experimental drugs used to kill the patient. Not bothering to note the manner of deaths, or even record the fact of assisted deaths, administratively. Mind blowing. Why haven’t those pushing for assisted dying insisted on there being a massive amount of research done into it? Appalling. From the article:

‘..complications and failures in intentionally ending life suggest that ‘assisted dying’ applicants are at risk of distressing deaths. This holds significant implications for the inclusion of ‘assisted dying’ in clinical practice, and further research is needed into the methods of assisted suicide and euthanasia and the mode of action of drugs used. While individuals may choose to accept that risk, informed choice demands that those risks are understood and clearly explained.’

’Clinicians throughout the world are prescribing and administering a wide variety of lethal drug combinations for patients who request an ‘assisted death’. While assisted suicide and euthanasia is often portrayed as a ‘Hollywood’ style peaceful and painless death, evidence from jurisdictions where the practice is legal reveals that this is not always the case. The prevalence of reported and suspected complications suggest there stands a risk of subjecting patients to a less than peaceful death and their loved ones to a traumatic bereavement.

These findings reveal the need for research into the mode of action of drugs used to bring about patient death, as little or no attention has been given to the problems of uncontrolled and unregulated experimentation with drug cocktails which have not been monitored and whose mode of action is unclear. While some countries have medical and pharmaceutical associations that have published recommended ‘assisted dying’ drug protocols, such as the Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers and the Royal Dutch Medical Association, no government committee funds research on the issued drugs.

There is also a need for jurisdictions where assisted suicide and euthanasia is legal to implement more thorough means of data collection regarding the methods of ‘assisted dying’ for inclusion in publicly accessible reports. In many jurisdictions, the drugs and doses prescribed or administered to bring about patient death are not reported.

The prevalence of adverse effects also has implications for clinical practice. The experience of ‘assisted dying’ may not be the ‘safe and comfortable’ process promoted by campaigners, and patients must be properly informed of the realities of hastening death and the risk of distressing complications. In the case of assisted suicide, this includes difficulties ingesting the volume of lethal drugs, adverse reactions to such drugs once ingested, and chances of a prolonged dying which could take several hours.

[…] There must also be clear guidelines as to what actions clinicians should take if an ‘assisted death’ goes wrong or fails.

Are doctors prepared to be present if the death takes several hours? If the patient regurgitates the drugs, should the clinician clear the airway and put them in the prone position even though such action makes it less likely the patient will die?

As ‘assisted dying’ becomes implemented in Western medicine, the practice must be held to the same standards of any other medical procedure. We could find no reports of systematic monitoring of brain activity until death, blood levels of drugs or postmortem examination of the lungs. As organ harvesting after euthanasia is being practiced in some Benelux countries; we recommend such research be undertaken urgently following assisted suicide and euthanasia.’

Meanwhile media coverage here in the UK today shows how many people have been given a very sanitised view of what it will be like. Take this BBC report with a terminally ill patient saying ‘I'm just incredibly grateful that me and tens of thousands of other people will be given the choice of a good death," she tells us. "Or to shorten a bad one."’

BBC: 'Many will be saved from pain' - Terminally ill people react to assisted dying bill
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg720lrjrmo

I don't need to propose it because I'm not trying to make things which the majority of people want illegal because they might result in unnecessary deaths.

That includes alcohol. Which gets misused and results in far more unnecessary deaths than is likely to happen through the misuse of assisted dying.

Why don't you propose to ban alcohol?

the author IF is incredibly biased against the bill. Please read around her views and consider this in the article.

yes I thought that too.

I don't believe morality is a human invention.

How you respond to that knowledge that it is going to rain tomorrow is as good as religious, yes.

Why not? They hear article 14 cases all the time.

Of course it might not need to get that far. The first stage would be a judicial review and if they won that and the overton window had shifted far enough then the government might decide not to appeal.

I don't know why anyone would vote against allowing those with ZERO quality of life to die with dignity.

Do I have to respond to it?