Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think Gill Pharaoh had the ideal end of life

259 replies

CurdinHenry · 23/07/2026 20:28

Article in the Times about this woman who decided to end her life through voluntary euthanasia at 75. Huge outrage on social media as a result as various people missing the point entirely express fury because they think being very elderly will be great fun. I personally don't want to get older than that. I don't ask anyone else to take the same view but it stresses me out that the naive want to reduce choices available to the prescient. Euthanasia should be available to everyone without condition.

OP posts:
6ate9 · Today 10:23

OtterlyAstounding · Today 10:17

We could just Logan's Run it and kill everyone over the age of 80, but I feel that would (fairly) be frowned upon.

Maybe humans are living too long? Quality of life over quantity of life.

Marmalademorning · Today 10:34

6ate9 · Today 10:23

Maybe humans are living too long? Quality of life over quantity of life.

So who gets to decide when someone’s time is up? The tax man when you’ve run out of money? Or the NHS when you reach 75?

My nan lived until she was 96. It was only the last two years of her life that she went downhill. She lived a relatively independent life for most of it.

I feel deeply uncomfortable with some of the posts on this thread. People are perfectly entitled to their opinions. But we need to be very careful with this so we don’t end up in a nightmare scenario where people have to worry about ‘euthanasia’ being forced upon them.

6ate9 · Today 10:38

@Marmalademorning You never answered my questions. Who is going to look after the increasing number of people who need care in the UK?

Marmalademorning · Today 10:50

6ate9 · Today 10:38

@Marmalademorning You never answered my questions. Who is going to look after the increasing number of people who need care in the UK?

I’m not a policy maker, and I can’t come up with all the solutions to massive issues like that first thing in a Sunday morning.

I do know that it would be wrong and inhumane to force euthanasia on people because ‘sorry but we’ve run out of money’. The irony of that being it wouldn’t actually be euthanasia anyway would it? It would be something entirely more sinister.

6ate9 · Today 10:57

Marmalademorning · Today 10:50

I’m not a policy maker, and I can’t come up with all the solutions to massive issues like that first thing in a Sunday morning.

I do know that it would be wrong and inhumane to force euthanasia on people because ‘sorry but we’ve run out of money’. The irony of that being it wouldn’t actually be euthanasia anyway would it? It would be something entirely more sinister.

So what Gill Pharaoh chose to do makes sense. She died before she may have needed care, which isn’t always readily available. I think there are a lot worse things than euthanasia.

Cheese55 · Today 11:05

Imdunfer · Today 08:47

"According to data from the National Audit Office (NAO) and the Homecare Association, roughly 40% to 48% of large for-profit home care providers report margins of 5% or less on state-funded work, with average net operating profits hovering near 2%–3%. "

Those profits are very low. Local authorities outsource this work to avoid management costs and all the on-costs involved with employing staff. Sick pay, holiday pay, PPE, recruitment costs and on and on.

Their profit is not the difference between what the care worker is paid and what the agency is paid.

The principle problem with care worker pay is that tax payers won't or can't pay more.

I expect I can sit back now and wait for the predictable "so tax the rich more".

It was outsourced along with everything in the Thatcher + years and there was no choice. Tbf it is more expensive to do it in house because of sick pay, annual leave etc but thats because they treat staff properly

Imdunfer · Today 12:20

OtterlyAstounding · Today 10:16

I'm afraid your belief that we can somehow tell 'rational' suicide from any other suicide is what's simple minded, here.

Are you saying that you think a 75-year-old in good health, who has children, grandchildren, a partner, and a fulfilling life, but who has talked about dying to avoid old age for decades, and who can pay for a suicide clinic, is a 'rational' suicide? But a chronically depressed, single 50-year-old who has suffered immense trauma they've never been able to move past, and has poor quality of life, who also doesn't have the money to access a suicide clinic, isn't rational?

Hmm...

By what criteria are you deciding that? Because to me, it makes more sense that the 50-year-old should wish to die (not that I think they should be helped to!)

How do you decide who needs help to avoid it, and who should be assisted to receive it? Because from what I've read (partially paralysed women, depressed women, women grieving a child's death - a lot of women, now I think about it), it really seems to simply come down to whoever can afford to pay for the trip and clinic.

And I'm not scared at all. Why would I be? I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of decrying suicide as terrible, while also praising suicide as great. It doesn't really work.

Congratulations, you've not only told me what I think but exactly why I think it.

Your wrong on all counts please stop doing it.

OtterlyAstounding · Today 12:26

6ate9 · Today 10:23

Maybe humans are living too long? Quality of life over quantity of life.

I think sometimes modern medicine ends up keeping people alive beyond when they should be – and beyond what they wish. For instance, a dementia patient shouldn't be on medications for prolonging their life, like heart medication (do they do that now?), just medications that make them comfortable in the moment.

But for the most part, I think people have good quality of life into their twilight years, and should be supported in that. I fear that the normalisation of assisted suicide will lead to people (particularly women) feeling pressured to kill themselves early on in their older years, so as not to risk burdening their children.

Cheese55 · Today 12:34

OtterlyAstounding · Today 12:26

I think sometimes modern medicine ends up keeping people alive beyond when they should be – and beyond what they wish. For instance, a dementia patient shouldn't be on medications for prolonging their life, like heart medication (do they do that now?), just medications that make them comfortable in the moment.

But for the most part, I think people have good quality of life into their twilight years, and should be supported in that. I fear that the normalisation of assisted suicide will lead to people (particularly women) feeling pressured to kill themselves early on in their older years, so as not to risk burdening their children.

Edited

The problem is that you can't just say, remove someone pacemaker because they have dementia. Some, definitely not all, go to a happy place in their dementia and those that dont can still experience pleasure.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread