Assisted dying and coercion

[ArabellaScott]

This is live right now, so I'm not sure how well linking to it will work. Copy-pasting below, aswell.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cy5k0qyled2t

'Rachel Clarke, a palliative care doctor, opts to answer a question about coercion and whether some MPs are right to feel concerned about this when considering the bill. (Earlier, MPs heard how medical and clinic staff are trained in safeguarding, though a retired GP acknowledged coercion was hard to spot.)
Clarke says she'd "strongly push back" on the suggestion coercion is something all medical staff are trained in spotting.
"I'm the kind of doctor who believes there is nothing to be gained by sugar-coating reality...about shortcomings, failings, areas where my profession the rest of the NHS are getting things wrong", she tells MPs.
"It is my clinical experience that not only are the majority of doctors not necessarily trained in spotting coercion explicitly, they're often not trained explicitly in having so-called advanced care planning conversations with patients around the topic of death and dying."'

Sorry couldn't make sense of this because of how on occassions MN displays all the url links.

But think it must be this article.
https://anglicanmainstream.org/article/keir-starmers-lethal-legacy-no-one-voted-for-assisted-dying/

I do remember when the Labour MP concerned first knew she was second in the ballot being vague about what she would propose. Then the next day is was announced she would be reviving the original bill.

I assumed she had been lent on.

What I dont understand is why, with everything else Labour has on its hands it wants to give up HoC time to this.

Have just seen what's makes it even worse, they can by-pass the Lords if the wording of the Bill is exactly as it was.

So this manipulation of the system is also stopping any attempt to get a Bill written that wasn't stuck together in a rush.

Pretty despicable.

Its something called the Parliament Act which means it can be passed by the House of Commons and sent for Royal Assent.

I am completely opposed to assisted dying because of the significant potential for abuse. We should be focusing on improving NHS and hospice care so that people receive the support, dignity and pain relief they need at the end of life not on how to get rid of people.

There are also serious concerns about bias. Age, disability, sex, race and socioeconomic status WILL influence who is encouraged towards assisted dying and who is not. And if not these markers, simply who is a popular, charismatic well liked patient and who is perhaps socially awkward. I'd imagine this to have an adverse affect on e.g. autistic people and people with learning difficulties etc.

I worry about vulnerable people who are terminally ill, elderly, disabled or otherwise disempowered. When someone is very ill and dependent on others, they will feel unable to advocate for themselves or challenge the views of doctors and carers.

Imagine having already lived through significant adversity as many have, childhood abuse, domestic violence, gender based violence bullying, only to be directed to the AD room when you are already feeling unworthy. What a civilised way to go. Not.

The potential for pressure from relatives is also a red flag. carer burn out, family conflict, inheritance all will push people to unfair AD.

It's a big no from me.