Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Assisted dying and coercion

527 replies

ArabellaScott · 28/01/2025 16:37

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."'

Assisted dying bill: Most doctors not trained in spotting coercion, medic tells MPs at assisted dying hearing

Rachel Clarke, a palliative care doctor, was speaking to MPs considering the proposed law on assisted dying.

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
44
Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 11:06

Perhaps if you bothered to read it you'd understand why it's not as simple as you make out. But well done, the glib lack of care for the rights of vulnerable people from so many fans of this legislation me even more concerned that this is not a good path to go down.

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 30/01/2025 11:06

It's a good job that some people, the ones you're accusing of scaremongering, can be bothered to think through and discuss the minutiae and hold the government to account.

Youre welcome.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 11:09

It has to be loaded with safeguards, and the more safeguards you put in, the fewer instances it will be usable.

Exactly. How will it deal with lack of mental capacity, which is the situation most people envisage it being used in?

Didshejustsaythatoutloud · 30/01/2025 11:25

ArabellaScott · 28/01/2025 19:26

I'm sorry, this is a terrible argument.

'Of course some women will be murdered, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it'

What we need is far better palliative care and far better support and care in general.

Palliative care is absolutely shit in this country!!
Have you ever watched anyone you love the most in the world die a long, slow excruciatingly painful death?

MrsPeregrine · 30/01/2025 11:29

This is one of th4 main concerns I have with AD. It’s an absolute minefield. But some people seem determined for it to be introduced in the UK regardless of the downsides.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 11:33

Palliative care is absolutely shit in this country!!

Yes, that's what she's saying.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 11:36

Im immune to emotional blackmail, after dealing with trans rights activists for so long. Everything needs to be properly examined and debated.

SomethingUniqueThisTime · 30/01/2025 11:40

anyolddinosaur · 30/01/2025 09:55

Havent bothered to read all the usual scaremongering but I'm rather tired of the "internal coercion" line when it's applied to people not wanting their children to suffer their extended dying. Or the line that it's somehow dreadful to prefer passing on money to your children rather than having in go on payments to carers to wipe your bottom for you.

I'm an adult - if I want to make those choices while I'm fit enough to do so it's my choice. But if I need a bit of help there is forced pain and indignity because other people want to make a different choice. And I cant end my life when I choose painlessly because someone else doesnt want that choice for themselves.

IME doctors fight to preserve life past the point at which it really benefits their patients. My concern is perpetuating the current coercion to stay alive.

I think you last point sums up my concerns. Presumably as a fit healthy person the idea of being seriously disabled or very ill fills you with horror and you think we should end people’s lives when they reach the point YOU think would be intolerable to you personally.

But you cannot know how in reality it would feel if you were in that situation or how others feel. Many disabled people or those with a life-limiting condition are concerned that society’s attitude will change and they will be subtly encouraged to end their lives prematurely. Who are you to decide someone else’s life is intolerable?

IME at present medical professionals are clear what their responsibilities are and take their oath of ‘do no harm’ very seriously - it shapes most of their decision making around whether to pursue certain treatments or not. Surely you are aware of some of the controversy around the ‘do not resuscitate’ decisions?

That being said one of the major issues facing medical teams caring for someone approaching their end of life care is the lack of funding and availability of appropriate care pathways. I am very seriously concerned people’s decisions to offer AD or to use the AD option themselves will be because of the lack of alternative choices.

Maybe I’m being idealistic. I do accept AD is widely approved of by the general population but I do feel it needs to sit as only an option alongside other properly informed choices a patient can make - namely excellent hospice care or properly supported home care.

Alwaystired94 · 30/01/2025 11:48

End of life care is an absolute joke. Anyone who has experienced a loved one receiving it knows that.

But we need safeguards for assisted dying. It needs to be one of the most robust systems of safeguarding. I have disabilities myself and dread to think what the 'wrong' person could try if i had limited capacity.

WomanDaresTo · 30/01/2025 12:01

tbh I get more worried every day about this

We've done a podcast on some of the possible routes to (fatal) harm - focusing on women with eating disorders, what 'mercy killings' tell us, and safeguards.

otherhalforg.substack.com/p/all-of-the-cases-we-identified-were

Appreciate feedback and support (no £2m campaign dosh here) - we've already talked to the Canadian feminists battling terrible outcomes there, and more on eating disorders, experts on domestic abuse...

Please don't assume anyone in parliament is on top of this yet - it's all so rushed

F

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 12:02

Thank you for the link, will take a look.

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 30/01/2025 12:24

I think another way AD is like the trans debate is that the person on the Clapham omnibus is not aware of the details.

Several people on this thread seem to think it would be available for frail, elderly people who are just old/ have dementia, which is not the case, so the same belief is probably held among the wider public.

If the public seems in favour of AD I wonder whether that's because the details haven't been widely focused on?

Certainly the more I find out, the more against it I have become.

Edit to clarify: when discussing, eg, trans women in women's sport, I remember quite a high proportion from the you gov survey thought that meant fully post op, not self ID.

The devil is in the detail.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 12:28

I agree, and like you my concerns have grown. I don't like the people pushing it forwards, either.

Wemaybebetterstrangers · 30/01/2025 12:50

I’m totally on board with AD. For several reasons I don’t need to explain on here.

I understand the current proposed ‘qualifying criteria’, if it were to be legalised. I don’t agree with them but it is start. They should of course be widened to allow more people to qualify for AD.

I don’t like the patronising tone on this thread either ‘on the Clapham omnibus‘, and more. Sorry but fuck off with your guardian-reading like smuggery (yep not a word but I like it, and think it rather accurately descriptive).

There are ways of making this legislation more palatable and effective for all concerned.

For example

  • early sign off by individual concerned, a bit like organ donation. But more closely and legally managed.
  • Swiss process good points and bad points. Investigate and conclude. Recommendations

This is back of a fag packet for illustrious MN readers, but you get idea. Please don’t carp on about detail here. This isn’t the formal review and recommendation process. This is an online forum for mostly, thinking aloud; and indeed, Allowed.

ArabellaScott · 30/01/2025 12:53

If you can tell people to 'fuck off' then we can use phrases like 'man on the Clapham omnibus'. And I don't care if you don't like the tone.

OP posts:
Wemaybebetterstrangers · 30/01/2025 12:55

ArabellaScott · 30/01/2025 12:53

If you can tell people to 'fuck off' then we can use phrases like 'man on the Clapham omnibus'. And I don't care if you don't like the tone.

Ok babe. Talking about enforcing people to suffer horribly unnecessarily, does make me cross. Apologies for the awful blasphemy.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 12:57

No one is doing that. Policies and laws need to work for everyone, not just their supporters.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 12:58

And emotional blackmail to shut a conversation down isn't going to fly here.

larklane17 · 30/01/2025 13:01

Didshejustsaythatoutloud · 30/01/2025 11:25

Palliative care is absolutely shit in this country!!
Have you ever watched anyone you love the most in the world die a long, slow excruciatingly painful death?

Yes. And very recently too.

A much loved woman whose symptoms were tut tutted by her male G.P. ( A bit of sciatica.) Found eventually to have inoperable spinal tumours. She wanted to see as much of her young grandchildren as she could and particularly wanted a last Christmas with them. So she asked to go home. More easily said than done for the rest of us, as she lived in a small terrace house with narrow stairs and no downstairs toilet or shower. Waiting weeks for assessments etc before we could bring her home while she bed blocked.

Due to her condition and the seeming inability to get her pain relief correct she was shunted back and forth, between an overcrowded, underfunded, understaffed A and E, dirty NHS ward, a local hospice that depends upon charitable donations to function, and home with a comode and specialised bed in the living room, next to the tiny kitchen. She caught COVID and pneumonia somewhere along the way. Shitty, inadequate medical support, carers who often never turned up to help, and a traumatised family feeling powerless looking on as she screamed for the pain to stop due to poor medication administration. Four months of this she went through.

Had she had Good Quality Palliative Care, which all the Be Kinders seem to avoid discussing, she wouldn't have been screaming to die. She would have been comfortable, clean, treated with dignity and respect, and died peacefully and not in pain. IF all that good care had been in place for her. IF adequate checks and balances had been in place as to her capacity and what she wanted, then assisted dying may well have been her choice and only her choice at some point after her last Christmas. As it was, she was pleading for death in November to spare her family from the distress as well as her own. That should not be the reason for such an Act. It should be about patient choice, not escape from llife because of lack of good pain free palliative care.

It should not come down to a medic saying: you have two choices: crap care and pain and a distressed family OR you can be helped to pop your clogs now.

So do sod off those with the emotive rhetoric as though the rest of us have no experience of this and not thought about it. We aren't the cruel ones in this debate. It's not the right to die, being discussed ffs. it's the poor quality of the proposed legislation many are concerned about. Compounded by the current poor quality of palliative care, and other pressures, that may adversely influence someones decision to die before they really want to.

All I am concerned about is that it is a person's own choice and not because they no longer feel valued by society, or because of inadequate care and pain, and that they are treated with dignity and respect without undue influence or pressure.

Wemaybebetterstrangers · 30/01/2025 13:03

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 12:58

And emotional blackmail to shut a conversation down isn't going to fly here.

🤷‍♀️ you call it emotional blackmail. I call it an accurate representation of fact.

I’m not trying to ‘shut a conversation down’. Why would I do that. Debate is necessary.

Wemaybebetterstrangers · 30/01/2025 13:04

@larklane17 You got it. It’s about choice.

larklane17 · 30/01/2025 13:07

Wemaybebetterstrangers · 30/01/2025 12:55

Ok babe. Talking about enforcing people to suffer horribly unnecessarily, does make me cross. Apologies for the awful blasphemy.

Well you certainly are a deep thinker. Babe.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 13:08

🤷‍♀️ you call it emotional blackmail. I call it an accurate representation of fact.

You can call it what you like, it doesn't work on me 🤷‍♀️ vulnerable people need to be safeguarded and all these difficult issues need to be fully addressed.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/01/2025 13:09

It should not come down to a medic saying: you have two choices: crap care and pain and a distressed family OR you can be helped to pop your clogs now.

I agree.

PepeParapluie · 30/01/2025 13:12

@larklane17 Im sorry for what your family and your relative endured.

I totally agree that it has to be a fair choice if we’re going to have it at all - we can’t have gold standard help to die while having unfit for standard palliative care and issues with our social care and home assessment etc services meaning one choice is no choice at all.

And the poor palliative care offered dovetails another point - this is another thing we’re asking the NHS to do. The NHS, which is underfunded and drowning in the myriad of things we already ask it to do. It can’t do many of the things currently in its remit safely or well (this is not intended to be a criticism of staff by the way, but the system is struggling - I think we all know that).

Why on earth do we think that introducing a whole new, and totally different, limb to NHS services means they’ll be able to do this well?