Assisted suicide bill

[genandtonic]

ive popped this on Scotsnet as well, so apologies. I just wanted to raise awareness to anyone here that is in Scotland.
im not the most clever political person in the world, so apologies if I’ve got this wrong, but whether you believe in this bill or not, this seems a tad concerning given the Scottish governments current level s of nuttiness.

I got sent this from the righttolife oraganisation whether or not you agree with all of their views ( I don’t) I am glad they, and other groups are concerned about this.
given that the Scottish government don’t seem the most inspiring I’m a little concerned. They appear to be taking the English view and making it more extreme? I haven’t read it in depth so would appreciate anyone who knows more about these things adding to the thread.
It seems to have been debated 10 years ago and was voted out at that time.
now it is being proposed by …’MSP Liam McArthur (Scottish Liberal Democrat, Orkney) has lodged proposals for an Assisted Dying Scotland Members Bill. The Stage One debate and vote will take place on 13th May’

right to life news says..’Scotland’s Health, Social Care and Sport Committee directly identified a large number of major flaws with the Bill in its Stage 1 report, and made it clear that dozens of major structural changes need to be made to the Bill, should it pass Stage 1. ’
heres a link to the main article from right to life
https://righttolife.org.uk/news/scottish-health-committee-raises-over-30-concerns-with-proposed-assisted-suicide-law
and one from the bbc
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98gzyr678eo
It seems there are many additions to the bill here in Scotland that aren’t in England and wakes. It would be very useful, I suspect, to write to your MP . There is a template at the end of the right to life link.
anyway, FYI in case it’s of interest. (And you are probably all already super informed and ahead of me)

Dear x
We are now just 6 days away from the Stage One vote on the Scottish McArthur assisted suicide Bill – it’s happening this coming Tuesday, 13 May.
Between now and then, I’ll be in touch a little more often regarding the Scottish Bill. Please do keep opening my emails and, most importantly, take the actions I highlight (usually at the end of each message). Every single one makes a difference.
U-TURN
You might have seen that Liam McArthur has just made a last-minute change to his Bill, raising the eligibility age from 16 to 18. It’s likely he did this because he knows support for the Bill is on a knife-edge.
While this truly disturbing aspect of the proposed law has been changed, despite this U-turn, this still remains a dangerous Bill. If passed, it would put thousands of vulnerable people at risk.
TAKE THIS NEW 30-SECOND ACTION TODAY
The disability rights group, Not Dead Yet UK, is asking people to contact their MSPs using a new tool on their website. It explains exactly why this Bill would be a disaster for people with disabilities.
Even if you have contacted your MSPs already, it’s really important to contact your MSPs again using this new tool – so your MSPs hear specifically about the serious risks this Bill poses to people with disabilities.
Please take action now and click the button below to use their tool to contact your MSPs. It only takes 30 seconds.
Act now - Click here to contact your MSPs
Thank you so much for all your help on this.
I’ll be in touch again soon.
With best wishes,
Catherine Robinson
Right To Life UK

They might well have a peaceful and dignified death anyway, and the drugs used in assisted suicide certainly don’t guarantee it!

The reality is that there will be certain doctors who agree with A.D. who will help people because they know it is the right thing to do.

No issues at Dignitas with this where they have decades of experience, you are scaremongering.

Exactly which is why we need it legalised here so it is available to everyone.

The reality is the bill forced all doctors to do it whether they agreed or not.

I support assisted dying in principle but I’m not sure this bill was the right way to go about it. I also wouldn’t want it to be at the expense of good quality palliative care

Nonsense.

Have you looked into what actually happens at dignitas rather than the glossy brochures and lobby group spin?

My understanding is the right to permit conscientious objection would have had to have been “lent” to the Sc Parl from Westminster as it’s a reserved matter.

It would start off with some doctors refusing ( off sick...etc), leaving less "good" doctors to do the killing. They will end up killing more people per year than they feel comfortable with, nothing to concern ourselves with there. And there are bound to be a few doctors who like killing people, so at least theyll get their kicks.

Have you followed the bill at all? It was the removal of section 18 at stage three that led to the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of GPs, and the Royal Parmaceutical Society Scotland amongst others opposing the bill.

Surely palliative care can offer pain free deaths to the vast majority of people in this day and age? And for the very small number that it can't, could options such as induced coma or some such offer the dignity that is craved?

Yes, they provide a peaceful death.

Sadly not.

Section 18 has been amended

The doctors helping people who want to die are the good guys here, similar to the vet putting a dog out of its misery because it is the right thing to do.

In Canada everyone talks about the autonomy of the patient, as is happening here. The result is that doctors are very lax and just wave deaths through. As for dogs - that's a useful comparison I think. I recently took my cat to the vet. The cat is elderly and has a medical problem which the vet would not run tests for, because of the cat's age. The vet told me that I should decide when to have the cat put down, and shouldn't hesitate to make the decision based on my own convenience. The message was very clearly that if the cat was becoming an inconvenience to me, that was a good enough reason to ask the vet to put the cat down, regardless of the quality of the cat's life.

Not being able to exercise a right isn't actually the same as taking the right away.

And just because a person is unable to do something they are allowed to do does not mean that anyone else, or the state, has to provide that things for them. Or that it would be a good idea to have a policy like that.

I have a right to marry, there is no requirement I be provided with a spouse or even a wedding.

Something else people need to remember with this is that the assisted death lobby is very well funded. These are the people who get the laws pushed back by bringing court cases. Here in Canada, they launched the first challenge about the safeguards very soon after the law was passed,they had clearly planned out the kinds of test cases they needed.

People should be looking at these groups and where the money is really coming from.

Yes, but the decision isn’t being given to someone else, it is with the individual themselves so that is a false comparison. You clearly don’t want to accept that some people want to commit suicide, and that is a perfectly valid and legal choice.

At the moment, the state does not allow someone who wants to die but is not able to physically commit suicide, to get help, but it is legal for anyone to commit suicide at any time in their life beforehand. This is inconsistent. If you are legally allowed to commit suicide during your life you should continue to have that choice when you are no longer able to do it yourself. There are plenty of doctors who support AS because they believe it is morally the right and compassionate thing to do.

Its not suicide if someone else does the killing.

Suicide was decriminalised in the sixties out of compassion for people with mental health problems - not wanting to criminalise/stigmatise them, rather then help/treat them. Suicide wasn't decriminalised because it was suddenly deemed a reasonable thing to do. At the same time as decriminalising suicide, The Suicide Act introduced a new offence of assisting, aiding or abetting suicide. That's to protect the vulnerable.

It is if that’s what they want.

Key reasons for the decriminalization of suicide include:

• Medicalization of Mental Health: There was a growing recognition that suicide attempts are usually a symptom of severe distress or mental illness requiring treatment, not punitive action.
• Encouraging Help-Seeking Behavior: Criminalization created fear and stigma, deterring people from seeking help from professionals or loved ones.
• Reduced Stigma and Shame: Decriminalization helped alleviate the shame and trauma faced by survivors and their families, aligning with more compassionate societal attitudes.
• Improved Prevention Efforts: By removing legal threats, it became easier to collect accurate data, which allowed for better suicide prevention policies and community mental health services.
• Moral and Social Change: The move reflected a decrease in the religious influence that viewed suicide as a sin/crime and a rise in secular, humanitarian approaches