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

If they didn't would they have told you?

I think that we have become used to aggressive yes / no debates. One side is right and the other is wrong. People who are in pain have the right to die / no-one has the right to die. But that's not what this is. I think that many of us in the UK are sympathetic to the idea of assisted suicide and would be comforted by knowing that it's available for our loved ones and for ourselves. That's certainly how I feel. If it became available and I found myself with an incurable and painful disease, I might well choose to avail myself of it. But I am balancing that against the fact that I'm quite sure that the legislation, however carefully drafted, would soon be relaxed and extended. Many vulnerable people would die in the interests of their relatives or just of the state saving money. And we would never be able to put the genie back in the bottle. It would fundamentally affect our society - how we see and treat the old, ill and disabled. There's no perfect solution here. Personally, if I develop a terrible condition with the way things stand at the moment I will consider Dignitas. I don't believe that to be hypocritical, for the reasons I've stated here. Dignitas is expensive, but the people who use it will never need any of their money or possessions again. It's not a great solution, I know. Nor is suicide, even for those who are physically capable of it. At the end of life, some people are not able to avail themselves of either of these options, and palliative care may not work for them. But again, I balance this fact against the large number of people I feel would be pushed into an early death if legislation was passed.

I think a large number of people will want to end their lives and the State should not prevent them from doing so. This is about allowing individuals to have choice.

Where do you think it is coming from? Genuine question.

We understand your feelings and arguments. But you are completely ignoring our concerns. To put it simply, and obviously the figures are just a guess, I think that 100 vulnerable people being pushed into dying in the selfish interests of others is too high a price to pay for the sake of 5 people who are suffering being able to die in the way that they wish. I really feel for those 5 people and I'm aware that one day I may be one of those 5 people, but I can't disregard the 100 people.

I agree with @Walterohwalter in that passing this law is not like anything else: it will fundamentally change the way we relate to the state, the NHS and to one another. And I'm just not convinced, looking at Canada's MAID project and other Scandinavian assisted suicide bills, that there is a way to ensure whatever safety provisions are being promised in the bill will not be changed by those who want absolutely no provisions. I fear that in the name of "bodily autonomy" we are forgetting those in our society who are being or can easily be pushed into things that are not in their best interests. Having assessments done via zoom, for instance, or short (or no) cooling off periods, or a whole plethora of other situations that have happened where it is legal makes me think twice. I may not be that sort of situation as I near my death, but if even one person dies who did not really want to, I feel that would be more than tragic.

I certainly feel for people who do not get sufficient pain relief as they are dying. And I would like palliative care to be available to everyone all across the UK on an equal footing. The hospice in my area is having to reduce beds because of lack of funding. It's obscene that we are even considering funding assisted death from public coffers (and even from diverted NHS funds!) but there is no talk of publicly funding hospices and research into pain management.

Personally I would like for something similar to what was on offer for my mother as she died. I was able to be with her in the States and saw the ease with which she was able to be placed under their hospice-at-home programme, which I think was funded by her Social Security payments (although I'm not sure how it worked tbh). As soon as her GP agreed that she was dying (and there was no need to specify a time limit to this), she was assigned a nurse who checked in daily, and a doctor on call. They set up a hospital bed, oxygen, wheelchair, whatever she needed to make her comfortable. They gave us what they called a "comfort pack" to store in the fridge, with directions how to use each thing should she be in pain. That included morphine, which thankfully, my mother never asked for. There was even something that we were told to put under her tongue as she was actually dying to make that process somewhat more comfortable. All this enabled her to die at home, surrounded by her children in relative peace.

We used to have something like this in the UK, as my MIL was living with us when she died. We had a visiting nurse come and set up a morphine injection device and a hospital bed and the doctor visited. But, sadly, I suspect none of this will be available when it's my turn to die.

You are just projecting your own fears to prove your point, all these figures are unknown. I have made my points, you have made yours, we will have to agree to differ.

So despite all the evidence from other countries (have you even looked into it?) you choose either to refuse to believe that the legislation is likely to result in people being pressurised into dying - for some reason you assume that the UK will do better than other countries - or you don't care, or maybe you care a bit but you have been so affected by the death of someone you know that you think that avoiding painful deaths is worth the pressurised deaths of other people. Looking at the evidence of what is happening in other countries and learning lessons from that is not "projecting your own fears". Looking at the evidence and using that evidence to inform your decision is exactly what our MPs are employed to do.

There are a million and one ways to commit suicide if someone is desperate enough, and in the age of the internet it is very easy to research the most peaceful suicide methods.
When I read stories like the ones below I feel absolutely horrified. There is no way these young women could have known where they would have been mentally in 10 or 20 years time. Yet they were deemed incurable and put down. I have little doubt, considering what has happened in other countries, that if assisted dying was legalised for the terminally ill, that this is where we would soon end up. I really don't want to live in a society that devalues life in such a way. Anyone who has ever recovered from long term depression, or had a loved one who suffers from depression should be against this. Anyone who has ever suffered a life changing injury/disability and initially felt like they couldn't go on but after a time found that, actually they COULD adjust, should be against this. I know that sometimes it doesn't feel like it but almost all hardships can be overcome. I went over a decade feeling that way. Now I'm in my forties I feel relief that there were no such laws when I was younger.

https://archive.ph/VzQNJ

archive.ph/g6am1

Sorry I know that people feel strongly about this on both sides. But this push to legalise assisted suicide really worries me. It's much harder to go through with it on your own, which is a good thing. I worry that if I end up in back similar place to what I was in when I was younger and I had this option open to me, I would take it. I wouldn't be in the right state of mind to consider that I might get better in the long term.

Those two cases are appalling. Those poor girls. It being what it is though i hope the men who abused them could at least be charged with manslaughter.

Thans to both @Walterohwalter for their posts @SylvanMoon

I think the quite honestly terrible way the HoCset up the "discussion" around the right to die private members bill was a complete disgrace.

Not helped by the media focusing onheart rending stories, when what is needed is an informed and well represented evidence to have a discusion.

Such as what has or is happening in other countries as it is far more informatiave and provided evidence based decisons.

I think it would help if NHS and care home start were able to provide evidence annonymously. It used to be said, or at least inferred that in the past many a GP helped someone at the end of live reach there sooner. In many instances I am sure this was done and supported by the person concerned. But how many weren't?

And of course Hospice staff.

This doesn't mean individuals with personal experience of a family member or loved one shouldn't be listened to. But that as individual experiences, even if they provide evidence about how end of live care just didn't work, or was cruel, but that it needs to be assessed as that. Just as an individual story, instead of being highlighted because it makes good tv.

There are quite a lot of things people are legally allowed to do which the state has no obligation to do for them if they can't manage on their own.

However - this is perhaps a good illustration of why it is important to be careful about these things. What was meant as a compassionate change to the law is , a generation or so down the line, now being interpreted as some kind of right, or a thing which is acceptable and should be accepted as a normal choice.

I think a lot is coming from some very wealthy donors. And there is a surprising amount here in Canada that comes from the government itself - so the lobby groups can lobby the government.

If you have a look at the article I posted in The Walrus, it is in many ways reminiscent of what happened with gender ideology, in that the lobbyists inserted themselves into direct discussions with political institutions and were somehow see as the experts.

Most of it isn't money from grass roots fundraising.

But it’s not just about individuals having choice. It’s about other things too. Protection of the vulnerable. Safeguarding. Legalities. Knock on effects. Emotional impacts on others involved.

But it is an acceptable choice. We do have right to kill ourselves. We are not obliged to stay alive. Neither should we have the right to deprive others of that right. The fact some people will need assistance to die doesn't mean their rights go away.

After reading those two horrific articles about the girls who were sexually assaulted and raped, and then killed by the state on their request, I'm wondering if there are statistics on the numbers of women vs. men who are using these assisted suicide laws. I would guess that women might be over represented.

I think it's been shown that women in general are more suicidal than men but are less likely to complete suicide, so making it easier with these laws would probably result in more women being killed. Older women are probably more likely to not want to "be a burden" on their family due to our tendency to think of others more than men do. And younger women and girls are much more likely to be sexually abused and raped than boys. Sexual assault, and especially child sexual assault, is rising rapidly due to our porn soaked culture (especially abuse of children by other children), so normalizing euthanasia as a solution to sexual assault will undoubtedly result in more women and girls being killed.

Normally, when a person expresses a wish to die, other people will try to help them to find a reason to live. This bill fundamentally changes that situation. We would now be expected to think about whether we should actually help them to fulfil that wish. It's a fundamental change in the way society works, with promoting or assisting in the death of another person becoming normalised.

The heartbreaking stories of those two young rape victims who were 'helped' in this way shows where this ultimately leads.

That was what struck me about the picture in this article.

House of Lords has ‘signed its own death warrant’ by stalling assisted dying bill, says MP | Assisted dying | The Guardian

Judith, Alison and Paola.

What/where is The Walrus?

The moment your decison to commit suicide involves someone else it changes everything, and especially if you are asking the auhorities/the state to assist.

To my mind people focus too much on an individual's right to do this or to do that, without considering that we all are part of a wider collective/society and that questions of ethics ( such as 'assisted dying' is ) concern all of us as members of a society.

Yes, and the common theme amongst many of these issues revolves around concepts of 'openness' ; 'no boundaries', and an individuals' supposed 'rights' or freedoms to do whatever they please ( the same with demands for abortion right up until full term).

There's a Janice Turner article in the Times, it goes way beyond the scope of this thread

https://archive.ph/rWIQF

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/left-has-a-moral-blindspot-on-human-life-ts5fpswh0

There's this bit though

The notion that women would be more easily coerced into ending their lives was dismissed, despite research by The Other Half policy group which found that of 100 “mercy killings” and “failed suicide pacts” in the past 25 years, 88 per cent of killers were men. But then, “a few grannies dying”, as Dr Henry Marsh put it, was a “price worth paying” for people to have a noble, self-realised death.

I suspect analysis of the sex, age, etc. of people taking up MAiD, for example, might give some actual numbers.

Decriminalising suicide didn't turn it into "a right to kill yourself with assistance provided by and financed by the state", fgs. Suicide was not legalised because Parliament considered it to be a good idea which should be encouraged, and assisting suicide was criminalised (at the same time) for a reason. Canada has now gone in completely the opposite direction, with state employees on occasion bringing up the option of assisted suicide when, for instance, a disabled person is refused a request for a wheelchair ramp.

I suspect analysis of the sex, age, etc. of people taking up MAiD, for example, might give some actual numbers.

@lcakethereforeIam

I could only find this from 2023
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1608077/medically-assisted-death-recipients-by-track-and-gender-canada/

A recent bmj blog with citations
https://blogs.bmj.com/spcare/2025/10/02/canadas-shortcut-to-death-how-assisted-dying-fails-our-most-vulnerable/

There are worrying case reports like this one where a woman who wanted palliative care are overruled by their husband:
“In April 2025, MDRC reports highlighted how assessments can be rushed and MAiD given in place of palliative care. Mrs. B, in her 80s, preferred palliative care, but adequate support, such as hospice, was denied. Instead, she underwent MAiD the same night her spouse, overwhelmed by caregiver burnout, urgently contacted the MAiD coordination service.”

Track #2 where death is not reasonably foreseeable seems to be most open to abuse:
”Cases from Track 2 MDRC reports, involving patients outside the end-of-life context, also reveal systemic failures, which I have previously written about in this forum. Individuals with complex medical, mental health, and social needs—including untreated psychiatric conditions, disabilities, trauma, and unsuitable housing—ended their lives through MAiD. Access to essential supports was limited. Patients were more likely to be poorer and women—groups already facing social injustice—and were less likely to name family as next of kin, often relying instead on friends, lawyers, or healthcare providers, highlighting isolation.”

The United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in March 2025, foundCanada’s MAiD regime discriminatory and ableist.

Disabilities
”In fact, from 2019 to 2023, 42 percent of all Canadian MAiD deaths involved people needing disability supports, including 1,017 who never received those supports. And in Ontario in 2023, people with disabilities were the most likely people to die via MAiD. Worse yet, in many cases, they are possibly getting MAiD before they can even access palliative care.
It’s not just physical disabilities.
A study of MAiD deaths between 2016 and 2019 at a tertiary care centre in Toronto found that 39 percent of those requesting MAiD had a documented psychiatric condition, most commonly depression. Patients with a psychiatric condition were much more likely to request MAiD than those without one.
Meanwhile, Canadian MAiD providers report that almost half of the patients they helped die in 2023 reported feeling they were a burden, up 10 percent from the previous year. In that same year, more than 22 percent of their patients suffered from loneliness—an annual increase of 5 percent.”
eppc.org/publication/medical-assistance-in-dying-was-supposed-to-have-stringent-safeguards-what-happened/