New Assisted Dying Bill...

naomi24 | 11:09 Tue 12th Nov 2024 | News

32 Answers

...just published 'could stop horrific deaths' campaigners say.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx2nyrr0w7rt

//Under the bill, adults with less than six months to live would be given the right to end their own life - a doctor could prepare the substance, but the person themselves would take the final act//

That needs a re-think. There are many who, because of the condition they're suffering from, are physically unable to take the final act.

Your thoughts - and are you for or against?

Has There Ever Been A More Clueless Prime Minister?

The Madness Continues......

Answers

1 to 20 of 32

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Old_Geezer

From the short radio mention I heard earlier there seems so many restrictions and hoops to jump through it isn't much of a step in the right direction.

Untitled

the person should be the one to finally do it. or else there is too much capacity for some truly horrible fraud. it would only be a matter of time before a medical practitioner is deceived or tricked into euthanising someone

Untitled

i have big reservations about assisted dying in general but i think if it is to be allowed then this is the right way to do it

naomi24

Question Author

//the person should be the one to finally do it.//

That's what the bill says - but what if they physically can't?

bhg481

At least it's a start. Once something is in place it's modifyable. I would like to specify NOW that if I get dementia I wish to be zapped but that won't be permitted under the current proposals.

jackthehat

Those unable to perform this final act themselves must have proper, regulated assistance.

Otherwise it is a pretty pointless exercise.

Untitled

then i think those people will lose out naomi. if anyone else is involved there is far far too much likelihood of coercion or deception.

Untitled

this might be a silly question as i don't know the details but does anyone know how dignitas gets around this problem? my understanding is that they give you a glass to drink from.

barry1010

Dignitas doesn't get around the problem:

"Members who wish to end their life must be able to prove they are of sound mind, as determined by the organization; be themselves able to bring about death..."

DDIL

For and it doesn't go far enough imo.

barry1010

If someone is unable to pick a glass up or hold a glass but can swallow it might be enough if they can suck the substance through a straw or similar from a well positioned, well balanced vessel.

naomi24

Question Author

//then i think those people will lose out//

So those in arguably a far worse position are condemned to suffer? That can't be right. A re-think is needed.

barry1010

If the fatal dose is administered by any third party there will be an opportunity for someone to make accusations of murder or sue.

jackthehat

barry - That is why it needs to be properly regulated and administered judicially and medically.

barry1010

Exactly, JtH. There will often be one family member set against it, claiming the patient isn't thinking straight.

It's emotive and difficult. I found it hard enough to make the decision to take my dog to the vet for the last time.

dave50

Too much over thinking it. If someone wants to die for whatever reason, it's up to them. Nothing to do with anyone else. Why do people get so upset with others who want to end their lives?

davebro3

I thought one way was you got hooked up to canula & the poison was delivered mechanically by the push of a button.

Just gimme a cyanide pill - thx & bye,bye.

youngmafbog

I've stated my opinion on thise before but what I wold prefer to see is it being signed off by two independant Judges and at least tow independant doctors one of whom should be a specialist in the area where the subject has an illness,

I have always been pro this choice but with what it morphed into in Canada has put me off a bit hence wanting at least the above. The other problem is that is seems the ECHR could intervene and we end up like Canada.