Assisted Dying Bill: Fresh Debate On 'right To Die'

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34208624

What do we all think about this ?

I will say straight away, that I am in favour of changing the existing law, as long as it monitored properly. A close relative of mine died 18 years ago in a lot of pain.

Surely we should be able to assist someone to shuffle off this mortal coil with a bit more dignity ?

[Sqad]

Svejk......I didn't suggest that you made that figure up, just interested from whence it cam as in my opinion it doesn't represent the experience that I have had.

[Gavmacp]

And not wishing to be rude why are we quoting that doctors are against it. Why are doctors the experts in this debate.

[Sqad]

Gavmacp..........the key phrase here is "terminally ill." Now who would you rather comment on that...a doctor.....or the postman?

[Gavmacp]

I think they should/would have an opinion but I think it is a much wider than just Doctors. I am not really that religious but I also consult their opinion.

[Sqad]

Gavmacp......I agree and that is why there is such a debate on such a controversial subject.

[Gavmacp]

Squad,
Not wishing to change the debate but I have followed some of your threads and believe that you have a different opinion to how the NHS should be run to myself. I think Doctors opinions should be listened to in this sort of debate but Doctors are Doctors not business people.

[Sqad]

\\\ Doctors are Doctors not business people.\\

I would agree with you, at least up to a point.......doctors have a bad track record of being "business people"

Have I missed your point?

[ToraToraTora]

still no one has addressed svejk's post at 09:45.

[Sqad]

TTT...which other countries have pushed the boundaries of RTD and how?

I will try to answer......if i know the details.

[Zacs-Master]

"They push and push the boundaries until perfectly healthy people choose to die."
Svejk missed the point that this is about people with terminal illnesses with less than 6 months to live.

[woofgang]

I doubt that "perfectly health people", healthy in BOTH mind and body would choose to die.
I think that the problem with the "less than six months to live" thing is that genuinely people don't know, not even doctors. They may have an opinion based on experience but I think if they were asked how often they were wrong the percentage might be as high as 30% of the time. Where that is people who would actually have lived longer, well under that law we would never know and provided they wanted to die, and I can imagine many circs where they might, its not such a problem...Its the poor folk who doctors believe would live for longer than six months and die earlier with immense suffering that concern me.

[woofgang]

While I understand the "two doctors and High Court judge" system, there would also need to be a system put in place to ensure that any hearings happened quickly and if the presence of the sufferer is required then that would need to be made possible. Its no good having the system and then saying "oh well if you can't get to a hearing we can't do anything" where travel would be difficult, painful, maybe even impossible. Its a place to start but practically not useful IMO

[Zacs-Master]

I pretty sure they've thought of that woof.

[woofgang]

...well I am not so sure...if you wanted to have said yes to something but at the same time make it as difficult as possible.....

[Svejk]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/11778859/Healthy-retired-nurse-ends-her-life-because-old-age-is-awful.html

Although this looks as if it comes from a 'pro-life' organisation it's well worth reading and confirms what I've previously read about how 'right to die' has developed in Holland.

http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/holland-background/

[woofgang]

But why should she not be able to die if she chooses to? The point is made again and again that if people feel that they can take their own lives or be assisted to do so at a point of their choosing, they are less likely to "go early" I first met this attitude many many years ago when I had my first really close professional dealings with a gentleman with terminal cancer...must be about 25 or more years ago. He showed me a large bottle of morphine mix which the doctor had prescribed for him and had told him to be VERY CAREFUL with it as there was enough there to kill him. He kept it locked away from the grandchildren but he told me that just knowing it was there and if things got too much he had a way out made him feel much better. His adult children were aware and very much approved of the doctors actions although i don't think a doctor could do it today. I never knew the end of the story as I discharged him once I had got him sorted with toilet bath and bed aids.

[Jackdaw33]

The classic case of assisted dying wa that of King George V who was given a Brompton cocktail by his doctor to hasten his death, which was only a few hours away. Apparently the reason for this was that the news would be in time for the morning papers rather than the less reputable evening ones.

[jno]

yes, George V was basically murdered. (No evidence that he had ever asked for it himself.)

[Svejk]

Zacs-Master/// "They push and push the boundaries until perfectly healthy people choose to die."
Svejk missed the point that this is about people with terminal illnesses with less than 6 months to live.///

If ever there was classic case of someone 'missing the point', your post is it.

And then you, woof, practically accuse me of lying re healthy people choosing to die. I post a link to exactly that scenario. And you come back with, 'why shouldn't healthy people choose to die'.
And that, if they ever get the 'terminally ill, checks and balances' act passed, is where the campaigners would be heading. (like they have in every other country)
Which eventually leads to the state, a la Holland, deciding who lives, who dies.

[woofgang]

I did say "healthy in mind" but in any case, I stand by my point, why should she not choose to die?

That article about Holland seemed to say that they had set criteria about who was allowed to have assisted suicide...that's no different from anywhere else, they just have set the boundaries in a different place...there's no question in that article that the government in Holland says "you are going to die whether you like it or not" While I might not agree with their criteria, at least they have criteria and clarity and openness. Here in the UK, as I have said before, assisted dying is happening many times every day in hospitals and hospices and care homes and people's homes. The difference is that there is no open discussion and all the control, whether they like it or not, is in the hands of the medical staff....and you won't stop this ever. Why not put the control legally where it belong in the hands of the person who wants to die or doesn't?