Assisted dying bill

I really hope, under the auspices of assisted dying that in our country we never reach these alarming figures recorded in 2023, Canada 15,343 as a percentage of their population alarming! and The Netherlands 9,068 both nations appear to have a very free and easy attitude to state sanctioned Euthanasia, and I can't help feeling pressure might have been brought to bear in certain cases. I understand the arguments for and against, although the premise makes me feel uneasy, it's where it might lead to down the line.

Personally, and I have made that very clear to my DH and to our ACs- ONE of the factors that would make me decide to go earlier rather than later would be exactly that. I do not want to be a burden- not to my DH, not to my ACs or GCs and not to the health system. I would much prefer nursing and medical care going to those with a future, and same for finances.

Mainly it would be about pain and loss of diginity and enjoyment of life- but not being a burden would be one of the factors. And there is nothing wrong with it. This especially as I live abroad and it would put extra pressure on the family. Nothing wrong with wanting to ease the burden on others, at all. Those who assess cases always interview twice, alone, and ask all the right questions to eek out any sign of coercion.

Quote GrannyGravy13 Mon 23-Jun-25 09:02:04
Allsorts
The thought of going to Switzerland is awful. People should die in their own beds if possible. I just hope vulnerable people are not pressurised.
That is one of the many reasons I object to this bill.

There appear not to be enough safeguarding to protect those who maybe coerced, made to feel a burden, taking the decision to end their lives for the sake of others.

I very much doubt there can be enough safeguards

I don't agree with the SPUK attitude. If you're financially able you can go to Switzerland and have a pain-free death. If you can't then it's hard cheese.

Allsorts

The thought of going to Switzerland is awful. People should die in their own beds if possible. I just hope vulnerable people are not pressurised.

That is one of the many reasons I object to this bill.

There appear not to be enough safeguarding to protect those who maybe coerced, made to feel a burden, taking the decision to end their lives for the sake of others.

Romola

Just for the record, the NHS does fund a dying person's care in a care home, for six weeks i think. There was no room in the local hospice for my DH, so he spent his last 19 days in a pretty good care home (the NHS doesn't fund the most luxurious homes!) Either me or our DS or DD were with him virtually all the time and the palliative nursing team called in regularly.
It wasn't a traumatic time, assisted dying wouldn't have come into it, but I just wanted to make the point about the NHS.

It’s twelve weeks, or was when my mum in law was diagnosed with terminal cancer. She lived 250 miles away. The nhs brought her by ambulance to the nursing home we chose, a mile from our home. I tried to persuade her to live with us. She’d cared for her father and refused to expect me to care for her as she feared it could upset our marriage 💙. So we visited daily, as did our adult children. She had a lovely airy room over looking the garden along with the nursing care she needed.

Galaxy

I wasn't talking to you caleo, I think generally those who support the bill have failed to address/ understand the risks. I am afraid I think it us a bill led by the privileged ( and I hate that word!)

Have you followed the debates and process in Parliament as the Bill passed through in the House of Commons ?

Just for the record, the NHS does fund a dying person's care in a care home, for six weeks i think. There was no room in the local hospice for my DH, so he spent his last 19 days in a pretty good care home (the NHS doesn't fund the most luxurious homes!) Either me or our DS or DD were with him virtually all the time and the palliative nursing team called in regularly.
It wasn't a traumatic time, assisted dying wouldn't have come into it, but I just wanted to make the point about the NHS.

Anniebach

Yes I know that power of attorney can be chosen, even changed
.but this is different, this is suicide

Suicide is not illegal. It can be donw in the most violent and messy of ways, leaving others and family totally traumatised forever. And sometimes not work and leave the person with massive health issues and physical disability. And generally ot available to anyone with advanced cancer or Motor neurone disease as too weak and limited.

Or it can be done with professional assistance, and be gentle and sure.

The thought of going to Switzerland is awful. People should die in their own beds if possible. I just hope vulnerable people are not pressurised.

Anniebach

Yes I know that power of attorney can be chosen, even changed
.but this is different, this is suicide

Yes, I understand what you are saying, but a power of attorney made while someone was of sound mind could not be changed if that person was no longer determined to have the mental capacity to do so. I'm just saying that it's wise to make your views clearly known on all matters like that while you are still in a position to do so, that's all.

Yes I know that power of attorney can be chosen, even changed
.but this is different, this is suicide

Anniebach

Quote ViceVersa Sun 22-Jun-25 13:59:41
Anniebach
People with dementia cannot choose to end their lives
But what about those who - like my mother - had clearly indicated their wishes while they were still of sound mind?

At what stage of the advancement of the illness ?

Well, my mother was deemed still capable enough to grant me power of attorney shortly after she was diagnosed with Alzheimers - but she'd made her views known years beforehand in any case.
However, as others have pointed out, this Bill - as it stands - would not apply to those with dementia. Which demonstrates the importance to make your views clearly known while you are still of sound mind (not just when it comes to assisted dying).

butterandjam

Rosie 51

ViceVersa

* Is letting a person die a long, slow, agonising death civilised? Subjecting them to something we would not do to our pets?*

*Of course it isn't, I don't think anybody objects to painkillers being increased to alleviate pain even to the point where they become 'killers' not pain killers.*

FGS. As the law stands, ITS A CRIME. The police object, the Law of the land objects.

Any doctors/ nurses known to have administered a deadly dose of pain killer to end a patients life , would be struck off, and charged with a crime.

That is the whole reason for people wanting to change the law.

No need to shout, I know it's a crime at the moment, I thought my intention was clear that most people (especially on this thread) don't and wouldn't object to the use of painkillers at any concentration to alleviate pain. They would be administered to control pain not intentionally to cause death, although that could be a result. Maybe the law on administering pain killers needs looking at? Palliative care needs a huge boost in funding and research or else it really isn't a choice.

This bill, until it starts its descent down the slippery slope, will not help vast numbers of people who won't fit the criteria but will still be in pain. Lord Steel has already said the panel would be very expensive and may have to go, and remember KL was so proud that a high court judge would be adjudicating on eligibility at the start of the bill's progress. "Strongest safeguards anywhere in the world" That soon got watered down.
Strange how all the elation that some adults will have the option of a painless suicide doesn't consider that no child will be eligible no matter the level of their suffering, nor people with advanced dementia, or too disabled to be able to self-administer the lethal dose. Obviously some people matter more than others. On the other hand I don't believe there won't be some who will be pressured or coerced into taking the option because they do qualify.

Anniebach

People with dementia cannot choose to end their lives

Not under this Bill. But I have clearly explained that it is possible. However that means taking the decision early after diagnosis.

Quote ViceVersa Sun 22-Jun-25 13:59:41
Anniebach
People with dementia cannot choose to end their lives
But what about those who - like my mother - had clearly indicated their wishes while they were still of sound mind?

At what stage of the advancement of the illness ?

Anniebach

People with dementia cannot choose to end their lives

But what about those who - like my mother - had clearly indicated their wishes while they were still of sound mind?

People with dementia cannot choose to end their lives

Shipman killed people who didn’t want to die. That is murder.

OldFrill

So why were those doctors not murderers like Shipman.

I just can't believe you asked this question.

OldFrill

So why were those doctors not murderers like Shipman.

Shipman killed patients who were NOT terminally ill, for his own financial benefit.

Rosie 51

ViceVersa

* Is letting a person die a long, slow, agonising death civilised? Subjecting them to something we would not do to our pets?*

*Of course it isn't, I don't think anybody objects to painkillers being increased to alleviate pain even to the point where they become 'killers' not pain killers.*

FGS. As the law stands, ITS A CRIME. The police object, the Law of the land objects.

Any doctors/ nurses known to have administered a deadly dose of pain killer to end a patients life , would be struck off, and charged with a crime.

That is the whole reason for people wanting to change the law.

knspol

I support the bill wholeheartedly but do also agree that high standard palliative care should also be available to those who want that route.

It would be lovely if high standard palliative care was available to all terminally ill people who need it when and where the time arises.

Unfortunately, it isn't.

Even in Switzerland Rosie51 - where the choice has been available, with a much wider basis, advanced Alzheimers patients cannot be given help to leave their misery behind. Anyone with a diagnosis has to make a very quick decision, whilst the disease has not taken too deep a hold, and whilst they still have capacity to make a clear judgement and decision.

I have a friend in the UK who has done everything so far to make sure he will be helped, despite diagnosis of a slow form of Alzheimer's. He has the goahead of the Swiss clinic. It has been over 5 years and he knows he will have to make the decision soon, or 'miss the boat' so to speak. I have promised to pick him up from the airport, take him there and hold his hand. He cannot ask his partner to come for fear she would be prosecuted on return, or even stopped at the airport.

lemsip

the thing I've got against this bill is that a celeb heading it.

Esther Rantzen's 'last hurrah' and her daughter Rebecca Wicox , duty bound to push this through as last thing she can do for her mother!
.
then they will be all over the news photographs everywhere
Esther said herself that she will go to Dignatas..... good for her she can afford it. £13.000 I just read.

Sorry, what difference does that make. Are you saying that because Esther Rantzen can afford to go to Switzerland, she should not fight for others to have the same choice. And of course, at home, in the UK, without the gruelling travel with lots of assistance, having to go to Hotel whilsts last checks are made, and then go to die in a strange flat on an industrial estate? And without her family for fear they would be prosecuted on return, or even stopped on the way there!