Farzanah
I don’t believe this Bill has been carefully thought through. The medical and legal implications are unworkable. The NHS and judiciary are struggling.
As to the “slippery slope”. If this Bill is passed, society will irrevocably change, and the guidelines, as in other countries, will broaden.
For example in the Netherlands children can opt for AD, as can those with a mental illness. Do those in favour believe this will never happen here?
Here's a little extract from the article referred to above:
"Neuberger said his experience sitting on cases involving assisted dying meant he was confident the tight terms of Kim Leadbeater’s bill – that it would apply to only those who are terminally ill – could not be expanded by judicial challenge."
But you believe that it can be?
I really don't understand why people with religious beliefs should impose their beliefs on the rest of us.
One reason given is that the sick person may believe that they are a burden to their families. Burden is a strong word to use - here's another definition"a physical load such as carrying something heavy, or it can mean an emotional “load” such as severe grief or illness."
Obviously the sick person, being of sound mind, will be aware of the "burden" or "load" that their family members are carrying whilst carrying for them. Surely it is down to those family members to ensure the sick person that they are happy to carry that load or burden because they do not want to lose them just yet.
I was in the nursing with my Mother for 8 days before she died from pneumonia. She had Alzheimer's and didn't know either me or my sister. I remember, after she died, walking away from the home with a feeling that a burden had been lifted from me. But it had been a burden that I had been willing to carry.
