Assisted dying bill

Yes, MissA, I get that. None more sad about what is happening to the NHS than DH and myself, and family and friends.

I can understand that, because in principle I'm not against the idea of choice, but I know I could fill the whole thread up with anecdotal tales about indifferent, cruel, lackadaisical, or wrongtreatment that just me and my family experienced in the NHS.
Letters not sent, lack of communication between departments, appointments not made, and so on.

MissA, thank you for clarifying. And I totally agree that safeguarding guidelines must always be followed.

In Switzerland, this is all properly documented, and interviews to ensure absolutely no hesitation or coercion, filmed and given to Police for Judge.

Two things would stop us from ever returning, despite low Sterling values making things quite difficult- the state of the NHS, and the lack of choice, if and when.

MissAdventure you posted

I don’t feel the NHS currently is in a fit state to be able to offer all that is needed to be in place

I totally agree with this 👍

Fleurpepper

MissAdventure-Switzerland has allowed Assisted Dying for over half a Century, and there has been NO slippery slope and the system works really well.

So where fo you get the 'We've all seen a pretty grim picture of how very wrong things can be when safeguarding protocol is goes wrong.' Canada? The proposed Bill has absolutely nothing to do with the Canadian system- at all.

Farzanah, I am also a member of the Humanist Society. You are the first person ever I've known to be against the Bill. I'd estimate 99+% are in favour and strongly campaigning in favour.

No, I wasn't referring to assisted dying at all, just pointing out that safeguarding guidelines must always be followed, or the results can affect the vulnerable people they are set up to protect.

I don't feel the NHS currently is in a fit state to be able to offer all that is needed to be in place.

MissAdventure

I'd say a lot of the people who don't support it - seeing potential problems isn't the same as completely rejecting the idea - are doing so from a safeguarding point of view.

We've all seen a pretty grim picture of how very wrong things can be when safeguarding protocol is goes wrong.

Excellent post, Miss A.

Kalm

Just to say being religious and believing a soul exists doesn't make one a lesser human.

What a very strange comment. No-one has suggested this at all.

I have Muslim family and friends and I totally respect their wishes to not avail themselves of choice. But I am terribly aggrieved that they, and other religious groups, Christian or otherwise- think they can stop me and others having the CHOICE.

MissAdventure-Switzerland has allowed Assisted Dying for over half a Century, and there has been NO slippery slope and the system works really well.

So where fo you get the 'We've all seen a pretty grim picture of how very wrong things can be when safeguarding protocol is goes wrong.' Canada? The proposed Bill has absolutely nothing to do with the Canadian system- at all.

Farzanah, I am also a member of the Humanist Society. You are the first person ever I've known to be against the Bill. I'd estimate 99+% are in favour and strongly campaigning in favour.

I'd say a lot of the people who don't support it - seeing potential problems isn't the same as completely rejecting the idea - are doing so from a safeguarding point of view.

We've all seen a pretty grim picture of how very wrong things can be when safeguarding protocol is goes wrong.

Kalm

Just to say being religious and believing a soul exists doesn't make one a lesser human.

Who on earth suggested that it did? I can't see anything on this thread which did.

Just to say being religious and believing a soul exists doesn't make one a lesser human.

OldFrill

Are people on this thread who don't support the bill driven to object because of their religious beliefs. Or is their religion not an influence?

Those who do not agree with the proposed AD Bill are not necessarily motivated by religious views. I’m a member of my local humanist group, many of whom do support the Bill, but for many well considered reasons I don’t.
You cannot assume at all.

Terribull, Fully Agree, in fact I along with others have written to my MP along with local mosques and churches expressing how my MP should oppose the AD bill. As I said if my labour MP wants to get in to Parliament again the majority is quite slim. Canada's policy was originally couched in so called liberal compassion and ended up as a Frankenstein law. Careful if you become unwell as the state has death (via your nearest and dearest) as an option.

OldFrill

Are people on this thread who don't support the bill driven to object because of their religious beliefs. Or is their religion not an influence?

Nothing whatsoever to do with my religious beliefs.

Again I agree with MaryDoll and completely agree having read your previous posts. It's not necessarily religious beliefs that would make anyone feel uncomfortable in what could come down the line in time. I wonder how Canada adopted it at the outset as opposed to how it's evolved. I remember seeing a QT quite a while ago on the subject, where two members of the panel who couldn't be more diametrically opposed politically, namely George Galloway and journalist Melanie Philips profoundly agreed with each other on this subject. I remember GG saying something like "what would worry me would be a scenario of helping granny on her way, granny being pressurised because she was a burden or the desire for family members to get their hands on her money" not verbatim but that was the gist. I completely understand the desire for those with a terminal degenerative illness such as Motor Nuerone where an awful ending awaits wanting to terminate their lives before it reaches that stage. What bothers me is the slippery slope that assisted dying has morphed into in Canada, how long before it's suggested that certain people are an expensive burden.

OldFrill

Are people on this thread who don't support the bill driven to object because of their religious beliefs. Or is their religion not an influence?

Nothing at all to do with my religion. It is a question of morality for me, influenced by my own personal circumstances.

Are people on this thread who don't support the bill driven to object because of their religious beliefs. Or is their religion not an influence?

Well said MaryDoll, whatever the outcome I do hope that we don't emulate the roads Canada and The Netherlands have gone down in assisted dying.

To be clear, I have no personal interest in this Bill. I live where the choice will be mine, and all mine, in safe conditions, in my own home, with DH and close family (if they choose to be there), and without the severe restrictions of this proposed Bill.

But I strongly feel that my British family and friends deserve to have the choice if and when they suffer from a terminal condition and they can't bear to continue. I have a long list already of those in the UK who have asked to come to us, if and when. We have explained this is not possible, as to get assistance here you need to be resident in Switzerland, not just a visitor. But we have promised them that we would be there to welcome them, help them with formalities, and hold their hand, if it is what they wish- safe that even though we are British, we could not be prosecuted for helping at this end.

But they really should not have to travel, and go through all the red tape, the massive cost, and the discomfort- and have to make that decision early to be able to do so. They should, just like us, have the choice in the UK. So unfair too that travelling to Switzerland is only available to those with the means to do so- with a cost of £15.000 to 20.===

The Canadian model is unique and no-one, but no-one at all, is considering adopting a model with any similarities to it.

There is no threat to disabled people, however severe, because the law will require for AD to be available only with thos with an estimated 6 months, terminally ill, and if they CHOOSE to ask for help.

To me the way the Canadian law has evolved is a very good reason not to vote for the Bill. Safeguards agreed at the beginning are watered down as time goes on, and I think it’s quite a warning.

The actress Liz Carr in her documentary on BBC explained why many vulnerable and disabled people find AD threatening.

They do have something in common, patients having no control over whether they live or die.

Interesting reading:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/canada-mps-university-of-michigan-national-institutes-of-health-university-of-toronto-b2352321.html

www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/25/canada-assisted-dying-laws-in-spotlight-as-expansion-paused-again

Freya, Assisted Dying has nothing at all to do with the DNR. Confusing and mixing the two is just so wrong.

Farzanah

From the Guardian
The Swiss Criminal Code of 1942 permitted adults to assist in another’s suicide as long as the motive for doing so was not “selfish”. Doctors are permitted to prescribe drugs for self-administration and to administer. Organisations providing assisted suicide have been providing services under certain regulations since 1985. Assisted suicide is lawful irrespective of the condition of the person who requests it.

Is this up to date and correct Fleurpepper? If so there are a couple of things which trouble me.

I do not know of anyone in Switzerland who has had the drugs prescribed for self administration. Most people who wish to have the choice, one day, but not urgently- will join Exit. They will receive publications and have the choice of going to AGM once a year, or contact the office with questions, etc. For the small sum of about £40 a year. Only people who think that if one day this maybe their choice to get out of massive pain, loss of independence and dignity- will make an advanced directive, let their family know, and their GP or medical team. So if and when the day comes, then the choice is sort of already made.

The doctor will then prescribe the drugs, when the person requests it, for Exit to come and assist and help, to make sure interviews take place, with the person on their own- to ensure no hesitation and no coercion, on two separate occasions, including on the day. All is filmed and the evidence given to Police for Judge. Some of the trained volunteers are doctors, but never part of the medical treatment team. Most are not.

Marydoll, I am so sorry you have at times felt in such pain and despair that you feel you could be at risk of asking for assistance to end it all. No I have never been in that situation, and I consider myself very lucky. My mother was, and she was a founder member of Exit- so she had the choice. But in fact, having the choice gave her the courage to continue with the pain and loss of everything, really. Because she knew she could ask at any time. She kept going- and finally turned to the wall and refused food and water, and died a few days later. But the choice, she had.

There are in fact lots of cases where people have said that knowing the choice was there, at any point- gave them the strength anc courage to keep going.

Again, I am very sorry you have been through such torment, and wish you the very best. And YOUR CHOICE- and your choice alone.

I hope Gransnetters will email their MPs to let them know what they think. There are quite a few groups lobbying MPs and I think plenty of individual opinions should be heard, not least from older folk.