Is the UK ready and fit for assisted dying

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/may/01/case-for-assisted-dying-nhs-patients-die

[Steve H]

You are grasping at straws, trying to find some excuse to oppose euthanasia that doesn't give away that you really oppose it for religious reasons.

[Nearly Sane]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/may/01/case-for-assisted-dying-nhs-patients-die

Deeply depressing. We should make people suffer because we make people suffer would seem to be the cleft that describes.

[Nearly Sane]

You are grasping at straws, trying to find some excuse to oppose euthanasia that doesn't give away that you really oppose it for religious reasons.

Maybe he's chosen his religion in part for philosophical reasons? Given the link isn't by Vlad, is written from a viewpoint where religion isn't really considered, it seems a bit flip to dismiss it entirely just because it was posted by Vlad. If we are using what we know about Vlad, he is also deeply anti Tory, so should we dismiss it because he's just posted it for political reasons?

That a palliative care doctor wrote it seems to me damning of where we ate. I think that linking it so closely to the issue of assisted dying risks the actual point that a doctor involved in palliative care sees the situation on the NHS as as dire as this will be missed.

[Alan Burns]

You are grasping at straws, trying to find some excuse to oppose euthanasia that doesn't give away that you really oppose it for religious reasons.

I have a close friend in a senior NHS post who identifies a worrying trend in relatives who are more concerned with protecting their inheritance than looking after their "loved" ones.

[Steve H]

I have a close friend in a senior NHS post who identifies a worrying trend in relatives who are more concerned with protecting their inheritance than looking after their "loved" ones.

Anecdotal evidence is no evidence. Any euthanasia law would have stringent safeguards built into it, and it seems to work ok n ither countries. How has your friend identified this "worrying trend"? Presumably, the relatives don't openly admit it.

[Nearly Sane]

I have a close friend in a senior NHS post who identifies a worrying trend in relatives who are more concerned with protecting their inheritance than looking after their "loved" ones.

Does your friend agree with the palliative care doctor in the link that the NHS is treating elderly people dreadfully, and they are suffering?

[Gordon]

From a personal perspective, speaking as someone who has incurable cancer, and having been told by the professionals that (and assuming I don't get hit by a meteorite or a bus first) the end stage of my illness will probably involve hospitalisation and significant pain control since I have tumours in my bones.

I would at least like the option of euthanasia at the point where my survival could be measured in a handful of weeks, and where those weeks would gradually become more unpleasant for me and more distressing for my family. I can't see that there can't safeguards that limited the euthanasia option to people in my position who were considered still competent to make an informed decision.

I don't want to die in a morphine-induced haze.

[jeremyp]

Deeply depressing. We should make people suffer because we make people suffer would seem to be the cleft that describes.

That's not the message I took from it. I think the author is concerned that people are pushing euthanasia as the "easy" solution to the problem that the NHS is not dealing with terminal cases properly.

[jeremyp]

I don't want to die in a morphine-induced haze.

I would be absolutely fine with dying in a morphine induced haze. I don't want to live in one, at least not one with no prospect of recovery.

[Nearly Sane]

That's not the message I took from it. I think the author is concerned that people are pushing euthanasia as the "easy" solution to the problem that the NHS is not dealing with terminal cases properly.

Where do you see that in the article?

[Nearly Sane]

'Assisted dying debate terrifying for disabled people, says actress Liz Carr' - and yet in the article a disabled person disagrees.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68951037

[Steve H]

'Assisted dying debate terrifying for disabled people, says actress Liz Carr' - and yet in the article a disabled person disagrees.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68951037

What gives her the right to speak for all disabled people? If she doesn't want to avail herself of AD or euthanasia, that is her choice, but others might choose differently. There are too many self-appointed disability activists making decisions for other disabled people without so much as a by-your-leave. Often, it's just a cover for being a member of the anti-choice brigade.

[Nearly Sane]

What gives her the right to speak for all disabled people? If she doesn't want to avail herself of AD or euthanasia, that is her choice, but others might choose differently. There are too many self-appointed disability activists making decisions for other disabled people without so much as a by-your-leave. Often, it's just a cover for being a member of the anti-choice brigade.

I think just dismissing people's fears like that is completely counterproductive.

And WTF is the 'anti choice brigade'?

[jeremyp]

Where do you see that in the article?

It is obviously there, if not in absolute black and white.

[Steve H]

I think just dismissing people's fears like that is completely counterproductive.

I'm not dismissing anything, just pointing out that she can't presume to speak for everyone.

And WTF is the 'anti choice brigade'?

The so-called, misnamed "pro-life" mob.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm not dismissing anything, just pointing out that she can't presume to speak for everyone.The so-called, misnamed "pro-life" mob.

  Well you've implied she's lying by referring to it as a 'cover'. And while there may be some overlap in those who oppose abortion  and assisted dying, it's not complete, and it's lazy to imply that it is.

[Steve H]

  Well you've implied she's lying by referring to it as a 'cover'. And while there may be some overlap in those who oppose abortion  and assisted dying, it's not complete, and it's lazy to imply that it is.

I said "often", so I'm not implying that.

[Nearly Sane]

I said "often", so I'm not implying that.

Then why mention it all? You didn't even deal with her arguments. You attacked her for speaking for all disabled people, and then by mentioning them linked her to anti abortion activists, and raised the possibility of it being a cover for that.

[Alan Burns]

The so-called, misnamed "pro-life" mob.

I presume you are referring to those who respect the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.
Why do you call them misnamed?

[Steve H]

I presume you are referring to those who respect the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.
Why do you call them misnamed?

If I ever meet one who is also a vegan, an opponent of the death penalty, and a pacifist, I will happily call them "pro-life", but I suspect that most claiming that title aren't.