MPs vote in favour of assisted dying bill

[Diver Fred]

I am in favour of it as long as the detail of the process is properly thought through and implemented. Quality of end of life care should also be of a high standard for those who don’t want to accelerate the inevitable.

Interesting that:

• the Liverpool Pathway has been mentioned. I’m pretty sure that was scrapped some years ago as it was found to be flawed.
• the Canadian system was covered quite extensively by Sky earlier in the week with a controversial point being that there are moves to extend it to include mental health conditions which I would be against. https://news.sky.com/story/depresse...ted-dying-in-canada-crossed-the-line-13258336

The Liverpool Pathway - best description is here.

I've now seen 2 elder members of my family put on 'Palliative Care' - I'd say it's the same thing Cruel action as the Liverpool Pathway. All the patient gets is some pain killing drugs, possibly some liquid just to moisten their lips whilst they have food withdrawn - in other words they are staved to death. Is that better than being put to death painlessly? In many cases that (seems) to be done to save the carers or nurses from having to keep the patients (and beds) clean cause it's easier than changing nappies on adults.

My wife sat in a hospital with her mother for several weeks whilst the hospital firstly withdrew care, then moved to a care home on 'palliative care' for the last fortnight of her mothers life. Even I had to spend a lot of time either in hospital with the wife and was in the care home for with her for the last few days of the MIL life. It was horrible to see and hear the agony!

 

[TRITON]

two doctors, judge

Similar systems in the past allowed shock treatment and lobotomies, and even pregnancy terminations. All in the patients best interests.

So when will the decision start being made for those people who are severely disabled ? 'No quality of life' 'its for the best'
2 doctors. Can doctors be trusted ? The judge just provides the legal aspect, not the moral one.

 

[MikeJhn]

Having watched my MIL laying in a fetal position, PEG fed to keep her alive for ten years, unable to communicate or interact with either myself or her daughter, it was my Wife who suffered, as long as safeguards are in place, I do think the bill is overdue.

 

[Scruples]

I won't be getting too excited yet. Iirc it'll take a couple of readings and then need to pass through the upper house, could be 5 years or so before it becomes law.
After seeing a few family members linger on in pain I would be in favour of a well crafted law

The Bill will still need more 'filling out', that's for sure and the HoL will study and debate then send the Bill back to the HoC for amendments, twice if they feel it necessary, but the HoC, if still adamant after that, can send the Bill through once they have decided.

Personally, I would have thought there would be minor resistance from the 'oldies' in the HoL since they they are closer to the reality of death but the religious few will attempt to make their beliefs known in the meantime. The HoL must, however, keep this on a rational level and leave mythology behind.

 

[Scruples]

Similar systems in the past allowed shock treatment and lobotomies, and even pregnancy terminations. All in the patients best interests.

So when will the decision start being made for those people who are severely disabled ? 'No quality of life' 'its for the best'
2 doctors. Can doctors be trusted ? The judge just provides the legal aspect, not the moral one.

That's an easy argument to make, mate. However, it is not sound.
Medicine has advanced a lot since the days you cite as a fear. The distribution of information has advanced, significantly, and the electorate are more more vocal leaving MPs and senior figures a little more vulnerable. I think the safeguards are there and would nullify your fears.

On our local Reach website the balsnce appears to be in favour of the Bill as it stands. As long as the debate remains in the secular zone the Bill will get Royal Assent with ease.

 

[Scruples]

I completely agree.
It's illegal to allow an animal to suffer yet it's ok for a human.

No, animals can, and are, euthanised by vets if, the owners believe that the animal's quality of life has passed and there's no likelihood of recovery. The vet will advise that the animal should have a fewer good days than bad, as a guideline.

Our 16 year old collie reached that situation, being unable to walk, eat properly or even lie comfortably. 16 years of a bond between a dog and its family and the end decision was a no-brainer. We all cried, and grieved, but out dog died at the right time, for him and for us. I'm sure this happens every day and the decisions aren't taken lightly but with a great deal of hand-wringing. The worth of a life, of someone close, hits you when they're gone.

 

[TRITON]

Medicine has advanced a lot since the days you cite as a fear.

Yes those methods are 'mostly' a thing of the past. But there will be new methods that im sure in the future will be questioned on moral grounds.
Sorry I cannot name individual treatments, but im sure there will be some.
You usually find though as with the still practiced electroconvulsive therapy, many will be concerning psychiatric illnesses.

But Im not citing it as a fear, im showing that in the medical world they are a law unto themselves.

Did you know for example that in the case of someone dying, they might try to get out of bed, which i think is the spirit if you will(or sheer bloody mindedness) trying to keep themselves going.
In that cases people are restrained.

They told my family that in my fathers case death was imminent, and predicted he would pass within 12 hours. Dad, being of the sheer bloody minded type refused to die in 12 hours and his will kept him going to a further 3 weeks, till they insisted on putting him on a machine that administered drugs(edit - called a syringe driver) that effectively left him weaker and weaker.

My fathers health was poor, due to cancer and copd, but he beat many infections if they just gave him the time to allow his body to overcome them. but on that machine it was the beginning of the end

Trust doctors ? Not a f'ing chance.

 

[Scruples]

Yes those methods are 'mostly' a thing of the past. But there will be new methods that im sure in the future will be questioned on moral grounds.
Sorry I cannot name individual treatments, but im sure there will be some.
You usually find though as with the still practiced electroconvulsive therapy, many will be concerning psychiatric illnesses.

But Im not citing it as a fear, im showing that in the medical world they are a law unto themselves.

Did you know for example that in the case of someone dying, they might try to get out of bed, which i think is the spirit if you will(or sheer bloody mindedness) trying to keep themselves going.
In that cases people are restrained.

They told my family that in my fathers case death was imminent, and predicted he would pass within 12 hours. Dad, being of the sheer bloody minded type refused to die in 12 hours and his will kept him going to a further 3 weeks, till they insisted on putting him on a machine that administered drugs(edit - called a syringe driver) that effectively left him weaker and weaker.

My fathers health was poor, due to cancer and copd, but he beat many infections if they just gave him the time to allow his body to overcome them. but on that machine it was the beginning of the end

Trust doctors ? Not a f'ing chance.

Well, your father was strong. Strong enough to make the decision to live which would preclude any medical intervention.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Similar systems in the past allowed shock treatment and lobotomies, and even pregnancy terminations. All in the patients best interests.

So when will the decision start being made for those people who are severely disabled ? 'No quality of life' 'its for the best'
2 doctors. Can doctors be trusted ? The judge just provides the legal aspect, not the moral one.

It is also based upon the wishes of the "patient" who should be of sound mind etc etc. Slightly different to shock treatment etc where the procedure was usually imposed.

 

[deema]

There are always two sides to every discussion, those who oppose it and wish that their view restrict the ability of those who wish for the legislation and those in favour. I’m fully for it, and indeed I don’t think it goes far enough. I would also like to see that you can make a living will to cover situations where you are no longer able to make your own decisions such as dementia, persistent vegetive state etc. I can also perceive of situations where my quality of life in my opinion would be intolerable, such as becoming quadriplegic, or after a severe stroke and in all cases I should have the right to a peaceful and dignified end rather than a life of what for me I would consider torture and inhuman treatment of the living. Anyway, a small step has been taken, hopefully the first in a series towards allowing me to have the freedoms over my life and death should the worst occur that I want to have.

 

[sneggysteve]

My partner was an 'end of life' nurse for 25 years. She provided palliative care and sat with people through their last, often very painful, months, days and hours. She's retired now and this was before we met. She is 100% in favour of the bill.

I have always been in favour but having someone who has seen the suffering so many times really pushes it home - thank you

 

[Ozi]

Slightly off topic. In a previous job I inspected disabled lifting equipment in a number of care homes, some excellent others horrific Granny farms. If people with no quality of life are to be allowed to end their lives I think there is a moral duty on society to ensure that they are given all practicable care to maintain their best possible existence. Regular inspection by independent people skilled in the art if I can use that term of caring for people in these circumstances should be mandatory. The same job took me into a number of prisons and there are a lot of care homes where I would far rather be in any of the prisons.

I'd like to see care homes made part of the NHS to end the situation where elderly people are bed blocking in hospitals, a totally inappropriate place for them putting undue work on to staff while causing unnecessary deterioration to the person on the receiving end whilst relatives try to find a place they can afford of a standard they are prepared to place a relative in. My mother was in this position for about a month, any longer and she might have lost the ability to walk and never returned to her own home. Thankfully we found a place in a WCS home that was really excellent. If you ever find yourself looking for a place for a relative one of the things we were told to look out for when inspecting bath chair lifts was the cleanliness of the underside of the chair. If it's cleaned properly someone on site understands infection control and the danger of bed sores, if it's covered in soap scum and dead skin stay well clear.

 

[Lons]

I'd like to see care homes made part of the NHS

Some of the NHS homes we looked at were horrible. Being part of the NHS doesn't make them better by default. I completely agree that the system has to be overhauled to stop bed blocking just can't see it happening anytime soon.

 

[Ozi]

Some of the NHS homes we looked at were horrible. Being part of the NHS doesn't make them better by default. I completely agree that the system has to be overhauled to stop bed blocking just can't see it happening anytime soon.

Regrettably I agree with you, hence a need for independent inspection to a national standard.

 

[Lons]

Regrettably I agree with you, hence a need for independent inspection to a national standard.

It's never going to happen unfortunately despite the obvious need.

My mother in law who died a few weeks ago at the grand age of 97 was one of the lucky ones in that they had worked very hard to save and paid into private pensions so that when the time came for her to decide she wanted to go into a home we could sell her house and fund the £6000 a month costs. This of course meant that there was no financial burden on government and LA finances, i.e. our money but after 5 years residence the savings were reducing dramatically.
The home and staff were absolutely first class whereas some of the others we viewed left much to be desired and our family experiences for others who went into NHS care homes was not great.

 

[deema]

I fear that unless there is some form of fast track through which ever court it’s to go through (crown or magistrate) then the present backlog of cases will mean that you will have no chance of a decent end of life as the court case will only be scheduled for after you have passed.

 

[ey_tony]

If family abuse by means of coercion in order to gain from their death can be avoided and with safeguards against a state predisposition toward encouraging euthanasia then there is room for the views of both those for and against euthanasia.

Even if it's passes into law, there is no obligation as far as I'm aware for anyone to be forced/coerced into a premature death.

My late wife died a horrendous death because of cancer at the age of only 54, my mother similarly at the age of 52 and I can recall my late mother in law saying to me as she lay dying with cancer of her throat " you wouldn't treat an animal like this, would you Tony". That was 32 years ago and she was absolutely correct...no one has the right to dictate how someone should die.

They may not agree with assisted dying which is their prerogative but they have absolutely no right to impose their views on anyone else and if all the safeguards can be met then their opinion shouldn't count as it's the person involved who should have the final say.

 

[Scruples]

I fear that unless there is some form of fast track through which ever court it’s to go through (crown or magistrate) then the present backlog of cases will mean that you will have no chance of a decent end of life as the court case will only be scheduled for after you have passed.

Everthing that's worthwhile has to start somewhere and somewhen...

 

[RobinBHM]

My late wife died a horrendous death because of cancer at the age of only 54, my mother similarly at the age of 52 and I can recall my late mother in law saying to me as she lay dying with cancer of her throat

Im very sorry to hear that Tony, 54 is no age.

I appreciate the ideological concerns from those who oppose it but I feel we should absolutely listen to people such as Tony who have experienced first hand the horrors of an undignified death.


An 'end of life' nurse' is an eminently qualified person on this:

My partner was an 'end of life' nurse for 25 years. She provided palliative care and sat with people through their last, often very painful, months, days and hours. She's retired now and this was before we met. She is 100% in favour of the bill.

I think it is good the bill passed but I want to see it properly debated and considered before it passes into law.

something that is good in principle can be bad in practice if the mechanisms make it unworkable............we cant have people choosing to have an assisted death only to spend their last few months having endless legal arguments. Nor can we have the possibility that people feel they have to choose it because they feel they are a burden.

 

[niall Y]

I think it is a strange juxtaposition, that a secular society that, in living memory, has quite rightly come to the conclusion that the state has no right to execute murderers; should now be countenancing killing some of its sick.