MPs vote in favour of assisted dying bill

[BC'er]

MDs have been quietly euthanizing people for centuries, upon request or their own initiative; take George V for example.

They will continue to do so, though now at increasing rates.

It was reported more than a decade ago that in Holland, one of the earliest to enact such laws, explicit consent from the patient was only obtained in about two thirds of cases.

Here in Trudeaustan so-called medical assistance in dying is being offered for just about any cause to just about any age group, including "depression".

Look on the bright side, it helps to reduce our carbon footprint and CO2 levels.

 

[Lons]

That's right, the debate just held is the 'second reading' (the first reading is just the announcement that the bill is being proposed). It'll now go to the committee stage in the Commons where it and proposed amendments will be debated at length. Then there's a third reading debate, and if approved it's off the Lords. There it will get a second reading and committee stage debates. Then if amended in the Lords it goes back to the Commons. Lots of debate yet to come on the details and it might well end up quite different in the detail if passes all that.

And there are a healthy number of debaters who are not in favour but intelligent and open minded enough to ensure all the issues are thoroughly discussed one of those for example is Dame Tammi Grey-Thompson who will make her voice heard.

 

[Diver Fred]

We have to bear in mind, assisted dying already happens, water, food, oxygen and medicine is withheld with the aim of killing the person off..........but not without suffering.

So True - sadly it's called 'Palliative Care'.

 

[RobinBHM]

https://humanists.uk/2023/03/20/canadas-assisted-dying-legislation-dispelling-the-myths/

 

[Scruples]

So True - sadly it's called 'Palliative Care'.

Which supports the idea that we should endeavour to find the most humane end of life for everybody.

 

[PhilTilson]

I have followed a number of threads on this site concerning controversial matters (EVs anybody? ) but rarely have I come across such almost unanimity of opinion as in this thread. I fully respect the views of people who disagree with the idea of assisted dying and absolutely support the view that there should be safeguards against coercion, but when it comes down to the fundamentals, nobody but I should have the right to determine whether and when I die. End of story (hmm... appropriate )

 

[Yojevol]

nobody but I should have the right to determine whether and when I die. End of story (hmm... appropriate )

Not quite. You could have deligated the right to refuse life sustaining treatment to your attorney in the situation where your mental health is sufficiently impaired.
Brian

 

[Inspector]

With gun laws in the UK having removed most firearms from the population long ago people can't blow their brains out when ready to leave. Recent blade laws are doing the same so one can't commit Harakiri or can't fall on their sword for relief of suffering. Climate change is melting the ice caps so the option of drifting off on an ice flow is soon to be out. Cars are pretty much so safe you will survive trying to ram into or drive off a mountain if the car will even let you. With flesh saving technology like the SawStop, head butting a saw bade is out too. Having the option of choosing a painless and peaceful passing when ready seems like a pretty good thing and a lot less messy. I love life but when it is no fun to ba had anymore I am grateful to have the option of checking out here.

Pete