A Political Thread pt. 2

[ncurd]

Rachel Wearmouth (@rewearmouth.bsky.social)

Badenoch: “If he wants to know what Conservatives will do, he should resign and find out. There’s a petition…” Starmer: “We had a petition on July 4.” Good lord. Politics on easy mode for the govt at PMQs.

bsky.app

 

[ncurd]

Theo Bertram (@theobertram.bsky.social)

It took years for Cameron to call for Brown to resign or Starmer to call for Johnson to resign. Badenoch has gone there after just three weeks. Where else do you have to go after that?

bsky.app

Ian Dunt (@iandunt.bsky.social)

It's simply incredible. Just absolutely blew it, her nuclear attack for a major moment. ****** away with a passing reference to some **** she saw online. [contains quote post or other embedded content]

bsky.app

 

[Gavin]

Ironic

*In the sense a child of immigrants, complaining about immigrants

 

[McTallshort]

Well I'm glad we haven't got another bat **** crazy idiot leading the Tories again....

 

[ncurd]

Are people laying into her saying that if immigration is stood high why didn't Tories do much about it in 14 years?

They've been out of power for...5 months....this isn't time to calling for a election or rebonding themselves. There are no votes to be won.

This about biding time and holing to account the govenement on the issue of today.

EV targets, Farmer strikes. Asking tough but fair questions.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Haigh fiasco giving Tories an open goal. Much less what she did and much more around Starmer's judgement. Focus is always more on the Government, but both sides of the House are quite capable of not covering themselves in glory.

Outcome of the assisted dying bill will be very interesting. I think I'm broadly in favour, but with significant reservations. The proposed safeguards seem reasonable, but once the door is ajar there will inevitably be pressures to widen availability over time which would make me very nervous.

When MPs have a free vote are they literally voting with their personal conscience or are they taking soundings from their constituents to represent their views? Or a combination of both?

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Haigh fiasco giving Tories an open goal. Much less what she did and much more around Starmer's judgement. Focus is always more on the Government, but both sides of the House are quite capable of not covering themselves in glory.

Outcome of the assisted dying bill will be very interesting. I think I'm broadly in favour, but with significant reservations. The proposed safeguards seem reasonable, but once the door is ajar there will inevitably be pressures to widen availability over time which would make me very nervous.

When MPs have a free vote are they literally voting with their personal conscience or are they taking soundings from their constituents to represent their views? Or a combination of both?

Must admit that I am very against it, but this thread is a very good argument as to why those safeguards aren't fit for purpose -

 

[Which Tyler]

I am very much in favour of it; on the principle of "your body, your rules"
Obviously, robust safeguards need to be in place, to make sure it's the patients own rules, not those of other people that are being applied.

Taking out of the equations
A] "safeguards need to be stronger" - which is an argument in favour of safeguards, not against assisted dying, and to my understanding, isn't relevant at this stage
B] "my god(s) says it's bad" - which is irrelevant in a secular society
C] "your body, my rules" - which is... frankly terrible
D] "medical professionals feel unappreciated if a patient chooses to die... slightly sooner than I could make them live" - which is... not good enough

What are the arguments against it?
I fully admit, I must be in a little bubble on this - all of my family are in favour, everyone I speak to in person is either in favour, B or D above, or just basing it purely on the instinct of "death = bad".
I'm genuinely interested in valid reasons to oppose



As for MPs - in theory, they take soundings from their community, and if the response is strong in one direction, vote that way, and if weak or indiscernible, vote with their personal opinion.

And finally, this (again)

 

[Welsh Exile]

It intrigues me that while this isn't necessarily a left or right issue, you do seem to find people on the right against it and people on the left for it. You'd think it would be the other way round considering the right tend to favour small state with little intervention and the left leaning towards the other direction. I'm all for it. I tend to find that the opposition to it, comes from bullshit, archaic religious ideas essentially anyway.

 

[Saintjay]

I think some of the concerns are raised from how the bill or law potentially escalates.

Other countries have expanded into more assisted suicide for things like mental health etc, with people in the 20's able to take there own life. The Netherlands is possibly expanding into a right for anyone over 75 to take there own life next year.

My experience with palliative care with the NHS and my mum was that it was first class. Yet i will say it was still horrific for her and the family to go through for the last two weeks.

So do you need assisted dying with good and competent palliative care, i don't know the answer to that.
I can see both sides of this argument and really don't think either is clearly wrong.

As for MP's voting with the conscience or what there constituency wants is probably a balancing act.

 

[Welsh Exile]

I was watching Question time last night and Rory Stewart or one of the other dickheads said that back in the day you had 20 workers for every 1 retired person and now it's something like 3 working people for every retired person. They then argued about immigration but when they came onto assisted suicide a lot were against it. Errrrr hello, cutting down the OAP population doesn't sounds like a bad idea, especially if you're generally against immigration.

 

[ncurd]

Oddly apparently age is the most discerning factor the idea being once you've experienced death and/or suffering personally your more likely to pro this.

I'll be brutally honest despite not being suicidal if I were to be diagnosed with dementia of any kind I would likely start considering it planning to live out my life to fullest until it really starts to take hold. I know probably a great deal of suicide/assisted suicide of terminally ill patients that probably goes unrecorded or a blind eye turned to it.

I don't think the current law prevents premature death I think it prevents people with a "safe" and "painless" option.

This said I understand the concerns of disability groups primarily and I don't think that any level of safeguards will ever be enough. However I don't think that outweighs the right of people to take matters into their own hands when they are at end of life or suffering from circumstances that many would find intolerable.

I don't think pressure to take this route from feeling your are a burden on others is a legit argument unless you are facing externals pressures. I think not wanting to be a burden from an internal pressure mental is perfectly a understandable reason.

I know my mothers last month of life was intolerable (although we were told recovery was still possible until at least the day before). My Grandfather was essentially a vegetable after his first stroke (or something) which probably drover my Grandmother to an early grave having to be a principal carer for 2 years.

On the other my other Grandmother is living a perfectly happily life with Parkinson's.

It should be about personal decision regardless of the reasons currently its not.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Seen multiple family members die from Dementia, very much in favour of AD

 

[General Melchett]

It intrigues me that while this isn't necessarily a left or right issue, you do seem to find people on the right against it and people on the left for it. You'd think it would be the other way round considering the right tend to favour small state with little intervention and the left leaning towards the other direction. I'm all for it. I tend to find that the opposition to it, comes from bullshit, archaic religious ideas essentially anyway.

Some interesting and thoughtful posts on here. The right in America would definitely be against it as they would see it was interfering with 'God's will' and we know that the Tories and Reform seem to be dancing to the same tune as the Republican party and so that might explain the position being taken by some of our politicians.

I can appreciate the good palliative care argument but there's no guarantee that good palliative care is maintained consistently throughout the country. I suspect it will go up and down based on the state of the economy and funding provided by the Government of the day.

My experience of watching a close relative pass away in hospital was that the doctors and nurses were hamstrung with having to deal with box ticking processes and paperwork to cover the hospital in the event of negligence complaints. I'm sure they tried their best but it just seemed that the level of bedside care took a hit because of the bureaucracy/inefficient internal processes. That aside, I'm in favour.

 

[Which Tyler]

Other countries have expanded into more assisted suicide for things like mental health etc, with people in the 20's able to take there own life. The Netherlands is possibly expanding into a right for anyone over 75 to take there own life next year.

So what?
Are people in their 20s "not real people" who don't get to choose? are they immune to life-ending conditions? Is mental health not a real illness?

For me, people in their 20s absolutely can and do suffer life-ending illnesses, and should have the right to go out on their own terms.
For me, mental health is a tricky one, and it should be pretty easy to prevent AD "on a whim" - we're not talking suicide-booths here; and long-term mental illness absolute can condemn someone to decades of absolute misery (and horrible suicides / suicide attempts).

So do you need assisted dying with good and competent palliative care, i don't know the answer to that.

Yes.
Having 1 choice is no choice.

Palliative care is absolutely the right choice for some, the wrong choice for others, and not even an option for another group.


I feel that there is enough evidence, and enough experience from other countries, that all the objections and questions should be able to be countered - I don't claim to have that familiarity, or to have those answers; just my own experiences, first, second and third hand, and decades being supportive of AD.


We already have the right to take our own life. We should have the right to do less horrifically, and to assist someone in taking their own life.
Worth bearing in mind, that that's what we're talking about here - assisted suicide, NOT person A killing person B

 

[ncurd]

Ian Dunt is doing a very good running commentary on the debate for those interested (regardless of your views on his opinions he usually covers this stuff pretty well).

Ian Dunt (@iandunt.bsky.social)

I'm going to do some coverage on here of the assisted dying debate. If you're not interested please mute this thread now. It'll probably go on a while.

bsky.app

Also wrote an excellent article on international countries who bought in assisted suicide and their effects, Canada which is often quoted by opponents is an outlier in how its been adopted.

Trying to make a damn bit of sense of the assisted dying debate

Everything you need to know about a profound change in the law

iandunt.substack.com

 

[Saintjay]

So what?
Are people in their 20s "not real people" who don't get to choose? are they immune to life-ending conditions? Is mental health not a real illness?

For me, people in their 20s absolutely can and do suffer life-ending illnesses, and should have the right to go out on their own terms.
For me, mental health is a tricky one, and it should be pretty easy to prevent AD "on a whim" - we're not talking suicide-booths here; and long-term mental illness absolute can condemn someone to decades of absolute misery (and horrible suicides / suicide attempts).



Yes.
Having 1 choice is no choice.

Palliative care is absolutely the right choice for some, the wrong choice for others, and not even an option for another group.


I feel that there is enough evidence, and enough experience from other countries, that all the objections and questions should be able to be countered - I don't claim to have that familiarity, or to have those answers; just my own experiences, first, second and third hand, and decades being supportive of AD.


We already have the right to take our own life. We should have the right to do less horrifically, and to assist someone in taking their own life.
Worth bearing in mind, that that's what we're talking about here - assisted suicide, NOT person A killing person B

Of course they are real people. Nobody is saying they are not. The same as mental health being a real illness.

It's the scope that people have concerns about. Should it just be the terminally ill or anyone who's life is unbearable and who no longer wish to be in the world. Do we include children in this with parental consent

For me If it's a voluntary and well-considered request. A person has unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement. No reasonable alternative. Then I am for it.

Should that be dependant on age or illness again i don't know. Or at what point or when does someone have or not have capacity to make that choice. There's lot's of what it's and questions. It's clearly a very difficult thing to cover in one act of legislation when there countless scenarios with no right or wrong answer

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I'm generally in favour, having seen my gran in her final weeks just sat in a chair unable to do anything and barely aware of the world around her. It's not life any more at that stage. If there is any sanity left, it must feel like being trapped in a body you don't control.

Safeguards obviously need to be in place to prevent people acting on such things impulsively, I think there should be a fairly long consideration time between deciding and the process actually happening to ensure they can change their mind.

 

[ncurd]

It's clearly a very difficult thing to cover in one act of legislation when there countless scenarios with no right or wrong answer

I think the committee stage of this one will be fascinating .

 

[Which Tyler]

Of course they are real people. Nobody is saying they are not. The same as mental health being a real illness.

It's the scope that people have concerns about. Should it just be the terminally ill or anyone who's life is unbearable and who no longer wish to be in the world. Do we include children in this with parental consent

For me If it's a voluntary and well-considered request. A person has unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement. No reasonable alternative. Then I am for it.

Should that be dependant on age or illness again i don't know. Or at what point or when does someone have or not have capacity to make that choice. There's lot's of what it's and questions. It's clearly a very difficult thing to cover in one act of legislation when there countless scenarios with no right or wrong answer

My apologies: you had seemed to be concerned about a slippery slope leading to people in their 20s making this decision (I think that's in this first draft, rather than any slope at all) or mental health.
I may well have been mis-reading things.

Personally, I want this to pass, at least today.
Ideally, I'd see it pass today, but get stuck later, as there's too much to resolve, and too important an issue to resolve with a private member's bill - see a Royal Commission started, and coming back with a new law enabling assisted dying, for intolerable suffering - including mental health.

Basically, learn from others, get it right first time, and there should be no need for a slippery slope. Get it wrong, and the slippery slope will be a requirement, not a thing to be feared.

Of course, we also need to improve palliative care; but that's a separate issue to assisted dying.

ETA: can committee stage pause itself and start a royal commission? I'm not sure - if it can, then that would be ideal.