A Political Thread pt. 2

[Vieux Talonneur]

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

Totally this. And attempts to do so down the line are inevitable.

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.

And this. Personal experience is likely to strongly influence your views.

I guess I really want there to be no grey areas but I'm not sure that's really achievable. For every cut and dried obvious case there will be others much more borderline with pressures applied even if well meaning.

 

[Saintjay]

I've found the whole debate on this really quite difficult tbh. Nobody wants to see friends, family, loved ones or anyone suffering and in pain.

Yet some days I'd give almost anything to have spent one last day with my mum and dad.

That can seem extremely selfish but i know it's me remembering how they were during the good days and not in there later years.

 

[Which Tyler]

The one thing I will to, to all those MPs voting against this because palliative care is a mess - introduce a member's bill to address palliative care then - these things are NOT mutually exclusive.

I've found the whole debate on this really quite difficult tbh. Nobody wants to see friends, family, loved ones or anyone suffering and in pain.

Yet some days I'd give almost anything to have spent one last day with my mum and dad.

That can seem extremely selfish but i know it's me remembering how they were during the good days and not in there later years.

Completely understood.
For me, it would come down to - one last day with them in screaming agony or off with the fairies, or one last day as you ~(hopefully) remember them - compus mentus, true to themselves and (relatively) pain free.

But that's me, other views are valid, I just haven't come across other arguments that seem to be (I hadn't really come across the "but palliative care" or the "but self-coercion" before, the former isn't relevant to this, the latter... isn't an issue I@m worried about, if the self-coercion is intolerable, then it's intolerable).


ETA: the bill passes, and goes to committee - where the fun will start!

 

[ncurd]

Completely understood.
For me, it would come down to - one last day with them in screaming agony or off with the fairies, or one last day as you ~(hopefully) remember them - compus mentus, true to themselves and (relatively) pain free.

This I'd give anything to have my mother as she was Boxing Day even for a short time.

I'd give anything to erase my memories of the following month and no amount of palliative care beyond sedating for the entireity her would of made it easier.

 

[Reiser99]

The one caveat I have is that this is all or nothing. If you get it wrong then people die wrongly.

I'm all for people who are suffering and terminal to be given the right to choose. Nobody should be able to choose for them. But you need to be 100% certain it's what they want.

I haven't had time to read up on the bill, but for me there should immediately be a conversation with a psychiatrist or counsellor when a person is diagnosed as terminal as to what their wishes would be. Especially if the illness will affect their mental capacity in future. The decision made in the past needs to be clear, unambiguous and free of any undue influence. Then the family only has to honour the wishes, not make the case for them.

However, as I'm thinking about it,that wouldn't cover everything. What about people in a sudden accident who are left in a coma...I don't know.

 

[ncurd]

Current bill requires two separate doctors and the person to compus mentus to apply for it. They also need to be given 6 months to live.

Those provisions don't go far enough IMO but it's a massive stepping stone.

(I personally have no issue with where Canada ended up).

 

[Reiser99]

Current bill requires two separate doctors and the person to compus mentus to apply for it. They also need to be given 6 months to live.

Those provisions don't go far enough IMO but it's a massive stepping stone.

(I personally have no issue with where Canada ended up).

Hmm, many people will fall outside that, especially if it's a long disease that affects the brain.

 

[General Melchett]

I would have no issue in formally adding my wishes/consent to my medical records now (as a hypothetical) in the same way as organ donation can be. The onus would then be on me to update my record if I change my mind in the future or the NHS could request that I review and re-submit my consent every few years. This could supplement the two doctor requirement and six months to live requirement and make everything more watertight.