Dignitas

[udderlyoffroad]

37 minutes ago, oowee said:

It's simply business rather than tourism (its far from a holiday but you could call it visiting a place of interest). There are a number of countries where it's legal now. Spain will soon be in (and a few states) and I am guessing that some of these countries will take visitors? I can understand that some may be uncomfortable with it but as to it being a generally held view I am sceptical?

I know generally national pride is something we look down our noses at, or at least a lot of people in this country seem to conflate patriotism with nationalism.  But try to imagine, for a moment, that the average Swiss person was proud of being Swiss.  Of their heritage, of their culture, of their fierce independence.  Now imagine that a unscrupulous 'Hilfswerk' exploited a referendum result to allow assisted dying and provided 'death tourism' to all and sundry- do you really think it would go over well with your average proud Eidgenosse?  Of course it doesn't.  But what do I know, I only lived there, was educated there, speak the local dialect.

 

43 minutes ago, oowee said:

Seems to me that as we all start to live longer the service is likely to grow. It would be a shame for the UK to miss out on a business opportunity if that is to be the case. 

Ending human suffering as a business opportunity.  Despite Brexit.

So we've now moved from should be available, with strong safeguards, in this country to "it's a growth industry, lads".

Exactly why it must never be allowed in this country.

[Scully]

23 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

I know generally national pride is something we look down our noses at, or at least a lot of people in this country seem to conflate patriotism with nationalism.  But try to imagine, for a moment, that the average Swiss person was proud of being Swiss.  Of their heritage, of their culture, of their fierce independence.  Now imagine that a unscrupulous 'Hilfswerk' exploited a referendum result to allow assisted dying and provided 'death tourism' to all and sundry- do you really think it would go over well with your average proud Eidgenosse?  Of course it doesn't.  But what do I know, I only lived there, was educated there, speak the local dialect.

 

Ending human suffering as a business opportunity.  Despite Brexit.

So we've now moved from should be available, with strong safeguards, in this country to "it's a growth industry, lads".

Exactly why it must never be allowed in this country.

I totally disagree. As far as I can make out it’s already quite an ‘industry’ in that the Swiss are being paid to provide a service.
It’s ridiculous, archaic, cowardly and downright backward thinking to prosecute those who accompany relatives to another country for assisted suicide. Totally ridiculous!
Like I said, the state plays no other part in the process, other than to create the legislation which allows people the choice. 

[oowee]

I for one think we should allow it. Other countries are now recognising that it's acceptable.  It's a growing industry and those of sound mind should be able to have a choice. It should not be restricted to the fortunate few that can afford to go abroad for service.

The UK can stick to rules like no other country, indeed some said the UK sticks to the rules when the rest of Europe just pays them lip service.  

The only objection I see is on religious grounds and in my view that has no place in politics unless elected for the purpose. 

 

[Agriv8]

In simple form I would  like to be able to elect 3 family or friends the right to allow me to be switched off if they all agreed that I was in pain and having no quality of life.  if I am able to communicate I will tell them when to sign the form if I can’t I trust them all with my life 2 of them stand very close to me with guns the other is the wife of 20 years. 
 

this is nothing to do with the state or the nhs trying to switch me off when the time comes.

edit to add if any of my organs can keep someone else alive then this is an added bonus !

 

Agriv8

Edited December 20, 2023 by Agriv8

[Genghis]

@udderlyoffroadI don’t think that anyone is going to change your mind on the subject, but one thing you’ve not addressed is what should a U.K. citizen do under the current legislation if they wish to end their own life?

It’s technically illegal to attempt suicide, even though it’s only ever prosecuted if it has caused harm to others in the process. Keeping this in mind, what advice do you give such a person?

[eggy74]

45 minutes ago, Genghis said:

@udderlyoffroadI don’t think that anyone is going to change your mind on the subject, but one thing you’ve not addressed is what should a U.K. citizen do under the current legislation if they wish to end their own life?

It’s technically illegal to attempt suicide, even though it’s only ever prosecuted if it has caused harm to others in the process. Keeping this in mind, what advice do you give such a person?

I would advise them to go and chew some elm seeds. personal choice is what it is and sod the law. However creating an industry, even one separate from the state will mean someone like my wife, who already feels she is a massive burden on me (she isnt) will have a route out. as for the idea that a Dr will safeguard the process, i would remind you many in here have used shootcert/ medcert recently, where there is money to be made, a Dr will provide the service.

[udderlyoffroad]

39 minutes ago, Scully said:

It’s ridiculous, archaic, cowardly and downright backward thinking to prosecute those who accompany relatives to another country for assisted suicide. Totally ridiculous!

No argument from me on that one.  

But I don't want to become an industry in this country, precisely because of what I've seen in Switzerland.

43 minutes ago, Scully said:

Like I said, the state plays no other part in the process, other than to create the legislation which allows people the choice. 

I'm sorry but the law of unintended consequences will absolutely bitch-slap you in this case.

This is the UK, we will have to involve an army of 'public health professionals' and 'safeguarding' and still we'll end up executing otherwise perfectly healthy people suffering from depression.'

2 hours ago, Genghis said:

one thing you’ve not addressed is what should a U.K. citizen do under the current legislation if they wish to end their own life?

I did, several posts back.  It's nearly 2024, I couldn't possibly give practical advice other than say the internet is a thing. 

[oowee]

12 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

No argument from me on that one.  

But I don't want to become an industry in this country, precisely because of what I've seen in Switzerland.

I'm sorry but the law of unintended consequences will absolutely bitch-slap you in this case.

This is the UK, we will have to involve an army of 'public health professionals' and 'safeguarding' and still we'll end up executing otherwise perfectly healthy people suffering from depression.'

I did, several posts back.  It's nearly 2024, I couldn't possibly give practical advice other than say the internet is a thing. 

So what have you seen in Switzerland that we can perhaps learn from here?

I can't accept a solution that involves research on the internet. Its equivalent to back street abortion and none of us want that.

I see no reason why a properly regulated service would not work in the UK when it's working in half a dozen other places already. 

[udderlyoffroad]

37 minutes ago, oowee said:

So what have you seen in Switzerland that we can perhaps learn from here?

Get a functioning healthcare system first.  Do not shut it down during pandemics.  Do not allow all and sundry  who haven't paid in to use it.  Make it an insurance based system.  Discourage obesity with higher premiums to reflect the increased costs it represents.  Expect a level of personal responsibility from functional adults.  Accept the reality that nothing truly is 'free at the point of use.'  Require additional insurance for hair-brained activities like skiing.

Once you have the basics in place, you can start to think about curtailing end of life care should quality of life have deterioted.  But starting from where the NHS is now, it'll be used to reduce waiting lists.

40 minutes ago, oowee said:

I can't accept a solution that involves research on the internet. Its equivalent to back street abortion and none of us want that.

I'm suggesting that in the UK context, that is the lesser of 2 evils.  I suspect its happening much more than you realise, because it's by its very nature under-reported.

41 minutes ago, oowee said:

I see no reason why a properly regulated service would not work in the UK when it's working in half a dozen other places already. 

Where?  Where is it working?  The Canadians are about to sign off on death where it's economically beneficial.  The Dutch have had multiple investigations into mismanaged cases.

I'm not actually against euthanasia, but sure as hell don't want to give the next Matt Hancock and/or <insert Labour scumbag> any powers over it whatsoever.

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Get a functioning healthcare system first.  Do not shut it down during pandemics.  Do not allow all and sundry  who haven't paid in to use it.  Make it an insurance based system.  Discourage obesity with higher premiums to reflect the increased costs it represents.  Expect a level of personal responsibility from functional adults.  Accept the reality that nothing truly is 'free at the point of use.'  Require additional insurance for hair-brained activities like skiing.

Once you have the basics in place, you can start to think about curtailing end of life care should quality of life have deterioted.  But starting from where the NHS is now, it'll be used to reduce waiting lists.

I'm suggesting that in the UK context, that is the lesser of 2 evils.  I suspect its happening much more than you realise, because it's by its very nature under-reported.

Where?  Where is it working?  The Canadians are about to sign off on death where it's economically beneficial.  The Dutch have had multiple investigations into mismanaged cases.

I'm not actually against euthanasia, but sure as hell don't want to give the next Matt Hancock and/or <insert Labour scumbag> any powers over it whatsoever.

What you are suggesting / hinting at is not the same as others in this thread are advocating for. 
 

You are saying the Government / A Doctor having powers to order someone be put to death. 
 

Others in this thread (seem to be) suggesting that people who have life limiting / terminal illnesses, which they know will lead to them having severe pain and long prolonged deaths… BUT HAVE NO COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT … should be able to make a decision / an advanced decision, that at a certain point along that journey, they should be able to take a pill, injection, whatever, go to sleep without any pain, and not wake up again. 
 

People of sound mind with no cognitive impairment will not be ‘put to death to clear up waiting lists’ under a system of that type. 
 

I also imagine that significantly more people would object to your idea of privatising the NHS than to giving people of sound mind the right to end their lives when they see fit. 
 

 

It is significantly more complicated / controversial when considering people who are not of sound mind, have had some sort of brain injury etc etc. 

We already have some people left to go in this country; it’s all just very much not talked about, people left to sort of fade away. Lots of people could be kept alive but would just be in bed on life support not concisions for years and years. 

My cousins partner had a huge stroke at age 59 last week … after 3 days on the life support they considered his quality of life with the medical team, noted he was brain dead and withdrew treatment, he did last about 2 hours until he faded away. 

[yates]

On 19/12/2023 at 18:47, Scully said:

I was about to post this topic this afternoon, after seeing Esther Rantzens story on the lunchtime news. 
It’s time, way past time we allowed those who wish to die to have the freedom to do so without repercussions for family. 
I can give many examples of cases where this should be allowable if those involved wished for it. 
I’ll start with this one. My OH’s father is 74 and suffered a head injury many moons ago, and is on constant medication. He is very likely to be diagnosed with Parkinson’s also in the next few weeks. He is prone to falling, and although there are mechanisms in place to get him upright again ( he’s a big bloke ) medical staff who visit asked if him and his wife had considered a DNR instruction if the time ever comes when he has a heart attack.
Due to his brain injury it is more than likely a heart attack and the ensuing starvation of oxygen to the brain, would more than likely drastically impede his quality of life and would require 24 hour care. 
Although very unsteady on his feet, he is totally lucid ( although quite forgetful ) and fully agreed to the suggestion. There is now a yellow envelope on the fridge door, FAO first responders and other emergency staff. 
His choice. 

Spot on, works well and provides dignity for the person and their loved ones

[yates]

6 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

What you are suggesting / hinting at is not the same as others in this thread are advocating for. 
 

You are saying the Government / A Doctor having powers to order someone be put to death. 
 

Others in this thread (seem to be) suggesting that people who have life limiting / terminal illnesses, which they know will lead to them having severe pain and long prolonged deaths… BUT HAVE NO COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT … should be able to make a decision / an advanced decision, that at a certain point along that journey, they should be able to take a pill, injection, whatever, go to sleep without any pain, and not wake up again. 
 

People of sound mind with no cognitive impairment will not be ‘put to death to clear up waiting lists’ under a system of that type. 
 

I also imagine that significantly more people would object to your idea of privatising the NHS than to giving people of sound mind the right to end their lives when they see fit. 
 

 

It is significantly more complicated / controversial when considering people who are not of sound mind, have had some sort of brain injury etc etc. 

We already have some people left to go in this country; it’s all just very much not talked about, people left to sort of fade away. Lots of people could be kept alive but would just be in bed on life support not concisions for years and years. 

My cousins partner had a huge stroke at age 59 last week … after 3 days on the life support they considered his quality of life with the medical team, noted he was brain dead and withdrew treatment, he did last about 2 hours until he faded away. 

Many people now in their 40/50's are making living wills whilst in sound mind and body providing legal instructions on how they wish to treated or be allowed to die when they lose the ability to make choices in later lie due to cognitive impairment. This is called an 'advanced decision ' and legally is binding 

[Lloyd90]

2 hours ago, yates said:

Many people now in their 40/50's are making living wills whilst in sound mind and body providing legal instructions on how they wish to treated or be allowed to die when they lose the ability to make choices in later lie due to cognitive impairment. This is called an 'advanced decision ' and legally is binding 

I know what it is, but you can’t direct someone to let you die or take actions that would lead to your death. 
 

You also can’t make instructions that would cause the other person to break the law. 
 

Similarly with LPOA, you can’t make a decision on the basis that you think it’ll bring about the persons death (it’s clearly stated within the guidance of best interest decisions). It just gives you the power to be the decision maker but not to make any decision you want. 

[udderlyoffroad]

10 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

People of sound mind with no cognitive impairment will not be ‘put to death to clear up waiting lists’ under a system of that type. 

You keep believing that.  Somehow the 'system' will prevent this.  Everywhere else in the world it's been tried suggests the opposite.

Speaking of everywhere else in the world...

10 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

I also imagine that significantly more people would object to your idea of privatising the NHS than to giving people of sound mind the right to end their lives when they see fit. 

Literally nowhere else in the world does it like we do, and everywhere else in the developed world has better health outcomes for treatable illnesses than us, whilst costing about the same or less.

And don't say 'but muh America', the NHS and the US system are 2 sides of the same coin, no-one else has copied either system.

[oowee]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-esther-rantzen-victoria-atkins-mps-commons-b1128443.html

 

[Lloyd90]

They just need to stop it being ‘illegal’ to take your own life. 

It doesn’t need to be a service on the NHS. 

 

[udderlyoffroad]

2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

They just need to stop it being ‘illegal’ to take your own life. 

It doesn’t need to be a service on the NHS. 

 

Definitely with you on that one.

Also make signing off on suicide illegal if grounds presented pertain to economic or mental health factors.

[oowee]

2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

They just need to stop it being ‘illegal’ to take your own life. 

It doesn’t need to be a service on the NHS. 

 

Would it also require making it legal to assist someone? No help if its legal and you are immobile and bed ridden. There will also need to have access to means.