Zone1 Assisted dying bill passes in the Lords. Will soon become law

Oh well, that argument is easily disposed of and has been disposed of. If the individual was in sound mind, he or she would naturally accept euthanasia. Therefore we will assume the soundness of mind and kill the poor sot.
It hasnt been debunked. Its a complicated issue. Look at the case you highlighted. The lady requested euthanasia when she was well and in sound mind. She railed against it when she was suffering from dementia.
Which state of mind holds most sway ?
I tend to think the latter but if that is the case why bother making a will. And if you ignore that why not ignore the rest of it ?
Mainly I dont think that Doctors and Nurses should have to perform on relubtant people.
Its a complicated situation and doesnt need conspiracy theories.
 
It hasnt been debunked. Its a complicated issue. Look at the case you highlighted. The lady requested euthanasia when she was well and in sound mind. She railed against it when she was suffering from dementia.
Which state of mind holds most sway ?
I tend to think the latter but if that is the case why bother making a will. And if you ignore that why not ignore the rest of it ?
Mainly I dont think that Doctors and Nurses should have to perform on relubtant people.
Its a complicated situation and doesnt need conspiracy theories.
The state of mind that says DON'T KILL ME should control at all times.
 
I think you allow your paranoia to cloud your judgement.
In the past few weeks several expensive medecines have been invented including intelligent insulin.
And at the end of it you make a strong case against capital punishment.
Capital punishment punishes the guilty, assisted dying targets the innocent.
 
I can only speak for my experience. But I had an elderly family member in the hospital recently who was "begging" doctors to just let her die. The doctors concluded she could make her own decisions. But we fought it. Today that elderly family member has recovered enough and is enjoying life and now wants to live.
 
Everyone has their own boundaries.. When I was in hospital I saw a guy shittiiing in a pan and having nurses wipe his arse afterwards. I dont think I could cope with that.
This bill will be amended as different voices weigh in.
I dont think it will be a one size fits all.
Yes it is a deeply complicated issue with many different components to deal with. If that guy got well from whatever ailed him though, his temporary humiliation was well worth it and he no doubt would be quite grateful that he wasn't allowed to end his life due to temporary embarrassment.
 
I can only speak for my experience. But I had an elderly family member in the hospital recently who was "begging" doctors to just let her die. The doctors concluded she could make her own decisions. But we fought it. Today that elderly family member has recovered enough and is enjoying life and now wants to live.
Thats a good outcome.
 
I think it would be great for you, Tommy! I'm happy that your "Lords" are giving you this opportunity.

This looks just your size:


View attachment 985940

I hope you'll try it on soon.

Just kidding, I wish you good health.

I actually did watch a loved one die over the summer. She was in a skilled nursing facility. She was moved into hospice, which was not a physical move, but a change in status. She had been taken to the hospital twice in two weeks and it was hard on her.

Long story short, she was in a better mood once that happened than she had been for months. I am sure they were giving her medication to ease her pain. Like really ease it. I know there is a lot of fear in the medical community due to our out of control tort industry. So, I'm thinking she lucked out and got one with deeper pockets, not so afraid of a lawsuit.

Passing laws specifically allowing end of life medication like that and limiting liability for it would be a better option than encouraging the old to off themselves.
Its the loved ones who get hammered by the law right now. They arrest people coming back from Switzerland. They need time to grivve not punishment.
 
None of shipman victims were given the option.
They will have with assisted dying. Worst thing invented, after Wales of course.

It's sold on JUST the terminally ill group. Then along the line, a campaign group will manage to convince the government to bolt on the paraplegic group. And as each year passes, and as each campaign group succeeds in bolting on their needs, eventually you'll be allowed to end your life because your shoelace snapped.

As I've said, it's the trickle effect. When it becomes law, that's the start of the ball rolling to the shoelace.
 
Its the loved ones who get hammered by the law right now. They arrest people coming back from Switzerland. They need time to grieve not punishment.
Here's the story for the full facts, just to quell any disinformation -


What was the relationship between the two in the link for her to grieve over?

If the law prohibits assisting someone to commit suicide, do you think that should be scrapped?
 
They will have with assisted dying. Worst thing invented, after Wales of course.

It's sold on JUST the terminally ill group. Then along the line, a campaign group will manage to convince the government to bolt on the paraplegic group. And as each year passes, and as each campaign group succeeds in bolting on their needs, eventually you'll be allowed to end your life because your shoelace snapped.

As I've said, it's the trickle effect. When it becomes law, that's the start of the ball rolling to the shoelace.
You push your opinion as fact. I dont think that is the case. I do think that the act will likely be amended as we progress. They always are.
 
15th post
You push your opinion as fact. I dont think that is the case. I do think that the act will likely be amended as we progress. They always are.
But history has shown that it trickles on and on. As I've already said, governments removed homosexuality off the DSM list. Fair enough? Yes? Sorted? But they're not happy. Marriage is hijacked and you get prosecuted for not baking them a cake. From the DSM list to the cake, there has been umpteen steps. It's not opinion, it's fact. Just watch, I bet you £1m it'll trickle.
 
But history has shown that it trickles on and on. As I've already said, governments removed homosexuality off the DSM list. Fair enough? Yes? Sorted? But they're not happy. Marriage is hijacked and you get prosecuted for not baking them a cake. From the DSM list to the cake, there has been umpteen steps. It's not opinion, it's fact. Just watch, I bet you £1m it'll trickle.
But the original law was lacking and didnt go far enough. I cant see it as a similar situation.
 
But the original law was lacking and didnt go far enough. I cant see it as a similar situation.
So change it. Then after the next campaign, change it again. Then after that campaign after the previous campaign, change it yet again. Then repeat, and repeat, and repeat, just like with homosexuality.

The trickle effect in action!!
 
But I dont see evidence of that.. The odds and ends thrown up will help put guard rails into the british bill.
I've never seen evidence that if ten year old's were allowed to drive, and the drinking age were lowered to that, then ten year olds would have a disproportionate number of car accidents. But, I can easily predict that they would.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom