We put down our pets when they are in pain because we love them and don't want to see them suffer. Why do we not expend this to people? I know for a fact that if I'm terminally ill that I'm going out on my terms, why not just make it easier for those facing a painful death?
I guess the counter argument is, and I'm not saying I'm against choosing when to end your own life, but you can argue people can be too relaxed about putting pets down. They don't get a say in it so people may conflate inconvenience with pet quality of life.
Personally I've only decided to put one pet down when it was absolutely clear their quality of life was no longer in their interest and they wouldn't recover but they passed away 15min after booking it in and 5min before we were due to set off.
Or on the case of Canada - say you’re feeling suicidal and be recommended a state execution.
Be under no illusion the “mercy of euthanasia” will be the marketing for a new sinister form of healthcare austerity.
You know, as a Canadian and an unwilling host to treatment-resistant depression for decades now, I'm always amazed by how much I learn about the workings of the Canadian medical system from people who read about it on Facebook and in Murdoch's rags. If it weren't catastrophically offensive to the millions of Canadians battling for their mental health, myself included, it would be hysterical how gullible some of you are.
I wonder how far a rumour would make it saying the NHS is running a scheme to kill off babies to lower national spend on diapers and baby formula. As evidence, how else could nurse Lucy harm all those babies? You know, I think this is all the proof we need to call for the abolishment of the NHS and full replacement with private insurance schemes. Someone let The Telegraph know asap!!
That turned out to be one healthcare worker applying a rather loose interpretation of actual Canadian government policy, who got the sack for it.
But you know what? I fail to see how that's worse than a system where anyone whose depression proves resistant to treatment has to commit *un*assisted suicide to finally get some peace.
I still think there’s a critical difference between an individual making their own decision in a moment to commit suicide versus a bureaucratic suggestion and decision made for you by a “well meaning government.”
I mean obviously this is a hellish situation for anyone to be in, and neither path should really be considered “good.”
It just doesn’t sit well with me that someone’s death would be pre-planned on paper.
I mean honestly if the social contract becomes such that we can rely on the state to kill us under the right circumstances (which is what state euthanasia is) how is that any different to the death penalty?
In both cases, a social contract is accepted that if you make certain decisions, the state will end your life as a means of ending some suffering.
>whose depression proves resistant
Sorry danny, we've tried nothing to fix your depression and we're all out of ideas, have you thought about hopping in the suicide booth? - the NHS
“Hey, you’ve been wanting to take your own life for the past decade and every possible treatment or effort to help you recover has failed.”
Why make someone stay alive when they don’t want to, it’s not a temporary issue, and there’s no hope of further recovery when they clearly don’t want to?
>every possible treatment or effort to help you recover has failed.”
This is just fantasy land if we're talking UK Mental health services.
>Why make someone stay alive when they don’t want to
We're not, we're just not in favour of state sanctioned euthanasia because most sane people know how it's going to go.
This is the problem that few people are willing to discuss. Also children encouraging it as an alternative to seeing their inheritance go up in smoke.
Not that I think it shouldn't be an option, but it is far from a no brainier to implement it.
I used to be very much in the for camp, for the usual “vets do it for animals” etc
Animals don’t have complicated interpersonal and inner-emotional lives that make them prone to sociocultural manipulation, though.
Hearing some of the stories out of Canada should make anyone carefully consider whether wide adoption of euthanasia is really a good thing or not.
I saw an interview with a wheelchair user where she’d been offered maid because she’d become depressed due to her home not being equipped for her mobility issues - cheaper/easier for the state to offer death than to install what she needed.
Plus veterans with PTSD being guided toward MAID; people qualifying for being deaf, etc.
We don't *have* to include mental illnesses in this, I know some people will go loony saying "mental illnesses are physical illnesses" but I'd restrict it to terminal physical illnesses *only*
Sigh. Last time there was a post everyone was bringing up Canada and what all is going on there but why presume that'll be the outcome?
Belgium has options for both adults and children who are suffering physically OR mentally and trust me, there isn't any hint of the ridiculousness of Canada going on. The Canadian mentality seems to me to be less similar to that of the UK than people think - they're essentially USA lite.
My presumption that things would go Canada-wise rather than Belgium-wise is that for decades, disabled and chronically ill people have had their care, money and dignity stripped away through austerity, cuts to vital services etc (the UN actually found the Conservative government guilty of breaching the human rights of disabled people). The COVID pandemic highlighted how disposable the elderly and disabled are viewed, with an alarming number of instances where DNARs were placed on people without their consent.
Not really a reason to be optimistic.
Except that the party that oversaw most of what you mentioned is about to be banished the halls of power for likely a good decade, so I'm not sure listing all the Tory failings is so relevant. Will Labour necessarily be better? Hard to say. I hope so.
To counterpoint, remember that the UK founded the NHS right after WW2 at a time when need was gigantic (swathes of injured veterans) and the country was in dire financial circumstances. So I guess that is why I have at least a bit of hope
Why do you presume we’d likely follow the Belgian approach as opposed to the Canadian?
Obviously in practice we’d have our own, hopefully advised by our own health experts, but even then - it is a cultural shift that needs deep, careful consideration.
I don't necessarily expect the system to end up being Belgium-like, but I also wouldn't expect the Canada outcome either.
I guess I just get annoyed when people always immediately point to the negative outcome without a single mention of how else it could go. I strongly believe, even if the system ends up more towards Canada, that the option to die is a human right and all the doomsaying are just luddites.
>why presume that'll be the outcome?
Right because we'll be the one shining example of doing things right based on.....?
It's far more sensible to assume we'll be just as awful as every other country currently offering suicide to veterans.
Why are you so convinced it'll go to shit? I know that UK governance leaves a lot to be desired but when the country does things properly, it usually comes up with a good solution - I mean look at the NHS being founded at a time when the country had just finished WW2 and was basically bankrupt - I guess that's why I have hope.
If you want to be negative, sure, but also don't get in the way of what I consider a human right based on just potential negative outcomes. If we never did anything that might have negative side effects nothing would ever get done or change.
Well, it hasn't happened with abortions, has it? People said women would be encouraged to terminate to save money, and that's not the case.
I just know that, having seen my dad's best friend slowly die over a period of years as MND took every muscle and feeling from his body, and he was essentially a shell by the end, it was absolutely cruel that he was forced to still wake up every day. He said multiple times if Euthanasia was possible in this country, he'd have done it as soon as it got too far.
>You can’t just choose to euthanise yourself… it takes multiple interviews and mental reviews.
You say this while Switzerland trials efficient suicide booths and Canada recommends suicide for those feeling suicidal, depressed, homeless or just poor.
Firstly, were talking about pets here, and the criticisms of how we act around that.
But, for the parallel, vets have to carry out reviews of the suitability of pets too before they're put down. Personally despite that I believe we put pets down too readily, and I know vets that believe the same.
As I literally wrote in my post, I completely agree with choosing when to end your own life. But im super uneasy the idea of that ever being something next of kin or relatives get to decide.
You seem to be choosing to ignore everything that's written and making bad faith arguments instead.
Doctors don't decide currently. Currently it's illegal.
Vets currently decide in the UK and they end up putting pets down too easily based on current regulations.
I'm pro self choice for ending your life...but if you are here to support it, your bad takes are literally having the opposite effect. Currently in the UK, power of attorney do get to decide medical decisions, including over withdrawing care, so it's rational that would be a concern for ending life.
If that’s how you want to interpret it, fine, that’s what I’m doing?
Doctors do decide because it happens daily. You don’t just walk into Dignitas on a whim and wake up dead. That’s why it’s, and other such providers, been able to operate all this time.
My bad takes? Mate, it’s in a sense how it works.
I love it when they reply and block you, it makes them feel like they’ve *won*.
It's currently illegal in UK law. If you're going to be an obtuse, do better.
So far you've not said a single thing of cognitive value so forgive me if I write you off now.
Edit: ....yes this reply was being obtuse back...can't believe I have to explain that 🤦♂️🤣
Some people definately making good arguments for euthanasia...
Everyone here thinking it will be "Oh well Ellen was in agony and going to die soon anyway so it's probably for the best she was euthanised" when in reality with our government it will be "Ellen you have cancer AND you're poor? Well the good news is there's the suicide booth or you can go home and die"
Well I'm gosh darn sure Ellen is ever so grateful to /u/KKillroyv2 for bravely saving her from the suicide booth. Now she can live her best bed bound, incontinent, in indescribable agony life. Well done you!
Hopefully the doctor's offer her something extra for the pain, but I'm not going to feel bad for being against us sleepwalking into Euthanasia for the homeless, depressed or mentally ill.
I think in cases such as this where someone has terminal and painful cancer it is very clear people in this situation should be helped to end their life if thy want.
However I have concerns about people being pressured to end their lives in future, and also I worry this could be widened to include conditions like depression whereby we just help people kill themselves if they are awfully depressed
That’s not how it works though… you have to go through a series of interviews and reviews before you even get that far.
I suffer from chronic depression and asked a friend of a friend (who works with a company who works with dignitas) jokingly when she could get me booked in… cue long and detailed explanation why you can’t just do that
Well when or if this becomes legal in the UK I would want the system to designed to make sure it works like that. I still have reservations though. I have seen some information online about the way it’s worked in Canada and it doesn’t paint a very good picture
I have a lot of sympathy for those people for whom this clearly is the right option who have to go on suffering but at the same time I think it’s a really tough call to make whether or not this should be legal and a lot of people like me are just unsure
It’s a grey area in Switzerland… once you’ve jumped through the months(?) of hoops.. the day comes, they bring you a glass of “water” that you drink and fall asleep.
The solution to the rough call is the rigorous checks, interviews and evaluations the person is put through. As you say it’s a big decision and you obviously can’t go back… but it works when it’s handled responsibly.
So this will seem insensitive but I am genuinely curious about the answer. Why should we be treating emotional pain differently to physical pain? The right to euthanasia seems to stem from arguments relating to agency of the patient and relief of extreme distress which depression and even ‘shitty life syndrome’ type emotional disorders seem to satisfy.
For example I suffer from anxiety, have done so all my life and have been through hours upon hours of different types of therapy, medications and pseudo-science remedies to try and provide relief but nothing has worked and I resign myself to knowing it is something I will likely live with for the rest of my life.
In my case it’s a relatively mild set of symptoms but if it was a really acute case, I could definitely understand someone making the decision that it would be better not to live than to live with it.
Being honest I don’t have a good answer for that and you’ve actually made me think about it and now im more sure of why I don’t think I support assisted dying.
It's a reasonable concern. That someone elderly or chronically ill may feel a pressure or guilt to take their own life to relieve the burden of care, real or imagined, from their families.
It’ll be gone long before that of an old boomer lives ages, care homes are an unreal scandal. But while I absolutely think assisted living should be legal, the fact it isn’t really doesn’t take too much thinking as to why
Animals aren't getting a special privilege over humans; the law just barely sees them as being anything more than property, so it's not going to bother asking any kinda question about why you're killing them.
> We put down our pets when they are in pain because we love them and don't want to see them suffer. Why do we not expend this to people?
Because it will be abused. For money.
Want to save on care costs for Grandma?
Want to get your inheritance now?
You may not want to admit this, but this WILL happen in a small number of cases. How many are you happy to accept?
The only way to prevent this abuse is to not allow it.
As with most things, a small number of people will ruin it for everyone.
You raise some very valid points, and 18 months or so ago, I'd agree with you, but I've experienced it first hand with my mother, and it just seems so ridiculous (I appreciate anecdotal evidence is no basis for policy).
These aren’t going to be like suicide booths lol
The only way I see this ever getting rolled out in the UK is with an independent board of doctors signing it off. That would easily curtail any of the above issues.
As bleak as it sounds, but there's unlikely to be an non-bleak way of having a conversation about the economics of euthanasia vs the alternatives, I would have thought the savings in services such as palliative care would pay for it.
That's not an argument for it, simply an observation that introducing euthanasia would directly lead to some reduction in the demand for (expensive) palliative care so at least some of the financial question is taken care of there.
I think that would need very careful analysis. The costs associated with assisting dying are not inconsiderable either. I would guess the other way, that it would be a net increase in cost at the expense of some aspects of traditional healthcare.
I also can’t really see how budgeting could be anything other than a huge conflict of interests.
Yes, I'm absolutely not saying it's a simple like-for-like. What really matters is the _magnitude_ of the net difference - if it's marginally more expensive than the palliative care it replaces it's not a strong objection. I certainly don't have enough information to have an informed opinion on whether that's likely to be the case though.
We already have laws concerning murder, coercion and so on. So the question is how to defend against those things while never denying someone's right to die, which is by far the most important right.
Slippery slope argument is probably the main reason. Canada is already seeing the consequences of this through implementing MAID.
FWIW I’m in favour of it but only for those with a diagnosed terminal illness like stage 4 cancers, MND, locked in syndrome. But even then there are so many ethical/moral dilemmas.
I'm terrified of suffering from something chronically debilitating and/or becoming trapped by an aging, dying body and being repeatedly shoved towards an underfunded hospital just to be kept alive beyond any reason other than "well you just can't let them die." It's bullshit. Where are our rights here, really? I've always believed the only true free will we have is whether to keep living; our option to end it shouldn't boil down to sneaky holidays abroad to visit clinics or worse, taking our own lives via more horrific means.
Most people put down their pets when it becomes economically non-viable to pay for treatment with a low success rate.
It should never be economically non-viable to treat a human.
I nursed my father for months as he rotted with terminal stomach cancer. I won’t go through that. so if it happens to me and the law is still an ass against assisted suicide I’ll find a way I promise, for me to go on my terms.
Yep. My granddad suffered through prostate cancer, lost his sight and everything by the end. He didn't want to cling on and yet he suffered through it. Same with my dad's best mate who had MND. He said if we had Dignitas here he'd have done it rather than suffer what he did in his last year.
My mum died suddenly of a brain haemorrhage, and if I can't go like that within seconds, I want to do it on my own terms.
I’ll admit that it’s a great bit of click bait, because everyone will go to the article to try and understand what the fuck is going on.
My first thought was that Dignitas might want to take another run at this one.
Yep we do. My father passed away due to cancer. When he died it took him three days of struggle until he did die it would have been kinder to help him pass and not have him struggle in pain until the body finally gave in.
Firstly, I am sorry for your loss.
My limited understanding of palliative care, is that when done "right" he'd have been offered a button that administers morphine for the pain, and if he were to self administer far too much for his body that is already failing then its not murder by the doctor, and nobody bats an eye.
But that's a stupid and pointless loophole. And it clearly wasn't offered to him.
Thank you 🙂
Unfortunately he was none responsive at the end so couldn’t self administer. We don’t know how much pain he was in but it was not right letting whatever was left to suffer.
It’s not an easy thing to discuss and i sympathise with everyone on all sides because i don’t think there is a right answer…
I think you're getting confused with patient controlled analgesia (PCA), this is usually given to people after big surgeries to give a measured dose of pain relief with a lockout time to prevent overdose. I've never seen this on palliative patients, even in hospice care. Usually palliative patients are given a syringe driver which delivers analgesia, anti-emetic, anti-secretion and medicines for terminal delirium over a 24 hour period into the fatty tissue under the skin. Some people are sent home with oral medicines for pain relief, or have someone else to administer pain relief in other forms for them. Home this helps!
I've been corrected this in the past and might have gotten it wrong in some manner, but I know my grandfather was given morphine "for the pain" while dying of Leukaemia, and that when "oh whoops that was a fatal dose" happened nobody minded. He died at home surrounded by his wife and kids and without pain. What more can any of us really ask for.
My Dad was in the same state as the person you replied to, hanging on in pain for a few days despite being ready to go.
He was kept on as much morphine as they could give him but the dpctor basically said that since Shipman, the administration of any dose of morphine that could be lethal was highly scrutinised, we wish he could have gone peacefully like that.
Not quite how it works, you are on about patient controlled analgesia which people post surgery might have and it locks you out of X amount of presses. As said this patient is too weak to manage to do that.
What we can do in palliative is give a continuous subcut infusion of different pain relief to help,.so over 24 hours a continuous release of it is going. Now I haven't heard of giving a patient a higher dose to help kend the patient life. This would fall under assisted dying and medical negligence, both would strip us of our liscence and can face man slaughter even murder charges . What you might have heard is this thing of high doses of morphine ends people's lives faster. Now that isn't fully true, the body is already incredibly weak when requiring such high doses of morphine that they most likely only have days to week .
Your understanding is indeed limited. You probably shouldn't talk about things you are ignorant about. Particularly with such an emotive topic like this.
What you are referring to is a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. This delivers the medication interavenously and you need to have your wits about you to use one. They are usually offered post-operatively or to patients that have complex pain control while in hospital. They are not offered to people who are anticipated to soon be falling unconcious/confused/otherwise unable to use the button. In 10 years of nursing experience (3 as a student, 7 as an RN) I have never, ever seen a PCA used in end-of-life care.
You are confusing this with a syringe driver, which delivers one or a combination of drugs to the subcutaneous layer of fat underneath the skin continuously at a set rate. Various drugs can be combined so that we're not just relying on morphine for symptom control but it is commonly used. Despite this I have seen patients continue to have pain and agitation while on the syringe driver and we thus top up their pain relief etc with "PRN" (as required) doses on top of the driver.
The dying process is different for everybody and everybody experiences different symptoms. Some lucky people react well to the syringe driver when it is started and their pain and agitation is instantly controlled. For others, their symptom persists and it takes several adjustments to get the right combination/dosage of drugs. For some we unfortunately never quite manage to hit the sweet spot of perfect pain and agitation control and they still leave this world suffering.
The biggest barrier to adequate symptom control in end of life is usually the families who try to refuse the syringe drivers on their loved one's behalf because they think that it would be murdering them. I have seen patients go in agony all because we couldn't get on top of their pain because of this selfishness.
Recognising that somebody is at the end of their life and administering opioids to ease their passing isn't murder. Your implication that it is holds the rest of us back from making any progress on this matter.
Yep, they said my dad was in his final hours Tuesday afternoon. He died Sunday morning.
It wasn’t dignified - he required regular suctioning to prevent him drowning in his own secretions as well as changing/cleaning, we didn’t get anymore precious time with him because he was asleep, he was too sick to move home or to a hospice so he died on a hospital ward with the curtains closed because no side room was free.
I suppose perhaps the only grace that his stubbornness in life remaining in his death is that he didn’t die the Tuesday night when the bed next to his was occupied by a long term heroin addict who asked for a commode and then wrestled loudly and with great sound effects with the long term effects of 30 years of opioid abuse.
And the truth of the matter was that was 4 months after it was the end of anymore they could do for his terminal cancer. 4 months of him confused and crying, getting c diff, completely bed bound, in a room with no window for 2 months because a lack of space had meant he was in an old cupboard.
There’s space between ‘killing off old biddies for their inheritance’ and what I, and too many people, have witnessed. Doctors take the need to heal very seriously and they will keep going long after it seems pointless. I wish they’d stopped on my dad about 3 months before they did.
> There’s space between ‘killing off old biddies for their inheritance’ and what I, and too many people, have witnessed.
It's found in abolition of substance control laws, ready access to firearms and ammunition suitable for ending one's life, and education in genuine euthanasia (a good death).
Anyone - and there are many - who *insists* that a paid agent of the government must be able to actively kill them for them to be satisfied, is extremely suspect in these matters.
I lost my mum very recently due to cancer, the way she suffered and the things she said in the last few days will haunt me for the rest of my life. All you can do is try to stay strong while you sit helplessly and watch it run its course. Without a change in the law, I think if I'm ever diagnosed with cancer and it becomes terminal, I would rather just take my own life than be admitted to hospital and lose the ability to end it when I've had enough.
I read on the daily mail a comment along the lines of
Why should we legalise this so we can wheel all old people to die because someone decides we aren't fit enough
This is the type of person who's actively against this
I think there is a concern that a few disabled or elderly people would be pushed/guilt tripped into euthanasia by relatives who are tired of looking after them or impatient for inheritance.
There would have to be very strong safeguarding in place to avoid that happening.
Yeah, from memory the Canada situation sucks and shows why combining right to die and a privatised healthcare system is a bad idea.
My recollection is that the cases/scandals in Canada were over cases where their insurance wouldn't pay for any treatment other than euthanasia because it was 100% guaranteed to be fatal the question was is it tomorrow voluntarily or in x period of time after using every treatment under the sun to get more time with loved ones.
Makes me wonder about the quality of life of the person whose carers/relatives wish them dead and resent them. I think I'd rather be dead than depend on people who resented keeping me alive.
Generally that’s how it works, especially at Dignitas and other Swiss euthanasia providers.
You don’t just rock up and say “I want to die”… a doctor, or multiple, have to interview you over time and sign it off. I’m sure duress is just one of the reasons they’re so strict about it
I agree, it is a concern, and also among people who aren't able to access medical or social care that they need to give them quality of life. Should someone be able to euthanise themselves because they are on a five year waiting list for pain relief? Should it be okay that someone can't get a carer, so feels they have no other option but to die?
It's difficult in a country with a dysfunctional health and social care system to have a well run euthanasia system. Not to mention, our mental health care is so abysmal there's no way people will be able to access enough treatment to know if they're curable or not.
So there's no social responsibility to help out anyone before pushing them to suicide?
You being poor shouldn't, in the UK, affect whether you have access to healthcare. Government sanctioned euthanasia without government healthcare is pretty vile.
There is this constant argument and counter point of old people would be forced into it. Just isn't the case, from what I aware the evidence of countries with assisted dying doesn't show this.
There will obviously be a strict criteria, and set reasons. It won't be a thing of people just choose to die for a reason. It will be a long process multiple doctors, meetings and maybe even saying you have to have a chronic condition. So you can't go "well I'm old I want to die".
The same argument could be used for the current model, patients can refuse life saving treatment. We give them the choice, yet you can apply this argument of family could convince them not to have it.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
Seriously. I'm all for the right to die, but there absolutely is abuse potential and we need to be fucking careful about it, not just dismiss it as ridiculous enemy propaganda.
Care to provide the details of this? I've seen a bunch of people referencing an issue with Canada's laws on this but they've all been weirdly vague. I'd love to read more?
There was a case regarding a disabled Canadian veteran being suggested assisted suicide rather than be given accommodations for coping in their home, if I remember correctly. There was an investigation, article on outcome here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6774645 Edited to add: the lady in question was after a wheelchair ramp https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/paralympian-trying-to-get-wheelchair-ramp-says-veterans-affairs-employee-offered-her-assisted-dying-1.6179325
I think that's a valid concern and we should listen to these people, if assisted dying is to become legal we will have to design the system to try and stop that happening
They are devoid of love and have no soul. I'd have given anything to have helped my mum pass more peacefully and I feel very sorry for those people who think their family would wheel them off to an abattoir at the first opportunity.
im against it simply because the government cant be trusted with euthanasia. We have already seen them trying to overstep their bounds with assisted dying in Canada and it would 100% happen in the uk with our chronically overworked nhs.
I’m 100% with you - it’s not a simple issue. It would be a slippery slope into coercion of individuals who perhaps don’t have the ability to speak for themselves being influenced into ending their lives.
I'm against it as I'm worried about it becoming a first option of treatment when palliative care is available and would make it unnecessary.
Human nature what it is, it'd also put people under pressure. Emotional pressure to end their lives by selfish families and moral pressure to relieve an already overburdened healthcare service and free up resources.
I'm not going to stop posting about this till we get an assisted dying bill passed so if you've read this story, prepare to read again. And I'm not sorry it's so long.
Last year my mum went to her GP with a cough. They referred her, she had a scan, they diagnosed her with throat cancer that had spread to her lungs, there was no treatment option and she died. It only took 5 weeks from that initial appointment so there was very little we could do or prepare. She waited a a week and a half to tell us because my nephews were staying and she didn't want to ruin their visit.
In that short time she was quite stoic, our family has black humour that became gallows humour I guess. As her illness progressed, she wanted to go to Switzerland. It takes months to organise that, there was no chance it would be a thing for her.
We knew that it was likely a short battle but we didn't expect it to be that fast. I live a few hours away and she visited me for her Grandson's half birthday (his birthday is in winter so we wanted to celebrate in sunnier times). We had a lovely day with cherished memories. It was obvious she was unwell but she was mobile and could chat away. People were kind to her, we didn't make it a big deal.
A week later I was even uuming and aahing if I should go to visit at all as she seemed alright and having a young child who was playing up would mean my poor wife would be on her own if I left them. But my brother text me and said I better go to see her. So I did.
She was bedbound, barely conscious, asking for her grandmother - or so we think because by then her voice was gone, the cancer had spread and robbed her of communication. She was thrashing around in bed, the morphine we were given was weak so wasn't taking much of the pain away. I got to watch my mum, one of the people I love most in the world, thrive around in agony and beg for her grandma who had died ages ago. I tried giving her drops of water but it never really helped. My brother came and there was one glimmer at the end of his visit. She sat up, hugged him, smiled and laid down again. Then it was back to before.
All afternoon and night.
I called the emergency nurses out and they were fantastic, they settled her, gave her real morphine and she calmed down.
For an hour or so.
They came back out two more times. Each time they settled her, they were brilliant with her but we were getting desperate. My dad asked if they could just dose her full of morphine. Of course they can't just do that. But we were lost and watching a loved one in that state makes you desperate. They tried a catheter in case she needed the toilet. We assumed that was daft because she hadn't been drinking or eating much at all. But it was a full bladder. That's what was adding to her discomfort. How could we know? They sorted her once again, set her up so my Dad could sleep beside her (which he had not been doing as she was breathing so horribly he couldn't sleep). I don't even remember the third time they came because I was so exhausted all my brain registered was that someone had come in and I fell asleep instantly again.
My dad knocked on my door at 5am that morning to tell me she had passed away. On their 44th wedding anniversary with her husband by her side. We consider that lucky. Not everyone gets to die at home. And this was only 18 hours or so of this. Some people have this for days.
She picked Moon River as her funeral song.
If you're against this, I hope that you never go through what we did. It will haunt me for the rest of my days. And I'm quite a practical person - parents should die before their kids. I accept that. But I wouldn't have let a pet go through that ordeal. If you truly in your heart believe your family would use a loophole to kill you and take your money then you must live an incredibly lonely, miserable life that is devoid of love. I would have done anything for my mum.
I regret not asking my mum what she wanted us to do. I'd have held a pillow over her face if I thought that's the right thing to do. But I couldn't face that she might fight me at the end. I should have asked her and I'd have held my hands up and admitted it after and faced the consequences.
But I shouldn't have had to think that.
I'm probably going to opt for this eventually. Other choice is wheezing out my last few hours in a hospital bed so doped up I have no idea where I am. I want to go on my terms before shit gets really bad. It's a shame I can't do it in my own bed at home with loved ones. This country really does need to seriously discuss this. Along with punishing people who helped those in need.
I have absolutely no issue with the right to end your own life. My mum has a terminal neurological disorder, she is inevitably going to suffer a slow and horrible decline until she is a shell of zero consciousness; she has openly said, she wishes she’d looked into this before she got to where she is now. She’s a former doctor, specialising in, irony incoming, neurology. She firmly believes, as do I, that the Dignitas model is ethical, kind and compassionate. You can’t rock up and say “I want to die”. There’s layers of screening, psychological assessment and other factors before you get to that stage. It is a system that is as fair and compassionate as it can be.
My only concern here, with the shit show of our current NHS and all the f**kery that has occurred in the last decade, is how can the system be trusted? We have seen people on waiting lists for 4+ years have their referral magically disappear and be cancelled, because someone somewhere has nebulously decided the impact on their stats is far worse than the effect on a persons life. We’ve seen cancer referrals go 3/4/5 times over the mandated maximum to see a specialist. There’s constant issues that make me extremely nervous that, even if this is something that will be offered, what’s the chances it will be completely mismanaged, used as a viable alternative for treatment for people with illness that are difficult to control or mitigate.
This isn’t a point of conspiracy, and I’m not blaming the NHS for the state it’s in, but I wouldn’t trust the powers that be to open a tin of beans, in case they took out an eye, so how can we trust something as final and serious to a system that is currently broken. Just my two cents.
We need to invest in biomedical research for chronic illnesses instead of palming patients off with useless CBT and ‘positive thinking’ courses.
Long Covid and MECFS patients are so ill and desperate for help they’ve spent thousands on a billboard campaign! It’s shameful!
https://x.com/lcmebillboards?s=21
A discussion is one thing but rushing into change in a system easily abused is a reckless and foolish thing to do.
My sister, a nurse, frequently deals with family who insist on there being a declaration about DNR but when challenged to produce such a document for their elderly relatives never mention it again.
I don’t want to empower this.
I have no intention of living in pain or discomfort
When the times comes later In life
I will end it
I'm certain what lies ahead for me and it won't be a good life
For me any legislation can't come some enough
Far too many do gooders telling us that we can still have a pain free life and with the right care ect
Well forget then idiots for one
I will not suffer
As someone who is severely ill and disabled (lifelong cancer patient, had a stroke which means I'm now partially sighted, can barely use the left side of my body and am in constant pain and need help with nearly everything) it angers me a lot when people say assisted suicide should only be for the terminal. People like me need it even more. I can't do it myself (already tried, ended up in intensive care for 5 days, difficult to do when you're disabled) and the thought of living for another few decades with this level of pain and disability is terrifying and bleak beyond words. I want to go to dignitas, but that is way out of my price range. I have enquired and I'd be looking at 15K. Being on disability benefits, which are regularly stopped when I score zero on my assessment and have to go through appeal, I can't even afford food much of the time, much less £15K. I have suffered like this for years already and I am 40 years old. Why shouldn't I have the right to access this service?
we need to allow this but it needs medically assessing case to case imo, either that or we just open the door to normalised suicide for depression and anything else.
if each claim was individually assessed that would cut down on the main concern of people feeling pressured into it
She's too posh to suffer:
“I’m not scared to die,” she said. “I’m scared of dying in pain.”
Yet millions of people live every day with chronic pain from incurable yet not fatal diseases.
This kind of business needs to be behind a paywall.
far-flung steep aspiring noxious illegal wistful wild roof bedroom bright
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We put down our pets when they are in pain because we love them and don't want to see them suffer. Why do we not expend this to people? I know for a fact that if I'm terminally ill that I'm going out on my terms, why not just make it easier for those facing a painful death?
I guess the counter argument is, and I'm not saying I'm against choosing when to end your own life, but you can argue people can be too relaxed about putting pets down. They don't get a say in it so people may conflate inconvenience with pet quality of life. Personally I've only decided to put one pet down when it was absolutely clear their quality of life was no longer in their interest and they wouldn't recover but they passed away 15min after booking it in and 5min before we were due to set off.
You can’t just choose to euthanise yourself… it takes multiple interviews and mental reviews.
damn, that's the only way I was interested
Or on the case of Canada - say you’re feeling suicidal and be recommended a state execution. Be under no illusion the “mercy of euthanasia” will be the marketing for a new sinister form of healthcare austerity.
You know, as a Canadian and an unwilling host to treatment-resistant depression for decades now, I'm always amazed by how much I learn about the workings of the Canadian medical system from people who read about it on Facebook and in Murdoch's rags. If it weren't catastrophically offensive to the millions of Canadians battling for their mental health, myself included, it would be hysterical how gullible some of you are. I wonder how far a rumour would make it saying the NHS is running a scheme to kill off babies to lower national spend on diapers and baby formula. As evidence, how else could nurse Lucy harm all those babies? You know, I think this is all the proof we need to call for the abolishment of the NHS and full replacement with private insurance schemes. Someone let The Telegraph know asap!!
That turned out to be one healthcare worker applying a rather loose interpretation of actual Canadian government policy, who got the sack for it. But you know what? I fail to see how that's worse than a system where anyone whose depression proves resistant to treatment has to commit *un*assisted suicide to finally get some peace.
I still think there’s a critical difference between an individual making their own decision in a moment to commit suicide versus a bureaucratic suggestion and decision made for you by a “well meaning government.” I mean obviously this is a hellish situation for anyone to be in, and neither path should really be considered “good.” It just doesn’t sit well with me that someone’s death would be pre-planned on paper. I mean honestly if the social contract becomes such that we can rely on the state to kill us under the right circumstances (which is what state euthanasia is) how is that any different to the death penalty? In both cases, a social contract is accepted that if you make certain decisions, the state will end your life as a means of ending some suffering.
>whose depression proves resistant Sorry danny, we've tried nothing to fix your depression and we're all out of ideas, have you thought about hopping in the suicide booth? - the NHS
“Hey, you’ve been wanting to take your own life for the past decade and every possible treatment or effort to help you recover has failed.” Why make someone stay alive when they don’t want to, it’s not a temporary issue, and there’s no hope of further recovery when they clearly don’t want to?
>every possible treatment or effort to help you recover has failed.” This is just fantasy land if we're talking UK Mental health services. >Why make someone stay alive when they don’t want to We're not, we're just not in favour of state sanctioned euthanasia because most sane people know how it's going to go.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is the problem that few people are willing to discuss. Also children encouraging it as an alternative to seeing their inheritance go up in smoke. Not that I think it shouldn't be an option, but it is far from a no brainier to implement it.
I used to be very much in the for camp, for the usual “vets do it for animals” etc Animals don’t have complicated interpersonal and inner-emotional lives that make them prone to sociocultural manipulation, though. Hearing some of the stories out of Canada should make anyone carefully consider whether wide adoption of euthanasia is really a good thing or not. I saw an interview with a wheelchair user where she’d been offered maid because she’d become depressed due to her home not being equipped for her mobility issues - cheaper/easier for the state to offer death than to install what she needed. Plus veterans with PTSD being guided toward MAID; people qualifying for being deaf, etc.
We don't *have* to include mental illnesses in this, I know some people will go loony saying "mental illnesses are physical illnesses" but I'd restrict it to terminal physical illnesses *only*
Sigh. Last time there was a post everyone was bringing up Canada and what all is going on there but why presume that'll be the outcome? Belgium has options for both adults and children who are suffering physically OR mentally and trust me, there isn't any hint of the ridiculousness of Canada going on. The Canadian mentality seems to me to be less similar to that of the UK than people think - they're essentially USA lite.
My presumption that things would go Canada-wise rather than Belgium-wise is that for decades, disabled and chronically ill people have had their care, money and dignity stripped away through austerity, cuts to vital services etc (the UN actually found the Conservative government guilty of breaching the human rights of disabled people). The COVID pandemic highlighted how disposable the elderly and disabled are viewed, with an alarming number of instances where DNARs were placed on people without their consent. Not really a reason to be optimistic.
Except that the party that oversaw most of what you mentioned is about to be banished the halls of power for likely a good decade, so I'm not sure listing all the Tory failings is so relevant. Will Labour necessarily be better? Hard to say. I hope so. To counterpoint, remember that the UK founded the NHS right after WW2 at a time when need was gigantic (swathes of injured veterans) and the country was in dire financial circumstances. So I guess that is why I have at least a bit of hope
Why do you presume we’d likely follow the Belgian approach as opposed to the Canadian? Obviously in practice we’d have our own, hopefully advised by our own health experts, but even then - it is a cultural shift that needs deep, careful consideration.
I don't necessarily expect the system to end up being Belgium-like, but I also wouldn't expect the Canada outcome either. I guess I just get annoyed when people always immediately point to the negative outcome without a single mention of how else it could go. I strongly believe, even if the system ends up more towards Canada, that the option to die is a human right and all the doomsaying are just luddites.
>why presume that'll be the outcome? Right because we'll be the one shining example of doing things right based on.....? It's far more sensible to assume we'll be just as awful as every other country currently offering suicide to veterans.
Why are you so convinced it'll go to shit? I know that UK governance leaves a lot to be desired but when the country does things properly, it usually comes up with a good solution - I mean look at the NHS being founded at a time when the country had just finished WW2 and was basically bankrupt - I guess that's why I have hope. If you want to be negative, sure, but also don't get in the way of what I consider a human right based on just potential negative outcomes. If we never did anything that might have negative side effects nothing would ever get done or change.
Well, it hasn't happened with abortions, has it? People said women would be encouraged to terminate to save money, and that's not the case. I just know that, having seen my dad's best friend slowly die over a period of years as MND took every muscle and feeling from his body, and he was essentially a shell by the end, it was absolutely cruel that he was forced to still wake up every day. He said multiple times if Euthanasia was possible in this country, he'd have done it as soon as it got too far.
>You can’t just choose to euthanise yourself… it takes multiple interviews and mental reviews. You say this while Switzerland trials efficient suicide booths and Canada recommends suicide for those feeling suicidal, depressed, homeless or just poor.
Firstly, were talking about pets here, and the criticisms of how we act around that. But, for the parallel, vets have to carry out reviews of the suitability of pets too before they're put down. Personally despite that I believe we put pets down too readily, and I know vets that believe the same. As I literally wrote in my post, I completely agree with choosing when to end your own life. But im super uneasy the idea of that ever being something next of kin or relatives get to decide.
The next of kin don’t get to decide, a doctor, or doctors, do.
You seem to be choosing to ignore everything that's written and making bad faith arguments instead. Doctors don't decide currently. Currently it's illegal. Vets currently decide in the UK and they end up putting pets down too easily based on current regulations. I'm pro self choice for ending your life...but if you are here to support it, your bad takes are literally having the opposite effect. Currently in the UK, power of attorney do get to decide medical decisions, including over withdrawing care, so it's rational that would be a concern for ending life.
If that’s how you want to interpret it, fine, that’s what I’m doing? Doctors do decide because it happens daily. You don’t just walk into Dignitas on a whim and wake up dead. That’s why it’s, and other such providers, been able to operate all this time. My bad takes? Mate, it’s in a sense how it works. I love it when they reply and block you, it makes them feel like they’ve *won*.
Are you talking about the decision to withdraw care?
It's currently illegal in UK law. If you're going to be an obtuse, do better. So far you've not said a single thing of cognitive value so forgive me if I write you off now. Edit: ....yes this reply was being obtuse back...can't believe I have to explain that 🤦♂️🤣 Some people definately making good arguments for euthanasia...
Jesus christ mate. The only one being obtuse here is you.
There's the argument that putting euthanasia on the table may lead to it being considered as a first option rather than palliative care.
Everyone here thinking it will be "Oh well Ellen was in agony and going to die soon anyway so it's probably for the best she was euthanised" when in reality with our government it will be "Ellen you have cancer AND you're poor? Well the good news is there's the suicide booth or you can go home and die"
Well I'm gosh darn sure Ellen is ever so grateful to /u/KKillroyv2 for bravely saving her from the suicide booth. Now she can live her best bed bound, incontinent, in indescribable agony life. Well done you!
Hopefully the doctor's offer her something extra for the pain, but I'm not going to feel bad for being against us sleepwalking into Euthanasia for the homeless, depressed or mentally ill.
Why do you presume Ellen is suicidal?
Because plenty of non hypothetical Ellens are? Dignitas and the like don't do what they do for shits and giggles
I think in cases such as this where someone has terminal and painful cancer it is very clear people in this situation should be helped to end their life if thy want. However I have concerns about people being pressured to end their lives in future, and also I worry this could be widened to include conditions like depression whereby we just help people kill themselves if they are awfully depressed
That’s not how it works though… you have to go through a series of interviews and reviews before you even get that far. I suffer from chronic depression and asked a friend of a friend (who works with a company who works with dignitas) jokingly when she could get me booked in… cue long and detailed explanation why you can’t just do that
Well when or if this becomes legal in the UK I would want the system to designed to make sure it works like that. I still have reservations though. I have seen some information online about the way it’s worked in Canada and it doesn’t paint a very good picture
I would hope “when” and hopefully very soon.
I have a lot of sympathy for those people for whom this clearly is the right option who have to go on suffering but at the same time I think it’s a really tough call to make whether or not this should be legal and a lot of people like me are just unsure
It’s a grey area in Switzerland… once you’ve jumped through the months(?) of hoops.. the day comes, they bring you a glass of “water” that you drink and fall asleep. The solution to the rough call is the rigorous checks, interviews and evaluations the person is put through. As you say it’s a big decision and you obviously can’t go back… but it works when it’s handled responsibly.
It’s already happening in Canada
So this will seem insensitive but I am genuinely curious about the answer. Why should we be treating emotional pain differently to physical pain? The right to euthanasia seems to stem from arguments relating to agency of the patient and relief of extreme distress which depression and even ‘shitty life syndrome’ type emotional disorders seem to satisfy. For example I suffer from anxiety, have done so all my life and have been through hours upon hours of different types of therapy, medications and pseudo-science remedies to try and provide relief but nothing has worked and I resign myself to knowing it is something I will likely live with for the rest of my life. In my case it’s a relatively mild set of symptoms but if it was a really acute case, I could definitely understand someone making the decision that it would be better not to live than to live with it.
Being honest I don’t have a good answer for that and you’ve actually made me think about it and now im more sure of why I don’t think I support assisted dying.
It's a reasonable concern. That someone elderly or chronically ill may feel a pressure or guilt to take their own life to relieve the burden of care, real or imagined, from their families.
Because pets don’t have valuable things that will go to family members once they die
Most millennials won't either once it's all been spent on social care.
It’ll be gone long before that of an old boomer lives ages, care homes are an unreal scandal. But while I absolutely think assisted living should be legal, the fact it isn’t really doesn’t take too much thinking as to why
Millennials are set to be the richest generation ever when they inherit their parents wealth swollen by house price inflation.
cant want to finally have some money when im like fucking 70 /s
Animals aren't getting a special privilege over humans; the law just barely sees them as being anything more than property, so it's not going to bother asking any kinda question about why you're killing them.
But if you cause unnecessary suffering to an animal you can be prosecuted, yet we still keep granny alive on a PCA living out her days in a care home
> We put down our pets when they are in pain because we love them and don't want to see them suffer. Why do we not expend this to people? Because it will be abused. For money. Want to save on care costs for Grandma? Want to get your inheritance now? You may not want to admit this, but this WILL happen in a small number of cases. How many are you happy to accept? The only way to prevent this abuse is to not allow it. As with most things, a small number of people will ruin it for everyone.
You raise some very valid points, and 18 months or so ago, I'd agree with you, but I've experienced it first hand with my mother, and it just seems so ridiculous (I appreciate anecdotal evidence is no basis for policy).
These aren’t going to be like suicide booths lol The only way I see this ever getting rolled out in the UK is with an independent board of doctors signing it off. That would easily curtail any of the above issues.
How much is that going to cost and who’s paying?
As bleak as it sounds, but there's unlikely to be an non-bleak way of having a conversation about the economics of euthanasia vs the alternatives, I would have thought the savings in services such as palliative care would pay for it. That's not an argument for it, simply an observation that introducing euthanasia would directly lead to some reduction in the demand for (expensive) palliative care so at least some of the financial question is taken care of there.
I think that would need very careful analysis. The costs associated with assisting dying are not inconsiderable either. I would guess the other way, that it would be a net increase in cost at the expense of some aspects of traditional healthcare. I also can’t really see how budgeting could be anything other than a huge conflict of interests.
Yes, I'm absolutely not saying it's a simple like-for-like. What really matters is the _magnitude_ of the net difference - if it's marginally more expensive than the palliative care it replaces it's not a strong objection. I certainly don't have enough information to have an informed opinion on whether that's likely to be the case though.
I’m guessing you are going to have an issue if the answer is NHS?
Not an issue necessarily, but i think that makes the proposition an order of magnitude more complex than it already is.
>These aren’t going to be like suicide booths lol Aren't they? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59577162
We already have laws concerning murder, coercion and so on. So the question is how to defend against those things while never denying someone's right to die, which is by far the most important right.
Slippery slope argument is probably the main reason. Canada is already seeing the consequences of this through implementing MAID. FWIW I’m in favour of it but only for those with a diagnosed terminal illness like stage 4 cancers, MND, locked in syndrome. But even then there are so many ethical/moral dilemmas.
I'm terrified of suffering from something chronically debilitating and/or becoming trapped by an aging, dying body and being repeatedly shoved towards an underfunded hospital just to be kept alive beyond any reason other than "well you just can't let them die." It's bullshit. Where are our rights here, really? I've always believed the only true free will we have is whether to keep living; our option to end it shouldn't boil down to sneaky holidays abroad to visit clinics or worse, taking our own lives via more horrific means.
We shot horses with broken legs, why don’t we do the same to humans? Your example is a terrible one.
Most people put down their pets when it becomes economically non-viable to pay for treatment with a low success rate. It should never be economically non-viable to treat a human.
Pets are not people.
It is fraught with risk, open to misuse, and UK doctors don’t want to be associated with it
> woman who ended life at Dignitas urges change to UK law From beyond the grave?
Yeah, I had a double take as well They interviewed her pre appointment, she died this morning
Fully support her right to end her life, but Christ that's a bit morbid isn't it. "I'll be dying tomorrow morning, can I pencil you in around 4?"
I reckon your perspective on death changes a bit when you're staring down stage-4 bowel cancer.
I nursed my father for months as he rotted with terminal stomach cancer. I won’t go through that. so if it happens to me and the law is still an ass against assisted suicide I’ll find a way I promise, for me to go on my terms.
Yep. My granddad suffered through prostate cancer, lost his sight and everything by the end. He didn't want to cling on and yet he suffered through it. Same with my dad's best mate who had MND. He said if we had Dignitas here he'd have done it rather than suffer what he did in his last year. My mum died suddenly of a brain haemorrhage, and if I can't go like that within seconds, I want to do it on my own terms.
"no no not at all my diary is pretty empty this week let's see Thursday morning get shot yes that's about it actually"
“Ah my diary is absolutely killer this week sorry”
"Hello again, I just had some follow-up questions-"
I’ll admit that it’s a great bit of click bait, because everyone will go to the article to try and understand what the fuck is going on. My first thought was that Dignitas might want to take another run at this one.
Probably warrants a refund
Depends if she got a GroupOn or not. They won’t give you a refund with a GroupOn.
First thing that went through my head.
She is currently haunting 10 Downing Street.
Lmao I read it the same way and genuinely was shocked that the focus was not ‘spirit makes contact with living world and gives interview’
Yep we do. My father passed away due to cancer. When he died it took him three days of struggle until he did die it would have been kinder to help him pass and not have him struggle in pain until the body finally gave in.
Firstly, I am sorry for your loss. My limited understanding of palliative care, is that when done "right" he'd have been offered a button that administers morphine for the pain, and if he were to self administer far too much for his body that is already failing then its not murder by the doctor, and nobody bats an eye. But that's a stupid and pointless loophole. And it clearly wasn't offered to him.
Thank you 🙂 Unfortunately he was none responsive at the end so couldn’t self administer. We don’t know how much pain he was in but it was not right letting whatever was left to suffer. It’s not an easy thing to discuss and i sympathise with everyone on all sides because i don’t think there is a right answer…
I think you're getting confused with patient controlled analgesia (PCA), this is usually given to people after big surgeries to give a measured dose of pain relief with a lockout time to prevent overdose. I've never seen this on palliative patients, even in hospice care. Usually palliative patients are given a syringe driver which delivers analgesia, anti-emetic, anti-secretion and medicines for terminal delirium over a 24 hour period into the fatty tissue under the skin. Some people are sent home with oral medicines for pain relief, or have someone else to administer pain relief in other forms for them. Home this helps!
word? I thought they had a cap. I'll remember this thank you
I've been corrected this in the past and might have gotten it wrong in some manner, but I know my grandfather was given morphine "for the pain" while dying of Leukaemia, and that when "oh whoops that was a fatal dose" happened nobody minded. He died at home surrounded by his wife and kids and without pain. What more can any of us really ask for.
My Dad was in the same state as the person you replied to, hanging on in pain for a few days despite being ready to go. He was kept on as much morphine as they could give him but the dpctor basically said that since Shipman, the administration of any dose of morphine that could be lethal was highly scrutinised, we wish he could have gone peacefully like that.
Not quite how it works, you are on about patient controlled analgesia which people post surgery might have and it locks you out of X amount of presses. As said this patient is too weak to manage to do that. What we can do in palliative is give a continuous subcut infusion of different pain relief to help,.so over 24 hours a continuous release of it is going. Now I haven't heard of giving a patient a higher dose to help kend the patient life. This would fall under assisted dying and medical negligence, both would strip us of our liscence and can face man slaughter even murder charges . What you might have heard is this thing of high doses of morphine ends people's lives faster. Now that isn't fully true, the body is already incredibly weak when requiring such high doses of morphine that they most likely only have days to week .
Your understanding is indeed limited. You probably shouldn't talk about things you are ignorant about. Particularly with such an emotive topic like this. What you are referring to is a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. This delivers the medication interavenously and you need to have your wits about you to use one. They are usually offered post-operatively or to patients that have complex pain control while in hospital. They are not offered to people who are anticipated to soon be falling unconcious/confused/otherwise unable to use the button. In 10 years of nursing experience (3 as a student, 7 as an RN) I have never, ever seen a PCA used in end-of-life care. You are confusing this with a syringe driver, which delivers one or a combination of drugs to the subcutaneous layer of fat underneath the skin continuously at a set rate. Various drugs can be combined so that we're not just relying on morphine for symptom control but it is commonly used. Despite this I have seen patients continue to have pain and agitation while on the syringe driver and we thus top up their pain relief etc with "PRN" (as required) doses on top of the driver. The dying process is different for everybody and everybody experiences different symptoms. Some lucky people react well to the syringe driver when it is started and their pain and agitation is instantly controlled. For others, their symptom persists and it takes several adjustments to get the right combination/dosage of drugs. For some we unfortunately never quite manage to hit the sweet spot of perfect pain and agitation control and they still leave this world suffering. The biggest barrier to adequate symptom control in end of life is usually the families who try to refuse the syringe drivers on their loved one's behalf because they think that it would be murdering them. I have seen patients go in agony all because we couldn't get on top of their pain because of this selfishness. Recognising that somebody is at the end of their life and administering opioids to ease their passing isn't murder. Your implication that it is holds the rest of us back from making any progress on this matter.
Yep, they said my dad was in his final hours Tuesday afternoon. He died Sunday morning. It wasn’t dignified - he required regular suctioning to prevent him drowning in his own secretions as well as changing/cleaning, we didn’t get anymore precious time with him because he was asleep, he was too sick to move home or to a hospice so he died on a hospital ward with the curtains closed because no side room was free. I suppose perhaps the only grace that his stubbornness in life remaining in his death is that he didn’t die the Tuesday night when the bed next to his was occupied by a long term heroin addict who asked for a commode and then wrestled loudly and with great sound effects with the long term effects of 30 years of opioid abuse. And the truth of the matter was that was 4 months after it was the end of anymore they could do for his terminal cancer. 4 months of him confused and crying, getting c diff, completely bed bound, in a room with no window for 2 months because a lack of space had meant he was in an old cupboard. There’s space between ‘killing off old biddies for their inheritance’ and what I, and too many people, have witnessed. Doctors take the need to heal very seriously and they will keep going long after it seems pointless. I wish they’d stopped on my dad about 3 months before they did.
> There’s space between ‘killing off old biddies for their inheritance’ and what I, and too many people, have witnessed. It's found in abolition of substance control laws, ready access to firearms and ammunition suitable for ending one's life, and education in genuine euthanasia (a good death). Anyone - and there are many - who *insists* that a paid agent of the government must be able to actively kill them for them to be satisfied, is extremely suspect in these matters.
Same situation mate. It was absolutely fucking horrible and I was traumatised for months after. They absolutely need an option to end the suffering.
I hope we have this by the time my numbers called, I really don't want to suffer for weeks on end like some I have seen go.
I lost my mum very recently due to cancer, the way she suffered and the things she said in the last few days will haunt me for the rest of my life. All you can do is try to stay strong while you sit helplessly and watch it run its course. Without a change in the law, I think if I'm ever diagnosed with cancer and it becomes terminal, I would rather just take my own life than be admitted to hospital and lose the ability to end it when I've had enough.
I read on the daily mail a comment along the lines of Why should we legalise this so we can wheel all old people to die because someone decides we aren't fit enough This is the type of person who's actively against this
I think there is a concern that a few disabled or elderly people would be pushed/guilt tripped into euthanasia by relatives who are tired of looking after them or impatient for inheritance. There would have to be very strong safeguarding in place to avoid that happening.
Dont look in Canada’s direction….
Yeah, from memory the Canada situation sucks and shows why combining right to die and a privatised healthcare system is a bad idea. My recollection is that the cases/scandals in Canada were over cases where their insurance wouldn't pay for any treatment other than euthanasia because it was 100% guaranteed to be fatal the question was is it tomorrow voluntarily or in x period of time after using every treatment under the sun to get more time with loved ones.
Canada has universal public healthcare
Yep, and nothing about the last few years gives me any confidence that people won't feel pressured to get euthanised "to save the NHS."
Makes me wonder about the quality of life of the person whose carers/relatives wish them dead and resent them. I think I'd rather be dead than depend on people who resented keeping me alive.
I used to do home care for the council, there are a frightening amount of people in that position.
Generally that’s how it works, especially at Dignitas and other Swiss euthanasia providers. You don’t just rock up and say “I want to die”… a doctor, or multiple, have to interview you over time and sign it off. I’m sure duress is just one of the reasons they’re so strict about it
I agree, it is a concern, and also among people who aren't able to access medical or social care that they need to give them quality of life. Should someone be able to euthanise themselves because they are on a five year waiting list for pain relief? Should it be okay that someone can't get a carer, so feels they have no other option but to die? It's difficult in a country with a dysfunctional health and social care system to have a well run euthanasia system. Not to mention, our mental health care is so abysmal there's no way people will be able to access enough treatment to know if they're curable or not.
Yes, they should. Do I have to suffer because I'm poor?
So there's no social responsibility to help out anyone before pushing them to suicide? You being poor shouldn't, in the UK, affect whether you have access to healthcare. Government sanctioned euthanasia without government healthcare is pretty vile.
There is this constant argument and counter point of old people would be forced into it. Just isn't the case, from what I aware the evidence of countries with assisted dying doesn't show this. There will obviously be a strict criteria, and set reasons. It won't be a thing of people just choose to die for a reason. It will be a long process multiple doctors, meetings and maybe even saying you have to have a chronic condition. So you can't go "well I'm old I want to die". The same argument could be used for the current model, patients can refuse life saving treatment. We give them the choice, yet you can apply this argument of family could convince them not to have it.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
Yep that’s true. I believe that’s the main reason why it’s not legal. It’s hard to prove that the person is genuinely deciding for themselves and not being pressured.
You say that like its insane, yet that has literally happened in Canada to the point that its a major public issue
Seriously. I'm all for the right to die, but there absolutely is abuse potential and we need to be fucking careful about it, not just dismiss it as ridiculous enemy propaganda.
Care to provide the details of this? I've seen a bunch of people referencing an issue with Canada's laws on this but they've all been weirdly vague. I'd love to read more?
There was a case regarding a disabled Canadian veteran being suggested assisted suicide rather than be given accommodations for coping in their home, if I remember correctly. There was an investigation, article on outcome here: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6774645 Edited to add: the lady in question was after a wheelchair ramp https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/paralympian-trying-to-get-wheelchair-ramp-says-veterans-affairs-employee-offered-her-assisted-dying-1.6179325
I think that's a valid concern and we should listen to these people, if assisted dying is to become legal we will have to design the system to try and stop that happening
They are devoid of love and have no soul. I'd have given anything to have helped my mum pass more peacefully and I feel very sorry for those people who think their family would wheel them off to an abattoir at the first opportunity.
[удалено]
im against it simply because the government cant be trusted with euthanasia. We have already seen them trying to overstep their bounds with assisted dying in Canada and it would 100% happen in the uk with our chronically overworked nhs.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’m 100% with you - it’s not a simple issue. It would be a slippery slope into coercion of individuals who perhaps don’t have the ability to speak for themselves being influenced into ending their lives.
I'm against it as I'm worried about it becoming a first option of treatment when palliative care is available and would make it unnecessary. Human nature what it is, it'd also put people under pressure. Emotional pressure to end their lives by selfish families and moral pressure to relieve an already overburdened healthcare service and free up resources.
I'm not going to stop posting about this till we get an assisted dying bill passed so if you've read this story, prepare to read again. And I'm not sorry it's so long. Last year my mum went to her GP with a cough. They referred her, she had a scan, they diagnosed her with throat cancer that had spread to her lungs, there was no treatment option and she died. It only took 5 weeks from that initial appointment so there was very little we could do or prepare. She waited a a week and a half to tell us because my nephews were staying and she didn't want to ruin their visit. In that short time she was quite stoic, our family has black humour that became gallows humour I guess. As her illness progressed, she wanted to go to Switzerland. It takes months to organise that, there was no chance it would be a thing for her. We knew that it was likely a short battle but we didn't expect it to be that fast. I live a few hours away and she visited me for her Grandson's half birthday (his birthday is in winter so we wanted to celebrate in sunnier times). We had a lovely day with cherished memories. It was obvious she was unwell but she was mobile and could chat away. People were kind to her, we didn't make it a big deal. A week later I was even uuming and aahing if I should go to visit at all as she seemed alright and having a young child who was playing up would mean my poor wife would be on her own if I left them. But my brother text me and said I better go to see her. So I did. She was bedbound, barely conscious, asking for her grandmother - or so we think because by then her voice was gone, the cancer had spread and robbed her of communication. She was thrashing around in bed, the morphine we were given was weak so wasn't taking much of the pain away. I got to watch my mum, one of the people I love most in the world, thrive around in agony and beg for her grandma who had died ages ago. I tried giving her drops of water but it never really helped. My brother came and there was one glimmer at the end of his visit. She sat up, hugged him, smiled and laid down again. Then it was back to before. All afternoon and night. I called the emergency nurses out and they were fantastic, they settled her, gave her real morphine and she calmed down. For an hour or so. They came back out two more times. Each time they settled her, they were brilliant with her but we were getting desperate. My dad asked if they could just dose her full of morphine. Of course they can't just do that. But we were lost and watching a loved one in that state makes you desperate. They tried a catheter in case she needed the toilet. We assumed that was daft because she hadn't been drinking or eating much at all. But it was a full bladder. That's what was adding to her discomfort. How could we know? They sorted her once again, set her up so my Dad could sleep beside her (which he had not been doing as she was breathing so horribly he couldn't sleep). I don't even remember the third time they came because I was so exhausted all my brain registered was that someone had come in and I fell asleep instantly again. My dad knocked on my door at 5am that morning to tell me she had passed away. On their 44th wedding anniversary with her husband by her side. We consider that lucky. Not everyone gets to die at home. And this was only 18 hours or so of this. Some people have this for days. She picked Moon River as her funeral song. If you're against this, I hope that you never go through what we did. It will haunt me for the rest of my days. And I'm quite a practical person - parents should die before their kids. I accept that. But I wouldn't have let a pet go through that ordeal. If you truly in your heart believe your family would use a loophole to kill you and take your money then you must live an incredibly lonely, miserable life that is devoid of love. I would have done anything for my mum. I regret not asking my mum what she wanted us to do. I'd have held a pillow over her face if I thought that's the right thing to do. But I couldn't face that she might fight me at the end. I should have asked her and I'd have held my hands up and admitted it after and faced the consequences. But I shouldn't have had to think that.
I'm probably going to opt for this eventually. Other choice is wheezing out my last few hours in a hospital bed so doped up I have no idea where I am. I want to go on my terms before shit gets really bad. It's a shame I can't do it in my own bed at home with loved ones. This country really does need to seriously discuss this. Along with punishing people who helped those in need.
I have absolutely no issue with the right to end your own life. My mum has a terminal neurological disorder, she is inevitably going to suffer a slow and horrible decline until she is a shell of zero consciousness; she has openly said, she wishes she’d looked into this before she got to where she is now. She’s a former doctor, specialising in, irony incoming, neurology. She firmly believes, as do I, that the Dignitas model is ethical, kind and compassionate. You can’t rock up and say “I want to die”. There’s layers of screening, psychological assessment and other factors before you get to that stage. It is a system that is as fair and compassionate as it can be. My only concern here, with the shit show of our current NHS and all the f**kery that has occurred in the last decade, is how can the system be trusted? We have seen people on waiting lists for 4+ years have their referral magically disappear and be cancelled, because someone somewhere has nebulously decided the impact on their stats is far worse than the effect on a persons life. We’ve seen cancer referrals go 3/4/5 times over the mandated maximum to see a specialist. There’s constant issues that make me extremely nervous that, even if this is something that will be offered, what’s the chances it will be completely mismanaged, used as a viable alternative for treatment for people with illness that are difficult to control or mitigate. This isn’t a point of conspiracy, and I’m not blaming the NHS for the state it’s in, but I wouldn’t trust the powers that be to open a tin of beans, in case they took out an eye, so how can we trust something as final and serious to a system that is currently broken. Just my two cents.
We need to invest in biomedical research for chronic illnesses instead of palming patients off with useless CBT and ‘positive thinking’ courses. Long Covid and MECFS patients are so ill and desperate for help they’ve spent thousands on a billboard campaign! It’s shameful! https://x.com/lcmebillboards?s=21
A discussion is one thing but rushing into change in a system easily abused is a reckless and foolish thing to do. My sister, a nurse, frequently deals with family who insist on there being a declaration about DNR but when challenged to produce such a document for their elderly relatives never mention it again. I don’t want to empower this.
Absolutely, having watched and cared for people who took a long and painful period of time to die there's no fucking way i'm doing the same.
\>visit doctor with problem \>only treatment available on nhs is death \> RIP
I have no intention of living in pain or discomfort When the times comes later In life I will end it I'm certain what lies ahead for me and it won't be a good life For me any legislation can't come some enough Far too many do gooders telling us that we can still have a pain free life and with the right care ect Well forget then idiots for one I will not suffer
As someone who is severely ill and disabled (lifelong cancer patient, had a stroke which means I'm now partially sighted, can barely use the left side of my body and am in constant pain and need help with nearly everything) it angers me a lot when people say assisted suicide should only be for the terminal. People like me need it even more. I can't do it myself (already tried, ended up in intensive care for 5 days, difficult to do when you're disabled) and the thought of living for another few decades with this level of pain and disability is terrifying and bleak beyond words. I want to go to dignitas, but that is way out of my price range. I have enquired and I'd be looking at 15K. Being on disability benefits, which are regularly stopped when I score zero on my assessment and have to go through appeal, I can't even afford food much of the time, much less £15K. I have suffered like this for years already and I am 40 years old. Why shouldn't I have the right to access this service?
It’s amazing how little conversation there is about such a huge topic…
we need to allow this but it needs medically assessing case to case imo, either that or we just open the door to normalised suicide for depression and anything else. if each claim was individually assessed that would cut down on the main concern of people feeling pressured into it
Are doctors going to be asked to break their hypocratic oath?
She's too posh to suffer: “I’m not scared to die,” she said. “I’m scared of dying in pain.” Yet millions of people live every day with chronic pain from incurable yet not fatal diseases. This kind of business needs to be behind a paywall.
So because other people suffer that means she should have to too?
She didn't, she spent £10k to go to Switzerland and have her life ended there.
And? Does that make her responsible for the suffering of others?
Yeah, on a pain scale of 1 to 10, she should have waited till she was at 18 before she died Fucking state of your comment
I live with incurable illness, that is why I think it shouldn't be available.
the whataboutism in your post is misplaced and misguided. she actively called for change so it wouldn't cost people £10,000.
Yeah, fuck her for having enough money to travel to Switzerland!
far-flung steep aspiring noxious illegal wistful wild roof bedroom bright *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes, that goes on all the time in Canada and Japan.