Jump to content

Improve End of Life Care before Assisted Dying - not before !


Apple

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

I agree, it just confuses me why we would be motivated to legislate primarily by a need in the UK?

 

Who said that would be the motivation?  My motivation would be as stated above, if that helps people in the UK, then fine, but my prime motivation would be giving people here the right of final self-determination. 

Perhaps a little controversial, but I have a little worry that continuing medical advances, whilst they do much to prolong life and alleviate suffering, also serve to prolong life in suffering.  It is highly sensitive and emotive, but there has to be an ethical debate, if there isn't one already, that deals openly with quality of life vs quality of survival. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Who said that would be the motivation?  My motivation would be as stated above, if that helps people in the UK, then fine, but my prime motivation would be giving people here the right of final self-determination. 

Perhaps a little controversial, but I have a little worry that continuing medical advances, whilst they do much to prolong life and alleviate suffering, also serve to prolong life in suffering.  It is highly sensitive and emotive, but there has to be an ethical debate, if there isn't one already, that deals openly with quality of life vs quality of survival. 

 

Stu's immediate response, which is what I was questioning.

I agree with everything you say and your motivation 100%. We are living longer but not necessarily better, and I also agree that there should be an ethical debate.

What I don't think should be considered in any way, is how much money we are likely to earn from people from the UK using any assisted dying law we decide to introduce.

I'm not saying that's what Stu suggested and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, I just think it's a worrying initial response from a serving politician, that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

I would agree with you there, and for what it's worth I think it is to be applauded that a serving politician posts on here giving and explaining their opinion whatever that opinion is.

As a Manx politician though, I do find it strange that your first thought when weighing up a potential assisted dying law would be with the people of the UK. Not that I would be against them using it and would be delighted if it alleviated suffering there too. 

Perhaps you could explain why this was, and if you'd include the service as part of our reciprocal health agreement? 

 

Not sure that was Stu’s first thought but only he can answer that.

Re reciprocal health agreement. It’s my understanding ( happy to be corrected) that going to Dignitas in Switzerland is a private thing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

What I don't think should be considered in any way, is how much money we are likely to earn from people from the UK using any assisted dying law we decide to introduce.

If assisted dying does become legal in the IoM I expect that it would be restricted initially to IoM residents. The idea that the IoM would welcome none residents is I think a very long way off as doing all the checks and balances would be difficult even with very limited numbers and full medical history from local doctors who you can question. Being able to cope with larger numbers and reliant on third medical records, input from family who the doctors making the decisions will not know just seems fraught with difficulty.  

If after a period of time we can show a proven track record of expertise in the area then the IoM may be able to open up but, as I said, I think that will take a while. It is not something, in my view, we should open the doors to everybody from day 1.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Not sure that was Stu’s first thought but only he can answer that.

Re reciprocal health agreement. It’s my understanding ( happy to be corrected) that going to Dignitas in Switzerland is a private thing.

 

 

I'm not sure it was either, just seemed a strange immediate response to me. The question regarding the reciprocal health agreement was to try to clarify it one way or the other.

I think one of the main problems with introducing an assisted dying act (which I fully support), is to remove any possibility of anyone being dispatched for any other reason than to end their own suffering in line with their own wishes.

I have no doubt the family and doctors motives are closely scrutinised to make sure this is the case. I think it is only right that government's motivation in enacting the law is similarly scrutinised. 

It seems to me that including it in the reciprocal health agreement would be an effective way of doing this in the case of the UK.

As Lost Login has pointed out though, opening it up to anyone but our own residents would bring its own problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Well when the end comes for me I wouldn’t have a problem with that.

 

Me neither. I'd like to get there via a black bin bag thrown in the burnable rubbish skip at the tip, the rest of the bag being filled with some plasterboard, a small TV, and a thin top layer of burnable household waste to disguise its contents so it wouldn't cost anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Me neither. I'd like to get there via a black bin bag thrown in the burnable rubbish skip at the tip, the rest of the bag being filled with some plasterboard, a small TV, and a thin top layer of burnable household waste to disguise its contents so it wouldn't cost anything.

Especially since the rises in gas prices making the crem an extortionate luxury!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A fool and his money..... said:

I'm not sure it was either, just seemed a strange immediate response to me. The question regarding the reciprocal health agreement was to try to clarify it one way or the other.

I think one of the main problems with introducing an assisted dying act (which I fully support), is to remove any possibility of anyone being dispatched for any other reason than to end their own suffering in line with their own wishes.

I have no doubt the family and doctors motives are closely scrutinised to make sure this is the case. I think it is only right that government's motivation in enacting the law is similarly scrutinised. 

It seems to me that including it in the reciprocal health agreement would be an effective way of doing this in the case of the UK.

As Lost Login has pointed out though, opening it up to anyone but our own residents would bring its own problems.

The post before mine from 2112 talked about 'suicide tourism' and my response had that in mind. I'm not suggesting that's why we should introduce the legislation as I've always thought that the most fundamental human right should be to have the option to check out if today was unbearable and tomorrow is going to be worse. I only hope that I have the mental and physical ability to determine that for myself if that's how my dice fall.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Stu's immediate response, which is what I was questioning.

I agree with everything you say and your motivation 100%. We are living longer but not necessarily better, and I also agree that there should be an ethical debate.

What I don't think should be considered in any way, is how much money we are likely to earn from people from the UK using any assisted dying law we decide to introduce.

I'm not saying that's what Stu suggested and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, I just think it's a worrying initial response from a serving politician, that's all.

Are we living longer. I think I read somewhere that is not necessarily the case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

The post before mine from 2112 talked about 'suicide tourism' and my response had that in mind. I'm not suggesting that's why we should introduce the legislation as I've always thought that the most fundamental human right should be to have the option to check out if today was unbearable and tomorrow is going to be worse. I only hope that I have the mental and physical ability to determine that for myself if that's how my dice fall.

Fair enough. I agree with you too and would want the same as you in the same position.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...