Active Travel

[woolley]

14 minutes ago, Apple said:

...and who is to judge that ? 

I have had lots of experience with the clinical and social conditions you have referred to both professionally and personally and in my view the avenue being ventured down here is wrong. There are far too many pitfalls in any position that takes away anyones human rights to exist without their full agreement and understanding. To undermine that erodes and takes away our humanity, it does not support or define it

End of Life Care and those who practice have the most difficult and enviable jobs in the health care sector.  The island I am told by a GP who knows does not yet follow the guidance from the medial professional body in the UK, which would be a good stating point to base IOM policy on. I am sure Dr A will be referencing this during his forthcoming attempts to  introduce legislation.

Yes we have situations with the elderly, chronic conditions and with groups of people who cannot defend themselves let alone speak up for themselves.

If the approach you envisage comes to pass how anxious would I  or anyone else feel about growing older, being diagnosed a terminal condition or having grandchild born with some form of abnormality. And once the door is opened , there will be no closing it again. 

We need to take step back.

When did Steven Hawking stop functions correctly ?

I don't know when Stephen Hawking stopped functioning. Maybe at the point of his death. Everyone is different.

We need to step back??! Goodness me. We need to step forward out of the dark ages! Human rights to exist? Why is there not a "human right" to a dignified death?

Why should anyone be anxious about having the opportunity of a humane exit from torment? Why do people have to travel abroad to escape this outrageous abdication of responsibility?  Who wants to hang on for the very last hour before the cancer finally consumes their wasted remains, or the dementia ravaged brain can no longer summon the signal to the heart to beat one more time? This approach does not defend the irretrievably ill; it condemns them in the worst possible way. It compels them to endure unspeakable suffering, and damns them to the loss of basic dignity for no good reason whatsoever. 

For mercy's sake, life at any cost is a cost too high.

[0bserver]

How did we get from lycra bandits to assisted dying on the Active Travel™️ thread?

[woolley]

On 11/22/2022 at 2:55 AM, Stu Peters said:

BBC story

We should be more like Holland, allegedly. I wonder of the new Director of Public Health realises that we're a bit colder, windier, wetter and more hilly?

When Stu Peters started this thread, he probably never envisaged its development in this direction. And for this reason I will leave it. We clearly can't sort out the issues of life and death here, but I guess I've said my piece. Woolley nowadays knows when it's time to butt out.

[Apple]

4 minutes ago, woolley said:

Why is there not a "human right" to a dignified death?

There is. Abroad.

Agreed. I wish you well.

 

[HiVibes]

8 hours ago, 0bserver said:

How did we get from lycra bandits to assisted dying on the Active Travel™️ thread?

Because old people.

[Passing Time]

22 minutes ago, HiVibes said:

Because old people.

Do you mean older people who know how to construct a sentence that makes sense...

[Asthehills]

Anyone with strong views on the subject of assisted death can make them known via the link to the public consultation on the matter in this MR piece.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/its-the-right-time-to-have-a-discussion-on-assisted-dying-mhk/?fbclid=IwAR09kHtMKzAsaOYDvwbQcu7h8ccKZqx_pIYdCs9Oe30hgDoEuB5vkcHn4iU
 

Personally, I think that with the right legislation and controls it would be a great thing for many who currently suffer years of pain and often humiliation with a total loss of dignity in later life.

[wrighty]

8 hours ago, Apple said:

There is. Abroad.

Agreed. I wish you well.

 

There isn’t, really. We still have the circus of loving wives fearing a manslaughter charge (or whatever the lesser assisting someone to die charge is called) for seeing their MND afflicted husband onto the plane to Dignitas. 
 

As for Stephen Hawking - he was of sound mind, more than anybody else. Why couldn’t he choose for himself, or have an advanced directive saying that when he no longer understood General Relativity (in him indicating dementia) the time had come. 
 

We need safeguards against coercion, families pressuring grandma to stop being a burden and do the decent thing etc. And we definitely need to ensure that religious individuals have no more influence in the debate than anyone else. 

[HiVibes]

27 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

Do you mean older people who know how to construct a sentence that makes sense...

Nah, all of them.

[The Voice of Reason]

Here is a thing.

A lot of the discussion on here re euthanasia  (quite rightly) focuses on lack of quality of life, coercion and mental state.

Putting all these aside, what of those who are physically well, of sound mind, no financial or familial problems etc and not being coerced in any way, who simply decide that living is not for them and want out?
 

Is this not a legitimate stance and their views worthy of respect? Or is that they are  automatically deemed to have a mental problem if they decide they don’t like living.

Just putting it out there.

 

[joebean]

Rather than wasting money on schemes in Liverpool, DoI should be getting the diggers out and removing the big obstacles that prevent me cycling from Ramsey to Douglas. Governments tend to promise to move mountains to make life easier for residents; they need to get cracking. 

[WTF]

11 hours ago, 0bserver said:

How did we get from lycra bandits to assisted dying on the Active Travel™️ thread?

maybe because the reality of active travel is at the end of life stage and should be put down.

Edited December 6, 2022 by WTF

[Apple]

3 hours ago, wrighty said:

We need safeguards against coercion, families pressuring grandma to stop being a burden and do the decent thing etc. And we definitely need to ensure that religious individuals have no more influence in the debate than anyone else. 

Completely agree. The consultation mentioned above sets out in much more details the proposals and which point the direction for the safeguards that need to be put in place. I am sure Tynwald, alongside the Capacity requirements, will impose the right conditions for that. 

Back to active travel then. 

[doc.fixit]

Saw my first cyclist on the Ramsey cycle way, well the one on the cycle way was right enough but their mate riding alongside them on the normal road was the epitome of arrogance.

Special part of the road created for them but no, they choose to ride on the carriageway holding the conventional traffic back and cyclists wonder why some of us get grumpy about their antics.

Go on, kick off, the only way I will take notice is if cyclists behave responsibly and begin to show that it is not a war, we all share the roads and it is just as important for them to try not to hinder other traffic just as motorists are now forced by law to not hinder cyclists.

[WTF]

19 minutes ago, doc.fixit said:

Saw my first cyclist on the Ramsey cycle way, well the one on the cycle way was right enough but their mate riding alongside them on the normal road was the epitome of arrogance.

Special part of the road created for them but no, they choose to ride on the carriageway holding the conventional traffic back and cyclists wonder why some of us get grumpy about their antics.

Go on, kick off, the only way I will take notice is if cyclists behave responsibly and begin to show that it is not a war, we all share the roads and it is just as important for them to try not to hinder other traffic just as motorists are now forced by law to not hinder cyclists.

they always ride 2 abreast so they can chat , you can't easily hold a conversation if you ride single file.