Assisted Dying debate.

[Anna B]

30 minutes ago, Draggletail said:

Being on morphine in a hospice and having the dosage increased to manage the pain until it kills the patient. I always thought this to be true, unless I was misinformed.

If it is true, this could be considered as 'assisted dying' Or could it...

 

That's what I thought too, but hard to verify.

 

End of life care (I believe it was called 'the Liverpool pathway' or somesuch) caused a bit of a scandal when people were being put on it without their or their families being told, so it was discredited. Damned if they do, damned if they don't....

 

We don't do death well. In spite of it happening to everybody, it seem to be shrouded in mystery. It's the last taboo subject.

[Norbert]

33 minutes ago, Draggletail said:

Being on morphine in a hospice and having the dosage increased to manage the pain until it kills the patient. I always thought this to be true, unless I was misinformed.

If it is true, this could be considered as 'assisted dying' Or could it...

 

That's what appeared to happen with my dad, they gave him control over the morphine pump and either his illness or the morphine did for him, hard to say.

[Anna B]

5 hours ago, cressida said:

There is the religious aspect,  not quite understood by a lot of people - I include myself in that.   Otherwise,  people do have the right to choose,  if I had

Motor Neurone Disease I wouldn't want to suffer and I don't believe my family would want me to either.

I agree 

 

The religious aspect was considered very important. Life was sacred. Pain and suffering was considered purifying. People had to stick it out to the bitter end as only God could decide when you died. To interfere with that process meant you might not enter heaven.

I still think doctors sometimes put an end to the suffering, but they were much more respected in the past and their judgement never questioned. It was assumed that they always knew what was best.

 

Then Harold Shipman happened....

 

[Draggletail]

35 minutes ago, Norbert said:

 

That's what appeared to happen with my dad, they gave him control over the morphine pump and either his illness or the morphine did for him, hard to say.

Same with my Mum. I'd forgotten but now you mention it, she did have a morphine pump that she could control. Thanks for jogging my memory.

[Draggletail]

46 minutes ago, Anna B said:

We don't do death well. In spite of it happening to everybody, it seem to be shrouded in mystery. It's the last taboo subject.

It's the uncertainty, the unknown. I sometimes watch 999 Critical Condition on TV - A&E surgeons and the team going all out to save a life no matter how old the patient's life, even trying to save people with existing advanced illnesses. We cling to life.

Imagine If we knew for sure there was a survival of consciousness after death, there would be less of a hurry to save life and therefore less compassion. 

Puts me in mind of the H.G Wells book where the people living what seemed an Idyllic scenario didn't care when one of their kind drowned because they were all ultimately doomed anyway.

[Annie Bynnol]

If a person has  clearly written instructions in a timely manner(discussed. been advised and witnessed) there is no reason for interference from any third parties- however the law need to be altered so that assisting suicide is not an offence.

   If the above criteria are not fully met then a judge  will look at the levels of proof that and establish 'beyond reasonable doubt'-the wishes of the person and monitor their medical condition.

    A guardian, medical person in charge or other could apply in open specialized court for a legally binding review.

    

[crisispoint]

I'm not entirely opposed to this, particularly for certain criminals.

[Anna B]

I think the problem comes with things like Dementia, when a person is considered not to be well enough to make a qualified decision, or is unable to do the deed themselves, and therefore must cut their lives short before they need a third party to help them. 

A terrible dilemma.

[Baron99]

10 hours ago, Anna B said:

 

That's what I thought too, but hard to verify.

 

End of life care (I believe it was called 'the Liverpool pathway' or somesuch) caused a bit of a scandal when people were being put on it without their or their families being told, so it was discredited. Damned if they do, damned if they don't....

 

We don't do death well. In spite of it happening to everybody, it seem to be shrouded in mystery. It's the last taboo subject.

The Liverpool Pathway was dropped back in 2014.

 

The LCP was replaced by new guidelines for end-of-life care that include: Clear communication, Individual care plans, Involving patients and their families in planning, Reviewing care daily, and Involving people who are important to the patient.

 

Even so, I was involved in tbe death of a relative in 2016 in her late 80's & and to be took as a number of relatives & have it explained in no uncertain terms that that a discussion had taken place between Dr's at the Northern General & IT had been decided, (THEY HAD DECIDED), that your aunt's medical care would be withdrawn & that they would make her as comfortable as possible & but she would deteriorate over the next 12 hours or so but her passage to death would be managed was hard to take. 

 

The medical staff might as well  have given her a jab / overdose at that point & saved her the 12 or so hours, (she wasn't conscious at that stage),  of what appeared to be many hours of struggling for breath. 

 

There is no dignity or bravery in a lingering death.