[Redway]

Originally Posted by the truth

Its not for you to decide that thousands of frail sick confused vulnerable people may die at the hands of an incompetent, or abusive, or corrupt member of staff or family member. My concern is for the innocent victims of such a law. People already murder for money the world over, all we are doing is making it easier for them. people also die in hospitals from neglect, all we are doing is making it easier to cover these failures up.

You also state, getting better isnt on the cards, so kill them off? dont give recovery a chance>? wheres theres life theres hope. Many thousands of people have lived for years way beyond their doctors predictions and expectations. this demand for making it easier to kill yourself is based wholly on pessimism and totally ignores the fact thousands probably millions are not receiving the medical treatment they need and deserve in the UK. I prefer to look at more optimistic ways of improving life, sustaining life and reducing pain.


Its a similar argument preventing capital punishment in the UK, too many innocent people may suffer as a result of such a law. Its too late once an innocent person has died through negligence or deliberate foul play.

Why should they want to recover, though? If they were really in that much pain why not let them do what they want?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by the truth

we cant trust them with files and paperwork, or taxes or regulations, what makes you think we could trust them with allowing suicides?

the whole euthanasia issue is a red herring. far more energy and attention needs to be drawn to improving the endless problems in the nhs, such as patients waiting too long for crucial someties life saving operations, too many ulti million pound scanners lying unused for years, which also creates bed blocking, unnecessary extra courses of medication and more work for nurses, cleaners, doctors, these people need to be scanned much much sooner...also other majors issues around our hospitals having over 50 times more infections that swedish hospitals and it some extree cases patients have effectively starving to death or dying of thirst in our wards

we do have a form of euthanasia already as the hospitals use the DNR , do not rescuscitate, when a patient becomes so weak , frail and ill.

we need to change the narrative on this sore subject.

Im sympathetic for those in excruciating agony. None of us know what that would feel like. But personally Im more concerned with helping to save lives, improve lives, reduce all the pain , reduce waiting lists, especially for people to get scanned for cancer, for kidney problems, for blood clots and so on.

once they get scanned earlier, they can immediately be put on the correct medication. without these scans, patients can go months on the wrong medication and can die prematurely.

it will cost more money to man these scanners. but it costs millions to build them and train the staff to use them. to then only use them a few hours a week is scandalous. the money it costs to operate them far more hours, would be saved in the long run, with more healthy people, treated earlier and not bed blocking taking endless medication whilst awaiting their scans

I asked you to stop quoting my posts. I have nothing to say to you.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Redway

Why should they want to recover, though? If they were really in that much pain why not let them do what they want?

some may want to recover yet be ignored, some will be too confused or sick and frail to even speak and explain if they want to live and go home. people with dementia say they want to die 50 times a d\ay, then the next day theyre happy as larry, eating and chatting....the human mind and body is unbelievably complex, then throw in old age and medication and it becomes almost impossible to decipher what exactly people really mean... if just 1 innocent person dies as a result of this law legalising euthanasia, then it wouldnt be worth it. sadly lots of frail innocent people would die unnecessarily. we need to work on hospices, we need to study the dnr programme closer, we also need to radically improve our entire nhs. the improvements are not just down to money, its down to structure, management, prioritising the use of scanners and tests and its about the moral code of the nhs and every single person who works within in. as a society its also about us respecting the nhs too

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Livia

I asked you to stop quoting my posts. I have nothing to say to you.

thats because youve lost the argument

[Redway]

Originally Posted by the truth

some may want to recover yet be ignored, some will be too confused or sick and frail to even speak and explain if they want to live and go home. people with dementia say they want to die 50 times a d\ay, then the next day theyre happy as larry, eating and chatting....the human mind and body is unbelievably complex, then throw in old age and medication and it becomes almost impossible to decipher what exactly people really mean... if just 1 innocent person dies as a result of this law legalising euthanasia, then it wouldnt be worth it. sadly lots of frail innocent people would die unnecessarily. we need to work on hospices, we need to study the dnr programme closer, we also need to radically improve our entire nhs. the improvements are not just down to money, its down to structure, management, prioritising the use of scanners and tests and its about the moral code of the nhs and every single person who works within in. as a society its also about us respecting the nhs too

Paragraphs...

And what are you even basing all this on? How on earth does 'some may want to recover yet to be ignored' bare any contextual relationship to the argument at hand?

We're on about people who actually choose to do. Go on. You humour me in a desperate attempt to justify your ridiculous views.

And use capitals. I feel like getting eye surgery every time I read one of your posts.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Redway

Paragraphs...

And what are you even basing all this on? How on earth does 'some may want to recover yet to be ignored' bare any contextual relationship to the argument at hand?

We're on about people who actually choose to do. Go on. You humour me in a desperate attempt to justify your ridiculous views.

And use capitals. I feel like getting eye surgery every time I read one of your posts.

The fact you've chosen to make an issue of paragraphing, when we are talking about life and death sums up where your priorities lie.
I find your views on this matter of life and death, chilling, ruthless , ill-conceived and abhorrent. You clearly do not, nor will not take into account the obvious innocent victims who will die as a result of this law. Why do you not address that matter? Why if you claim to be so caring about people who want to die, are you not concerned about these confused frail old people, who may in fact want to live?

As for your comment, were on about people who choose to die? Have you worked with elderly people with dementia or other illnesses? Have you observed at close hand how dramatically their words and behaviour fluctuates from moment to moment, hour to hour , day to day. One day they will say, I want to die , kill me off. The next as I have already stated, but you chose to ignore (Why?) They will be happy and contented. Exactly when would you choose to get these people killed off?

I have justified wholly my views. pray justify the 100s and 1000s of abuses of this law, where innocent frail confused people find themselves murdered? Let us see if you can actually address this issue in detail to justify all this inevitable abuse. Let us see if you can do so without making any petty remarks about trivialities like paragraphing and capital letters. Let us see if you can view a matter of life and death as more important than paragraphing.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by the truth

The fact you've chosen to make an issue of paragraphing, when we are talking about life and death sums up where your priorities lie.
I find your views on this matter of life and death, chilling, ruthless , ill-conceived and abhorrent. You clearly do not, nor will not take into account the obvious innocent victims who will die as a result of this law. Why do you not address that matter? Why if you claim to be so caring about people who want to die, are you not concerned about these confused frail old people, who may in fact want to live?

As for your comment, were on about people who choose to die? Have you worked with elderly people with dementia or other illnesses? Have you observed at close hand how dramatically their words and behaviour fluctuates from moment to moment, hour to hour , day to day. One day they will say, I want to die , kill me off. The next as I have already stated, but you chose to ignore (Why?) They will be happy and contented. Exactly when would you choose to get these people killed off?

I have justified wholly my views. pray justify the 100s and 1000s of abuses of this law, where innocent frail confused people find themselves murdered? Let us see if you can actually address this issue in detail to justify all this inevitable abuse. Let us see if you can do so without making any petty remarks about trivialities like paragraphing and capital letters. Let us see if you can view a matter of life and death as more important than paragraphing.

No that just shows that I want to be able to read your posts (even if they are a load of bull) so I can make sense of them, you complete and utter Mensa-qualifying genius.

And I see you're replying to ... like ... 5% of my posts and completely ignoring the rest.

And what experience have you? Have you any evidence to prove your statements? Or are you choosing to ignore that some of these people have thought about taking their lives for years?

As for your dementia comment ... does that extend to cancer and any other severe physical impairments? Do these affect your memory and your ability to make judgements?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Redway

No that just shows that I want to be able to read your posts (even if they are a load of bull) so I can make sense of them, you complete and utter Mensa-qualifying genius.

And I see you're replying to ... like ... 5% of my posts and completely ignoring the rest.

And what experience have you? Have you any evidence to prove your statements? Or are you choosing to ignore that some of these people have thought about taking their lives for years?

As for your dementia comment ... does that extend to cancer and any other severe physical impairments? Do these affect your memory and your ability to make judgements?

yet again you have ignored my points. I have gone into far greater detail than you on loads of areas. You have failed totally to justified a law that will help kill of tthousands of people. All you have done is try to deflect to other trivial irrelevances like paragraphs and capital letters. I have a lot of experience yes thank you. What experience do you have? What qualifies you to pronounce the whole of the UK needs a law that allows people to kill themselves? What fool proof safety nets will you put in place for all the innocents who will die as a result of this law?

[Redway]

Your English Language skills have all the accuracy and readability of a 12-year-old.

And it absolutely would not increase euthanasia rates by such a significant amount as what you're implying: people go abroad to end their lives, which debases your 'argument' even further.

If the said person is in a fit enough mental state to make such a judgement, should they not be allowed to do what they wish? After all, is it not a free country - where people are free to do what they want?

You seem to labour under the delusion of free speech, which is meant to fool flocks of sheep who cannot think for themselves into believing that somehow they have control over the whole world at the tip of their finger.

Free speech is there to allow people to do and say what they want, not to be altered into what you think it should be.

Your argument so for has consisted of:

I'm the truth and I'm so intelligent and literate that you can do whatever you want as long as I approve of it!!!

Anyway I'd stand a better chance going to the jungle and teaching a group of monkeys how to do logarithms than arguing with you.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Redway

Your English Language skills have all the accuracy and readability of a 12-year-old.

And it absolutely would not increase euthanasia rates by such a significant amount as what you're implying: people go abroad to end their lives, which debases your 'argument' even further.

If the said person is in a fit enough mental state to make such a judgement, should they not be allowed to do what they wish? After all, is it not a free country - where people are free to do what they want?

You seem to labour under the delusion of free speech, which is meant to fool flocks of sheep who cannot think for themselves into believing that somehow they have control over the whole world at the tip of their finger.

Free speech is there to allow people to do and say what they want, not to be altered into what you think it should be.

Your argument so for has consisted of:



Anyway I'd stand a better chance going to the jungle and teaching a group of monkeys how to do logarithms than arguing with you.

Aside from the usual cheap shots and insults, the rest of your non-argument is embarassing, you wish to pass laws with no safety nets described that allows a free for all euthanasia bill? You have avoided all the complex issues surrounding this issue and chosen instead of hurl petty insult that belong in a kindergarten. I suggest you go away and construct a cohesive argument that somehow justifies the risk of killing off thousands of frail innocent vulnerable old people. Then when you have actually thtought it through properly , take out the insults, then post it to your local mp and see what response you get.

Clearly we disagree profoundly on this issue, I will however not stoop to your level of trading insults. Good luck with your letter, I suspect the issue will remain as it stands. But who knows if the majority feel like you do and the argument wins over the politicians , then who knows. I will continue to fight against it.

[mrlecturer]

encouraging breakthrough. about time this issue becomes widely promoted and accepted.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by mrlecturer

encouraging breakthrough. about time this issue becomes widely promoted and accepted.

do you really trust these politicians to provide enough safeguards to ensure the system is never abused and not one old frail vulnerable sick person is abused or dies as a result of this law?

[MTVN]

Have Switzerland not managed it ok?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Have Switzerland not managed it ok?

you tell me? Switzerland is a tiny , elitist rich mans haven. Nowhere near as complex and over populated as the UK. If abuses have taken place, its hard to find out about them all, as the voice of a stroke victim would couldnt speak but was killed off as his family thought thats what he would have wanted, thats a voice we cant hear nor never will hear. so how do we collaborate how many victims slip through the net? Its plain common sense to see that many such frail vulnerable people will get killed off, some by accident or misunderstanding, others by design

[MTVN]

Well from what I know they have to actually prove the motive is not selfish, and those who cannot risk getting 5 years in jail. All assisted suicides are taped and the police, an officer from the coroner's department and a doctor all attend the death. There are a lot of regulations and checks in place, and the assisted suicide laws are supported by 80% of the population, it's not as though anyone and everyone could just rock up to a clinic and get the relative killed off at the drop of a hat

[the truth]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Well from what I know they have to actually prove the motive is not selfish, and those who cannot risk getting 5 years in jail. All assisted suicides are taped and the police, an officer from the coroner's department and a doctor all attend the death. There are a lot of regulations and checks in place, and the assisted suicide laws are supported by 80% of the population, it's not as though anyone and everyone could just rock up to a clinic and get the relative killed off at the drop of a hat

How intelligent are these 80%?how do you prove motves are totally unselfish? I dont believe that figure is true across the whole nation, its more like a poll from a tabloid paper? we elect intelligent people, specialists in their fields to argue these laws. The vast majority wouldnt even begin to understand the endless complexities involved in such a blanket law ? Or are they just following the hysterical headlines?

Ill fight for the right of the unheard of voiceless victims who could be killed off

[Kizzy]

I don't think anyone should be discussing it other than the person themselves affected, by any means they can.
There should be at least a 12 month delay from the initial suggestion to a final desision and trained councillors to mediate in the interim.
I'm not suggesting those affected won't have thought long and hard, and family will have their own veiw but the impartial voice of a third party may help?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by kizzy

I don't think anyone should be discussing it other than the person themselves affected, by any means they can.
There should be at least a 12 month delay from the initial suggestion to a final desision and trained councillors to mediate in the interim.
I'm not suggesting those affected won't have thought long and hard, and family will have their own veiw but the impartial voice of a third party may help?

Im not sure how you can police who discusses this, but I take your point

I know for bitter experience how duplicitous, sly, corrupt, dangerous and back stabbing family members and so called friends can be when elederly relatives get ill. no one offers to help out, nearly everyone whispers behind the persons back, stick him in a home, then go out and enjoy yourself

we are brutally callous often in dealing with old people. lets face it the only way old people get treated well , is if they commit a crime in their old peoples home and get sent to prison. compared to an old care home, prisoners get treated like kings

this is another massive issue that needs addressing

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by the truth

Im not sure how you can police who discusses this, but I take your point

I know for bitter experience how duplicitous, sly, corrupt, dangerous and back stabbing family members and so called friends can be when elederly relatives get ill. no one offers to help out, nearly everyone whispers behind the persons back, stick him in a home, then go out and enjoy yourself

we are brutally callous often in dealing with old people. lets face it the only way old people get treated well , is if they commit a crime in their old peoples home and get sent to prison. compared to an old care home, prisoners get treated like kings

this is another massive issue that needs addressing

I meant the people involved in the proposed euthanasia discussing it, not us...

The question of standards in our residential care homes is being focussed on in the media more now so hopefully there will be more regulatory bodies set up ...But don't hold your breath.
The 'private' care homes that cost loads employ inadequate, lazy, ineffective drunks to make plenty dolla...Who's silly idea was that?

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by the truth

How intelligent are these 80%?how do you prove motves are totally unselfish? I dont believe that figure is true across the whole nation, its more like a poll from a tabloid paper? we elect intelligent people, specialists in their fields to argue these laws. The vast majority wouldnt even begin to understand the endless complexities involved in such a blanket law ? Or are they just following the hysterical headlines?

Ill fight for the right of the unheard of voiceless victims who could be killed off

No it was an official referendum, although my mistake it was just in Zurich that it was held http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...e-2284752.html

[Kizzy]

wow 160 0ut 0f 1000 foreign visitors...

[the truth]

Originally Posted by kizzy

I meant the people involved in the proposed euthanasia discussing it, not us...

The question of standards in our residential care homes is being focussed on in the media more now so hopefully there will be more regulatory bodies set up ...But don't hold your breath.
The 'private' care homes that cost loads employ inadequate, lazy, ineffective drunks to make plenty dolla...Who's silly idea was that?

Theres zillions of holes in every part of our systems, the thought of legalising euthanasia with so many failings, mismanagement finanical restraint and incompetence, political corruption, corporate corruption, individual corruption at such a high, the thought of adding euthanasia of the most vulnerable people, putting them at the hands of such people and such a dangerous unreliable system, frightens me to death. No doubt it will do the same to these frail vulnerable old people too.

I cannot even begin to imagine how many safeguards this would need to have in place. How tight the vetting would need to be of every single person involved. I mean really the people running this country are already treating pensioners like dogs, theyre alreay up to their eyeballs in corruption at every level. backhanders, cash for questions, bribes to cops, bribes back and forth between journalists, cops and politicians...wars based on spin and lies, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands....Do I think these people would lose sleep over the safeguards for vulnerable old people? [probably not

Let sleeping dogs lie, but dont let people kill them off

There are far more humane ways of improving the system we have. the entire nhs needs massive overhaul and I include the appalling standard of some areas of nursing in this too. people should never die of thirst in british hospitals, but its happened. all it takes is a 5 minute swallow test of salt and water to see if a patient can swallow.

we need to improve on and fix the system we have already got. we need to clean up our parliament and our corrupt media. before we can even consider diving into the nightmarish scenario of legally allowing euthanasia. evenn politicians know, once you open that particular door, there is no turning back and over the years as the system grows and the rates of euthanasia expands, more and more innocent people will fall victim to human error or human corruption