Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Richard Hakluyt]

One of my niece's room at college in Oxford was formerly Tolkien's room ....bet you are glad you met me now 

[Syt]

I feel I have an unfair advantage living in Vienna's center where you can't throw a stone without hitting some historic place.

But maybe a fun one: Friedrich Hebbel, a German poet, lived in my street for two years in the 1840s. He was born in Wesselburen/Dithmarschen (near where I'm from) and died in Vienna.

[Josquius]

Two Brits discussing the differences between UK and the US.

One of those guys has been popping up on my feeds a lot lately, apparently from the same county (though the accent makes me suspect a wealthy background). Seems to walk a pretty good line of appealing to the sort of young guys that would fall into the orbit of bellends like Tait  whilst speaking sense.

I'm not sure on the whole descendants of the guys who took a risk factor for Americans. But a lot of sense in there yes.
Britain is in a really weird place where we don't have the unjustified self belief to go out and try and start a business American-style, nor do we have the good safety net to hold our hand and make us risk starting a business Scandi-style.

Edit- Curiously no sooner had I posted this than I saw this post:
https://bsky.app/profile/duncanlamont2.bsky.social/post/3lbrolngnw22y

One of my niece's room at college in Oxford was formerly Tolkien's room ....bet you are glad you met me now 

Strikes me he would be an annoying ghost.

[Tamas]

Not pushed in your face on top of the page like the government members opposing it, but finally a Guardian piece allowed to support the assisted dying bill: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/26/assisted-dying-labour-legacy-death-vote

Many opponents misrepresent the proposed law. Gordon Brown wrote: "The experience of sitting with a fatally ill baby girl did not convince me of the case for assisted dying; it convinced me of the value and imperative of good end-of-life care." But his heartbreaking story of a child's death that was, he said, mercifully without pain, is entirely irrelevant to this bill. His call for good end-of-life care is universal, but palliative care staff know that the best of care can't always ease horrific final months. I have seen it in my own family.


Let anyone hesitating understand the worst horrors that can befall you at life's end, as reported in The Inescapable Truth, written by palliative care clinicians: "Some will retch at the stench of their own body rotting. Some will vomit their own faeces. Some will suffocate, slowly, inexorably, over several days." They estimate that, on any average day, some 17 people are dying these horrific deaths: it could be you or me. Doing nothing inflicts certain agony. Diane Abbott and Edward Leigh write that "the only adequate safeguard is to keep the current law unchanged", but keeping the status quo just safeguards suffering.

Older people are more strongly in favour of the right to die than younger people: the older you get, the more bad deaths you encounter and, yes, they are frequent. This is no abstract moral issue here, but a reality that many families are shocked to discover. It explains why, despite all the "state death service" frighteners and the wild misrepresentations, public opinion has not shifted: two-thirds stay as strongly in favour as ever, with only 13% against.

I have bolded the gruesome part because this is exactly why I cannot tolerate the opposition to the bill. While we humm and hamm and go through the legalese with a fine comb, people go through suffering that us lucky ones cannot possibly comprehend, but it can very easily be our own future as well. And they do not have to anymore. It is society's choice to put the through this even if they'd rather die. Simply put, every MP voting no is voting to force people to go through examples such as the above.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Two Brits discussing the differences between UK and the US.

One of those guys has been popping up on my feeds a lot lately, apparently from the same county (though the accent makes me suspect a wealthy background). Seems to walk a pretty good line of appealing to the sort of young guys that would fall into the orbit of bellends like Tait  whilst speaking sense.

I'm not sure on the whole descendants of the guys who took a risk factor for Americans. But a lot of sense in there yes.
Britain is in a really weird place where we don't have the unjustified self belief to go out and try and start a business American-style, nor do we have the good safety net to hold our hand and make us risk starting a business Scandi-style.

Edit- Curiously no sooner had I posted this than I saw this post:
https://bsky.app/profile/duncanlamont2.bsky.social/post/3lbrolngnw22y

One of my niece's room at college in Oxford was formerly Tolkien's room ....bet you are glad you met me now 

Strikes me he would be an annoying ghost.

There are about 6m Americans living outside the USA, about 1 in 50. Coincidentally there are about 6m "unadventurous" Brits living abroad, about 1 in 10. One reason that Britain can look unadventurous, especially declining places like Middlesborough and Wakefield that they mention, is that people with get up and go got up and went. That is a continuing process of course, which does not help the declining places who lose their more active people, but there is little evidence of a eugenics type change in the entrepreneurial nature of those populations.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I feel I have an unfair advantage living in Vienna's center where you can't throw a stone without hitting some historic place.

But maybe a fun one: Friedrich Hebbel, a German poet, lived in my street for two years in the 1840s. He was born in Wesselburen/Dithmarschen (near where I'm from) and died in Vienna.

Ominous....

[crazy canuck]

Quebec rarely waits for the Federal government for much things, I expect that we will get MH MAID before 2027.

For now tho, Quebec has introduced anticipated MAID.
https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-system-and-services/end-of-life-care/medical-aid-in-dying/advance-request-medical-aid-dying

You guys are going to hate it. 

How is Quebec going to get around the Criminal Code prohibition?  I am not saying its not possible, I just don't know the interaction between the statutes enough to know the answer.

The DPCP (our crowns) has received the order not to prosecute those violation. Trudeau government has said it wasn't going to intervene.

Thanks

[mongers]

One of my niece's room at college in Oxford was formerly Tolkien's room ....bet you are glad you met me now 

I guess for a Tolkien fan that could be a real plus for having to pay £9-10k uni.fees.

My Tolkien connection is ...
when I was a child we had a beach hut on bournemouth seafront, just 200yards from it on the cliff top was the hotel Tolkien used to say at with his wife during the summer months.

I could have non-literally spent several hours a day in some proximeity to the great man.

[mongers]

I feel I have an unfair advantage living in Vienna's center where you can't throw a stone without hitting some historic place.

But maybe a fun one: Friedrich Hebbel, a German poet, lived in my street for two years in the 1840s. He was born in Wesselburen/Dithmarschen (near where I'm from) and died in Vienna.

 

Yes an unfair advantage.

[Barrister]

Not pushed in your face on top of the page like the government members opposing it, but finally a Guardian piece allowed to support the assisted dying bill: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/26/assisted-dying-labour-legacy-death-vote

Many opponents misrepresent the proposed law. Gordon Brown wrote: "The experience of sitting with a fatally ill baby girl did not convince me of the case for assisted dying; it convinced me of the value and imperative of good end-of-life care." But his heartbreaking story of a child's death that was, he said, mercifully without pain, is entirely irrelevant to this bill. His call for good end-of-life care is universal, but palliative care staff know that the best of care can't always ease horrific final months. I have seen it in my own family.


Let anyone hesitating understand the worst horrors that can befall you at life's end, as reported in The Inescapable Truth, written by palliative care clinicians: "Some will retch at the stench of their own body rotting. Some will vomit their own faeces. Some will suffocate, slowly, inexorably, over several days." They estimate that, on any average day, some 17 people are dying these horrific deaths: it could be you or me. Doing nothing inflicts certain agony. Diane Abbott and Edward Leigh write that "the only adequate safeguard is to keep the current law unchanged", but keeping the status quo just safeguards suffering.

Older people are more strongly in favour of the right to die than younger people: the older you get, the more bad deaths you encounter and, yes, they are frequent. This is no abstract moral issue here, but a reality that many families are shocked to discover. It explains why, despite all the "state death service" frighteners and the wild misrepresentations, public opinion has not shifted: two-thirds stay as strongly in favour as ever, with only 13% against.

I have bolded the gruesome part because this is exactly why I cannot tolerate the opposition to the bill. While we humm and hamm and go through the legalese with a fine comb, people go through suffering that us lucky ones cannot possibly comprehend, but it can very easily be our own future as well. And they do not have to anymore. It is society's choice to put the through this even if they'd rather die. Simply put, every MP voting no is voting to force people to go through examples such as the above.

Even though it's mentioned, this feels like it doesn't acknowledge the existence of palliative care.  The horrible deaths being used as a comparison - people are not suffering.  They don't spare the "good drugs" in such cases - nobody is worried about a palliative care patient becoming addicted to opioids.  Indeed that's where fentanyl and the like are still being used.

As mentioned - I'm fine with MAID in such cases.

The problem is - once you open that door, where do you draw the line?  I made a whole long post about this.

[HVC]

I'll argue the not in pain part. My farther was given so much meds he was hallucinating, but still in considerable pain. Ironically, due to the topic at hand, he couldn't be given more without killing him.

[Barrister]

I'll argue the not in pain part. My farther was given so much meds he was hallucinating, but still in considerable pain. Ironically, due to the topic at hand, he couldn't be given more without killing him.

As I understand it - that's been the "little secret" of palliative care for years.  Patients are given doses of pain killers (that they definitely need!) with the knowledge it may/will cause their death.

Problem of course with it being under the table is that it doesn't happen every time.

But again - someone who is actively dying being given MAID is world's different than someone with a life-altering disability but to whom death is not remotely imminent being given MAID.

[Josquius]

There's all these theoreticals of enforced /pressures suicides and all that....

But I wonder. Looking at the Dutch who seem to theoretically have the best law on this stuff... Are there many actual cases of that in practice?

This was an interesting case and something i theoretically totally support the right to have.

BBC News - The troubled 29-year-old helped to die by Dutch doctors
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-45117163

[Sheilbh]

Not pushed in your face on top of the page like the government members opposing it, but finally a Guardian piece allowed to support the assisted dying bill: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/26/assisted-dying-labour-legacy-death-vote

Looking at the last couple of days alone both opinion pieces on the subject are in favour.

And by my count at least eight articles basically about or framed in a broadly supportive way. Two or three that are critical.

I have bolded the gruesome part because this is exactly why I cannot tolerate the opposition to the bill. While we humm and hamm and go through the legalese with a fine comb, people go through suffering that us lucky ones cannot possibly comprehend, but it can very easily be our own future as well. And they do not have to anymore. It is society's choice to put the through this even if they'd rather die. Simply put, every MP voting no is voting to force people to go through examples such as the above.

She probably should have said that The Inescapable Truth wasn't written by palliative care clinicians but by Dignity in Dying quoting family members and some palliative care clinicians (I'd note that the association for palliative care doctors have come out against the legislation).

But also this is MPs literally doing their job. They are lawmakers. This isn't a vote on a point of principle with no effect but sets out how assisted dying would work. I don't think the fault is legislators looking at a legal text and opposing it (on a free vote) because of concerns about how it would operate, that's literally what they're there for, especially when there's no party whip.

Sadiq Khan has also come out against today, he is concerned around the safeguards and risk of "coercive control" of vulnerable individuals. Other disability rights charities have also announced their opposition which basically means most disability rights groups have now announced opposition to the bill - I think if the bill fails, supporters need to spend time really trying to understand and address the fears of disabled people (that would certainly be key to changing my mind).

But there is opposition and support across all strands of Labour and Tories. There's also a lot of interest, I think over 100 MPs have expressed an interest in speaking in the debate. Unfortunately because of the procedure chosen by supporters in bringing the bill forward there will only be five hours of debate - so about two and a half minutes per MP who wants to speak. As I say I think Abbott and Leigh are right that there was a deliberate strategy of doing it fast and early, I think that has hurt support. I think some MPs' minds will be made up in the debate and I wouldn't be surprised if some end up voting against it precisely because of the short time the bill's been available for study and the short time for debate.

[Barrister]

There's all these theoreticals of enforced /pressures suicides and all that....

But I wonder. Looking at the Dutch who seem to theoretically have the best law on this stuff... Are there many actual cases of that in practice?

This was an interesting case and something i theoretically totally support the right to have.

BBC News - The troubled 29-year-old helped to die by Dutch doctors
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-45117163

I have definitely heard anecdotal stories from Netherlands.

Problem is it can only be anecdotal - because anyone who feels pressured but goes along with it anyways pretty much by definition doesn't complain.