They Shoot Horses, don't they?

The only question really is should people who are terminally ill have this option. The parts in bold are important. 6 months to live has been added but in practice that time could vary. People get to know what the actual timescale is when death happens.

Info from Oregon says that 1 in 3 do not take the option when granted and also some don't get permission before they die.

Then comes another aspect. Over time more conditions get added. It's what usually happens.
 
Sponsored Links
The only question really is should people who are terminally ill have this option. The parts in bold are important. 6 months to live has been added but in practice that time could vary. People get to know what the actual timescale is when death happens.

Info from Oregon says that 1 in 3 do not take the option when granted and also some don't get permission before they die.

Then comes another aspect. Over time more conditions get added. It's what usually happens.
In practice many will make the decision weeks or days away from expected death, so there will simply not be enough time to go through all the procedural hoops.
 
Not all

This is a free vote

Who gives it ?

More so than a lot of voters, yes
If you believe all of that, and if many voters are like you and believe MP's are above scrutiny/influence and are all knowledgeable, then maybe putting it to the people is a bad thing? ;)

Although an opponent MP when questioned said...

“I think the bill will pass, but it’s impossible to tell,”.

“MPs can cave to constituent pressure regardless of their personal views. Some will vote it through without reading it. Some will reject it based on one line. Some might vote it through but reject it later if it’s not amended how they like.”

"The MP continued: “These kinds of votes are always so messy. It’s a quandary for MPs. Do you vote based on your views? The views of the voters? Do you abstain if you aren’t sure? It’s a difficult one.”

"To help with this dilemma, many MPs have been putting the question directly to their constituents. Labour MPs Tom Hayes and Adam Jogee are among those who have put out surveys to voters, while Dan Aldridge held a public meeting in his Weston-super-Mare constituency to hear input from locals"

"MPs have also been known to change their minds on assisted dying, with some who voted in 2015 now indicating they may vote the opposite way"

So some MP's are putting the question to their constituents...

Sounds a bit like asking for the public's opinion to me...

And some might change their mind...

Based on what, and is that opponent MP not trying to put a bit of pressure on others? ;)
 
Sounds a bit like asking for the public's opinion to me...
What's an MP there for, if it's not to represent their public.

Nothing wrong with accepting opinion in a free vote

Tell me why we have MP's if they are not there for important things such as this ?
 
Sponsored Links
In practice many will make the decision weeks or days away from expected death, so there will simply not be enough time to go through all the procedural hoops.
If there was no safeguards you would be moaning about that
 
He is the boss
If Starmer stated his position you would be whining he is influencing the vote….and don’t tell me that’s not true

You will turn any argument to suit your “I hate Starmer” obsession.

You need to sort yourself out
 
The corrected term is assisted suicide.
No it isn’t.

The person is dying anyway, the only choice is whether to choose an unpleasant death of pain or a dignified death.

You are a pro life nutter with no common sense at all
 
I was previously in favour of it. But I don't like what they have drafted. I see no reason for a Family court Judge to have any involvement.
Me neither, if they are anything like those courts that decide on taking children from parents.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top