I have no idea how the assisted dying debates/ votes will play out, but I have a bad feeling it will end up as a case study in the unsuitability of UK political culture and legislative process for this sort of thing.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
You wouldn’t ask me, who has watched exactly one football match in my life, to write new rules for football.
Similarly, I doubt most MPs have personal experience of how awful end-of-life can be, since most people don’t. This needs legislating by people who have seen what they are talking about.
Given it is literally about life and death, one might assume there would be a lot of discussion. Poorly thought out process for something this significant
Disagree - bad discourse is usually led my right wing rags and disinformation- this time round they dont seem to be all over the place - that should allow good debate.
If I had a vote, I'd vote against.
Mainly because I don't trust our systems to not abuse (whether deliberately or through inefficiency) whatever rules are put in place.
We should be able to choose how we die, not have pain and suffering imposed on us. I’ve seen it first hand and the law is currently cruel and heartbreaking.
I'm not so sure - I don't think we've really been that bad at this sort of thing historically - if there's a change on assisted dying, it's imo not UK political culture per se, but more polarisation overall.
It’s clearly an important issue with lots of complicated and nuanced aspects. But in terms of the crude optics it’s just incredibly weird and unfortunate that this is one of the first things the Labour government is associated with.
MPs will have an opinion and yes, we live in a representative democracy. However this is a morally and practically complex issue and consultation beyond constituency clinics would build consensus. FWIW, I'm fully in support of the Bill - I just want it to last beyond next change of Government.
Comments
Similarly, I doubt most MPs have personal experience of how awful end-of-life can be, since most people don’t. This needs legislating by people who have seen what they are talking about.
Never a better description of Westminster has ever been asserted.
Mainly because I don't trust our systems to not abuse (whether deliberately or through inefficiency) whatever rules are put in place.
Reform circa 2006 and end up in stalemate.
I wrote about this more than a decade ago from personal experience. I share some of your concerns but it is an important step. See https://www.internationalfuturesforum.com/s/394
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04793/
The humanitarian case for it is evident.
The potential for the UK's politicians and legislature to produce some half-arsed fudge which creates a worse scenario is almost inevitable.
We have 650 newly elected MPs, they should be able to have an opinion.
There are at least other 10 countries that have had similar votes.