Turn on thread page Beta

The 'right to die' bill got rejected watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Synchyst)
    The bill should not have gone through a poll in the first place or bee discussed in parliament.

    No one should be committing suicide no matter how bad they are suffering. This is totally my opinion. The fact that a doctor can tell you how long you have left to live is total garbage. There are countless numbers of cancers who have defeated cancer after being told they have a certain number of months to live.

    Only God knows.
    So no one knows then
    (Original post by jamestg)
    It's still not as representative as it could be...

    Anyway - do you have any info on its enforcement in other countries? Is it successful? I really would like to make up my mind for my politics class.
    Search Oregon and the Netherlands.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by jamestg)
    It's still not as representative as it could be...

    Anyway - do you have any info on its enforcement in other countries? Is it successful? I really would like to make up my mind for my politics class.
    No survey ever is, but it's still a high statistic though, so even if 5,000 wasn't representative, it's unlikely the real figure is going to be anywhere less than 50%, so I think it's safe to believe a majority supported the bill.

    I don't have any information on its success in other countries, although I know Switzerland has provided euthanasia for a few years now.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    It's the largest poll ever done on it in the UK, so it's the most representative of any of the survey data you'll find on the subject.
    Also, a poll of 5000 people gives a 1.4% margin of error with 95% confidence. So, it is easily a big enough sample.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Simes)
    Also, a poll of 5000 people gives a 1.4% margin of error with 95% confidence. So, it is easily a big enough sample.
    Thanks, I didn't know that.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Synchyst)
    No one should be committing suicide no matter how bad they are suffering.
    Wow. That's sick. Possibly one of the most evil things I have ever read online.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Very disappointing that our MPs can be so misrepresentative of their constituents. I am saddened that this bill was rejected because the issue will very unlikely be looked at again for a long time.

    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Does it matter though? You can fly to Switzerland pretty cheap these days.
    Not if you're aiding someone in their suicide. Under UK law you can be charged with manslaughter.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    Please see this poll: http://www.populus.co.uk/Poll/Dignity-in-Dying/

    It records that 82% of those interviewed supported the bill.
    Yes because it was a question biased in favour of that answer. Ask anyone if they want a choice about something, there is a predisposition to answer "yes". "Choice" appears to have no downsides.

    Ask them is they would like their mother's new partner to arrange this for their mother (all other considerations-free choice, sound mind, doctors, High Court judges etc) and you wouldn't get the same response.

    The first reason why not is because whilst most people believe they should have freedom of action, they are less happy about conceding that to others when they believe they have a legitimate interest in the decision. I have the right to erect a conservatory but I will object to planning permission when my neighbour wants to do it.

    Secondly, the original question was not an open question; it raised and unequivocally resolved in favour, many of the arguments against assisted suicide. The question I formulated was deliberately designed to re-open those arguments and did so in a subtle way. It should make no difference that a wicked stepfather was promoting this given the assumptions in the question. If the woman was of sound mind and genuinely wanted this, the promoter is irrelevant However, almost certainly the way I phrased this would cause most people to doubt the validity of the assumptions. Did the woman consent? Was she of sound mind?

    Most partisans load questions in opinion polls.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Starvation13)
    News Story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34208624
    ----

    Let's talk about this. Just don't go full bonkers down there because most people have good opinions and we all want to read them lol.

    And I'll probably say the first controversial thing I've said on here lol:

    Personally,I'm against the bill, not only for religious reasons but also for the fact that allowing the bill IMO would've lead some people to commit suicide when the diagnosis could've been wrong, it's difficult to say whether someone actually has 6 months left to live.
    Except the pre-requisites isn't just having a terminal illness, the illness basically has to destroy any quality of life you could hypothetically have left. So people in constant agony, people completely paralysed, people with such severe alzheimers that they are in capable of doing anything or recognising anyone. The phrase "you call this living?" comes to mind.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Unless you are the one suffering, I don't think you should be able to make that decision for them. Life isn't about just existing, it's about living. If being alive is worse than death, then I think it's fair to die. And if you can't have a happy life because of something you can't control, you should have the right to end it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    It's the largest poll ever done on it in the UK, so it's the most representative of any of the survey data you'll find on the subject.
    That doesn't make it reliable, it just means there aren't any reliable surveys. 82% of 5,000 is 4,100; so 4,100 people out of an electorate of 45,000,000 is an incredibly tiny amount


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I was pleased it was rejected. It would have led to a slippery slope of people ending up feeling they had to end life early. Even if you agree with the premise of the Bill (which I don't), there were not enough safeguards.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    That doesn't make it reliable, it just means there aren't any reliable surveys. 82% of 5,000 is 4,100; so 4,100 people out of an electorate of 45,000,000 is an incredibly tiny amount.
    If that were true then surveys would be useless, but they aren't, because if you achieve a good sample then you can be reasonably assured that the sample is representative of the whole.

    Please see Simes' post that the poll of 5000 people gives a 1.4% margin of error with 95% confidence.

    You can verify this for yourself using the following calculator:
    https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size-calculator/
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Starvation13)
    News Story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34208624
    ----

    Let's talk about this. Just don't go full bonkers down there because most people have good opinions and we all want to read them lol.

    And I'll probably say the first controversial thing I've said on here lol:

    Personally,I'm against the bill, not only for religious reasons but also for the fact that allowing the bill IMO would've lead some people to commit suicide when the diagnosis could've been wrong, it's difficult to say whether someone actually has 6 months left to live.
    Nonsense, the European countries where it is legal have had no such problem.

    (Original post by miser)
    It's a failure of democracy when the public so overwhelmingly support a bill, but the political representatives vote it out anyway.

    MPs are out of touch with so much, I suppose it oughtn't be surprising their views have failed to keep pace with public sentiment.
    +1

    (Original post by Synchyst)
    The bill should not have gone through a poll in the first place or bee discussed in parliament.

    No one should be committing suicide no matter how bad they are suffering. This is totally my opinion. 1.The fact that a doctor can tell you how long you have left to live is total garbage. 2.There are countless numbers of cancers who have defeated cancer after being told they have a certain number of months to live.

    Only God knows.
    Why?

    1. Of course, you know more than doctors do. Can we see your PhD? If you don't have one, your opinion is worth less than that of a doctor.
    2. Learn your stats. Also, we are talking about terminal cancer. I trust you know what that means.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I sincerely hope no one disagreeing with assisted suicide has to go through the painful process of seeing a loved one go through stage 4 cancer, withered, struggling for each breath, and in so much pain that maximum morphine dosage is unable to help, forced to spend their last few months being poked at by doctors, and being kept alive by the skin of their teeth.

    No one should have to go through that.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Regardless of my reasons, I should be allowed to end it when I choose. My life is mine, not the government's.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Does it matter though? You can fly to Switzerland pretty cheap these days.
    Not if you're hooked up to a ventilator or external VAD. You probably won't be allowed to get on the plane in the first place, and anyone helping you to get there gets charged.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    saddening but as usual the government -and religious freaks- believe they have the right to dictate what people do with their bodies. thankfully there are more and more sane youths who are not only in favour of humans having complete authority over their own bodies in the form of euthanasia, abortion, sexual activities, etc. the majority of intelligent, normal people out there are pro doing whatever the hell you want with your own body and life, and the world leaders need to realise that in the end they will be on the wrong side of history should they not listen to the rational people of the world, rather than the irrational and delusional fools (also known as religious nuts)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Synchyst)

    No one should be committing suicide no matter how bad they are suffering. This is totally my opinion. The fact that a doctor can tell you how long you have left to live is total garbage.

    Only God knows.
    I agree we should leave all medical decisions to the wisdom of the great all mighty, who's reputation for scientific prowess is beyond reproach. Or should we leave it to tarot card readers on the street?

    While we are at it, why don't get rid of lightning rods as well. Who are we to question him if God wishes to smite down a building. Clearly only Jesus should decide when a building gets burned to a crisp.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fango_Jett)
    Not if you're hooked up to a ventilator or external VAD. You probably won't be allowed to get on the plane in the first place, and anyone helping you to get there gets charged.
    Makes sense that they'd punish you for helping but would they still punish someone for helping someone get to Switzerland?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Makes sense that they'd punish you for helping but would they still punish someone for helping someone get to Switzerland?
    Probably would. I mean if they reasonably suspect that you had a deliberate hand in helping.

    I mean how believable is it that your terminally ill relative planned a trip to Switzerland, a country famous for its' assisted suicide clinics, out of the blue with absolutely no expectation that they were going there to end their lives and you had no clue or suspicion whatsoever.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.