Skip to content

Can you say “Rug pull” children? Yes, that’s right, rug pull.

MPs have voted to remove the need for a High Court judge to approve assisted dying requests.

13 thoughts on “Can you say “Rug pull” children? Yes, that’s right, rug pull.”

  1. The “High Court” judge thing was always a nonsense. You don’t need a High Court judge to get a divorce, if they wanted judicial oversight of euthenasia, it should have been any judge. Just like if you want a wire tap, it’s “a” judge, not a high court judge. If you’ve forgotten to get a power of attorney and want to strip somebody of their autonomy, it’s “a” judge, not a high court judge.

    And, as it’s a medical thing, shouldn’t it be overseen by a doctor, not a judge? And “any” doctor; if you want an abortion, it’s overseen by “a” doctor, not some sort of “High Court” doctor.

  2. Phase One was when the Cons deliberately sent all those pensioners home from hospital to die during Covid.

    This is Phase Two.

  3. This is someone’s personal decision. Beats me why you need a judge or a doctor. You want every decision in your life subject to someone else’s approval in case you’ve been coerced into it? Going to need a lot of judges or doctors.
    Let’s be honest. You’re against assisted suicide on a moral basis. Past that, you’re just looking for reasons

  4. Steve. No one’s talking about euthanising anyone. Someone is being assisted to gain their wish. Morals are your wishes imposed on others.

  5. “No one’s talking about euthanising anyone” Oh yes they are. If the victim is to have the determining say they’d call it “assisted suicide”. When they call it “assisted dying” then you know The State will have the determining say.

    Given how little care and thought will be expended on such decisions I’d say that it’s The Shallow State that will decide.

    Personally I’m all for me being allowed to decide according to some form I’ve completed while still compos mentis, or even according to a properly witnessed oral statement. And if I’m gaga I’d rather my wife decided than The State.

    Alternatively I could be supplied with the wherewithal for a nice painless death that I’m competent enough to administer myself. I really don’t want to throw myself in front of a train and spoil the peace of mind of the driver. Though come to think of it, bugger unionised train drivers.

  6. dearieme
    “really don’t want to throw myself in front of a train”

    Wouldn’t work anyway down here in Dorset; even if the damned things are running, they don’t go fast enough to reliably kill you.

    Apparently Leyland station is the place; fast through trains and a long straight track so you can see them coming to time your leap.

  7. @dearieme
    That’s what worries me. Any part of the State having any part of it. I can’t see why it can’t be a service like any other service. You don’t need a high court judge’s opinion on whether to get a haircut. Even if you’re being coerced by the wife/girlfriend. And I don’t find the coercion objection particularly valid. We’re being coerced over one thing or another every day of our lives. The coercers are proud of it. They get awarded fucking peerages for it.

  8. BiS – they will come for the mental patients, mark my words.

    I am a mental patient. Those nice young men in their clean white coats kept me alive. If someone told me to kill myself whilst I was in a state, I’d do it. Getting mentals to kill themselves is shooting fish in a barrel. We are already halfway there on our own accord.

    It’s been purple dragon knowing you. Hee hee, haha to the funny farm!

  9. The thought occurs; anyone going down the assisted dying route faces an inheritance tax bill of 150%. Unless they go to the High Court.

    Sorted.

    By the way, why I am getting adverts with bloody Chinese text on them?

  10. @Chris
    You’re saying there is going to be someone around to regret it?
    This is why I don’t like that anti-argument. Pick a better one. It’s essentially you know better about someone’s life than they do? What gives you the presumption?

  11. Following that argument means that murder is permissible as long as it’s done with complete surprise and painlessly. The murder victim is no longer there to protest.

    If I came across someone standing on the parapet of a bridge prepared to jump, I’d do my best to talk them out of it, rather than give them a helpful push.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *