Starmer's vision quest

[CXRAndy]

Starmer should have consulted the BBC


View: https://x.com/stillgray/status/1921852995290927386?t=JuEZZAliI-T7tHwV9Nhc2A&s=19

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Multiculturalism eh? I had pizza for my tea last night. A bit weird, but ok I suppose.

 

[AndyRM]

You'd think a seasoned right wing grifter would be able to manage a bit better than a 10 year old straw poll...

 

[CXRAndy]

You'd think a seasoned right wing grifter would be able to manage a bit better than a 10 year old straw poll...

You'll find that the 'straw poll ' is still valid today, probably even more so

 

[AndyRM]

Possibly, but the problem with a one off question like that is it's about as nuanced as a brick in the balls and doesn't take into account the scope of what multiculturalism actually represents.

It's a constantly evolving topic too, so all a one off question like that is going to give you is a snapshot of a particular point in time, not a properly representative view. But it generates a snappy "Multiculturalism blasted by new BBC poll: shocking data reveals the truth" style headline which, once you get past it, usually turns out to be bullshi!t.

 

[First Aspect]

"I'm not against multiculturalism. Some of my best friends are multicultural."

 

[First Aspect]

The 1970s sounded really fun. Let's go back there.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

The 1970s sounded really fun. Let's go back there.

You'd need to go back a bit further to get rid of all this for in stuff. I reckon most problems can be traced back to 1066.

 

[First Aspect]

The Romans. Bloody illegals coming across the channel from Europe.

 

[Pblakeney]

What about the Celts?

I'd like one of those who have rose tinted memories to pick the year/decade/century when Britain was all sunlit uplands and no downsides. Or immigrants.

 

[Ian H]

You'd need to go back a bit further to get rid of all this for in stuff. I reckon most problems can be traced back to 1066.

The Norman invasion was really just a fight between family members as to who had the best claim to the English throne.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Beaker people?

 

[First Aspect]

Britain was at one stage uninhabited. We are all immigrants. Sh!t oh dear.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'm going by what nurses and doctors and palliative care specialists say. After initial depression, most patients with a good standard of palliative don't want to hasten their end.



When you or your pal get to that stage, if you had a good standard or care and some quality of life you might feel differently. By emphasising the personal autonomy aspect I think it's easy to overlook that this bill will disproportionately affect the most vulnerable.

There's certainly scope for an assisted dying protocol but this bill isn't it. Parliament spent longer discussing the fox hunting bill and every sensible ammendment or safeguard has been vetoed.

You just don’t get it do you?, some of us don’t want the “good care”, “palliative care” route, even if it was/is universally available, we want the “switch off the light” route. Not compulsory. If other people want different, fair enough, I have no problem with that, I will even pay my taxes to fund the system, but, just as I would not dream of forcing my choice on others. I don’t expect them to force their choice on me!

Finally, as things are, existing patients don’t have much choice but to “grin and bear it” do they?,

 

[icowden]

I'm going by what nurses and doctors and palliative care specialists say. After initial depression, most patients with a good standard of palliative don't want to hasten their end.

And most won't. The bill isn't about most, it's about some. Currently when an animal is very ill, we give it an injection which eases its suffering and hastens its end (well unless it's a racehorse in which case bang). We don't start to fit it with a peg for feeding, set up round the clock nursing to clean and rotate the animal, and dose it with morphine every time the pain becomes too great.

There's certainly scope for an assisted dying protocol but this bill isn't it. Parliament spent longer discussing the fox hunting bill and every sensible ammendment or safeguard has been vetoed.

Except that the request must:

• Be made by someone with capacity (Mental Capacity Act) who has had a witnessed preliminary discussion with a medical practitioner
• A coordinating doctor is appointed who carries out the first assessment and make a report and recommendation.
• A second independent doctor must do the same.
• An assessing doctor must review the reports of the first two doctors, have a discussion with the patient, review their records, review other care options including palliative care, psychological support etc. If this doctor is not satisfied that the patient meets all the criteria a second assessment can be done by another independent doctor.
• The reports then get sent by the commissioner to a multidisciplinary panel who make a final decision as to eligibility.

By the time all that has been done any patient with 6 months or less left to live will have probably died anyway.