Subject: The Parliamentary debate on assisted dying.

Backwards and forwards the debate rolled on, each member eloquently putting forward their opinion since on this matter it can be nothing more. I’m sure most of the politicians have already made up their own mind on the matter but it seems to me that the question is for the person dying, not the philosophically opposed, not the diktat of religious opinion or parliamentary opinion, the only opinion which is worth considering are those of the ones who are experiencing the onset of death and death who are in acute pain or distress.
Undoubtedly palliative care is ‘not’ sufficiently available in our county and whilst underfunded by the government and reliant on charity, in some circumstances, even the palliative services cannot provide a relief from the pain and distress when a person dies.
Who are we kidding listening to the parliamentary ‘legal eagles’ pick holes in the definition or wording of a clause in the bill, this is not an exercise in definitives it’s simply placing in the hands of someone dying the option of avoiding intolerable pain. It doesn’t question their morality or their ethics it simple states that their life can end and the pain brought also to an end.
The implications of others interfering and influencing the person dying can be dealt with by providing safeguards but shouldn’t preclude the principle of right to choose the ‘time and place’ of my death.