Claud Regnard

The Swiss have 80+yrs experience of providing assisted deaths.
They are clear that it is
-called assisted suicide.
-not a medical treatment
-not part of healthcare

The reality of assisted dying/ suicide in Canada
See www.kadoh.uk for more evidence around AD/S

Jurisdictions allowing assisted deaths have seen the
quality of end-of-life care
👇go down
❌Not up

Welsh hospice services could reduce without more funding, charity says Hospices caring for people at the end of their lives are at risk because funding is

"Nine of the 14 hospices in Wales..face a financial deficit in 2025-26, one has closed and another is temporarily shut because of increased running costs and funding difficulties."
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

Thank you- a helpful clarification.
If we take 1% as a likely rate in the UK, the current total death rate in England & Wales (568,213 in 2024) means we can expect nearly 110 assisted deaths each week.
The question is, can we leave that to a stretched & exhausted NHS?
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...

The figure is rising each year.
In 2024 in Oregon 376 had assisted deaths
The average annual total deaths in Oregon is 19,710.
That means 1 in 52 had an assisted death.
Medical definitions describe anything between 1 in 10 and 1 in 100 as being common.
hdpulse.nimhd.nih.gov/data-portal/...

No mention in this article that the assisted death bill was
-drafted in less than 4 weeks,
-primarily based on misinformation from campaign groups
-ignored major organisations and expert opinion
-repeatedly rejected safeguards
Peers now have to do the work that should have been done before.

they came for disabled people too, both by making it even harder for us to claim benefits but also by allowing assisted dying legislation with pathetic safeguards to be pursued knowing that it will lead to disabled people being pressured into dying.

"Rare" is 1 in 2000 or more.
Common is 1 in 20 or less
Oregon assisted deaths are currently 1 in 71.
So Oregon assisted deaths are relatively common, not rare.

If only the same determination for assisted deaths was applied to the access to specialist palliative care ....
www.pallcarevic.asn.au/news/96/fund...

Assisted suicide & HoL peers:
❗A badly drafted/considered law demands scrutiny.
❗A poorly considered process requires questions.
❗A rushed affair creates dangers.
✅Peers have been forced to protect patients from harm.

A badly drafted law demands scrutiny.
A poorly considered process requires questions.
A rushed affair creates dangers.
Peers are doing their best to protect patients from harm.

Incorrect.
The assisted death rates in Oregon and other states are rising rapidly
&
The eligibility requirements are also expanding (often by changes in practice rather than law changes)

Assisted dying bill: Special series #2 - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 71 In this special episode we have an exclusive conversation with Dame Elizabeth Gardiner, the former head of the government’s Office of Parliamentary Counsel, who drafted the Terminally Ill Adults (End ...

Dame Elizabeth Gardner describes how she drafted the assisted suicide bill in <4weeks
"on a shoestring".
No wonder the House of Lords is forced to scrutinise it.
⏩
www.hansardsociety.org.uk/news/parliam...

What's in a name?
The Swiss have 80yrs experience of providing assisted deaths.
They are clear.
They call it assisted suicide.
They are also clear it is not a medical treatment.
www.samw.ch/en/Ethics/To...

Assisted dying/suicide and palliative care:
There is no choice when more than 300 people every day in the UK can't access the specialist palliative care they desperately need.
[HospiceUK estimate in 2017- likely to be higher today]

Improving end of life care will be challenging when every day >300 people can't access specialist palliative care.
Unfortunately the evidence is that #AssistedDying doesn't improve end of life care.

Whatever the public's view on legalising #AssistedDying it comes last on their priorities for this government.

Peers keep finding major flaws in the assisted dying/suicide bill.
Those problems started with minimal drafting and scrutiny in the Commons.

The careful scrutiny by the house of lords of the assisted dying/suicide bill is being described as "constitutional vandalism".
The real damage was done by
-drafting major law in less than 4wks
-failing to listen to evidence expressing concerns
-excluding many orgs & groups

Labour peer just let slip he thinks poor people should be allowed to use assisted dying When you're so determined to push through an assisted dying bill that will kill so many, what's a few benefit scroungers anyway?

Labour peer just let slip he thinks poor people should be allowed to use assisted dying www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/...

3/n And while the Commons did support the assisted dying bill at third reading, there were a lot of reservations and the margin was only 314-291.

Taking all this together, to threaten use of the Parliament Act to bludgeon it through, feels more undemocratic than the Lords blocking it, for now.

I support the principle of assisted dying. I think bringing it in through this kind of flawed process is a recipe for disaster. I think attacking the legitimacy of the Lords as convened is just confused and counterproductive. This is a result of the choice to do this through PMB. Own it. 6/?

Assisted dying isn’t a manifesto pledge. It isn’t even a government bill. Lords are entitled to do their job on such bill.

More than that, private members’ bills have limited time for debate and amendment. That’s why people flagged from the beginning it might be a bad way to pass this reform. 2/?

The accusation that the Lords are “obstructing democracy” by supporters of the assisted dying bill is a ridiculous one that shows up the flaws in this process that have been there from the very beginning – which have repeatedly been covered up by heated rhetoric (1/?)

Living wills are useful expressions of future care if someone loses capacity, but they are not legal documents.
In contrast, an Advance Decision to Refuse Treatment (ADRT) has legal authority if valid & applicable, but..
...nothing in case law allows an individual to demand future care options.

This is understandable but unworkable for assisted dying/suicide:
1) Only those with capacity are eligible
2) Current case law is clear, you can refuse future care options, but you can't demand future options.
3) Allowing advance requests for AD/S creates dangers of bias and abuse.

Assisted dying bill:
The HoL may wish to ask
❓ Why over 300 every day in the UK cannot access the specialist palliative care they desperately need
❓ Why specialist palliative care services in AD jurisdictions have their funding stalled or reduced

Assisted dying bill:
The HoL may wish to ask
❓ Why every AD jurisdiction has expanded its criteria (inc. Oregon)
❓ Why there was more evidence on thalidomide than exists on AD drugs/doses
❓ Why AD reports contain so little data and why some produce nothing (eg. Dignitas)

Assisted dying bill:
The HoL may wish to ask
❓ How many cases of suffering are caused by inadequate or ignorant care
❓ About the impact of AD on a stretched & exhausted NHS
❓ Why no AD drug has ever been approved by any regulatory authority in the world