THE 'ASSISTED DYING' DEBATE

Friday sees the debate in the UK Parliament when MP's will mull over the pro's and con's of letting individuals choose whether to end their lives or not.  There are naturally strong views born out of beliefs, both religious and secular on either side of the argument.  I liken the discussion to that of abortion - both subjects being fiercely opposed by those who believe that they are right with no allowance made or granted for anyone with an opposing stance.  Emotion, justice and morality all play a part on both sides of the argument.. Those of a religious bent - and I do consider those who believe in characters from a best-selling novel to be nothing other than bent! - should not be allowed to use this 'crutch' as a reasonable argument against either the choice of dying or aborting a foetus. Unfortunately, there are sad saps still at large who have believed in such tosh ever since that well-reported incident on a cross. (Can't believe it really took place myself, can you just imagine the 'Health and Safety' implications!). Bearing in mind the congregational sizes at your average church service, is it representative of our population to allow twenty-six C of E bishops to sit in the House of Lords?  They pontificate, at great cost to the taxpayer, over proposed government legislation before voting on the subject's possible implementation prior to being passed back to the House of Commons for amendments or support.  The quicker these non-elected, minority-serving, migrant-fawning hangers-on are banned from office the better our democracy will be.  That goes for all members of the House of Lords, not just those with a 'nod to God'!  

It hasn't gone unnoticed that head honchos at the C of E, the Catholic Church and the Jewish faith have banded together in a show of unity, as if anyone should care, and come out with the following statement: 'Part of the role of faith leaders in communities is to provide spiritual and pastoral care for the sick and for the dying.  We hold the hands of loved ones in their final days, we pray with families both before and after death.  It is to this vocation that we have been called, and it is from this vocation that we write'.  Vocation?  Vocation?  Sanctimonious prigs! It is not a proper job!! Not once is there reference to the physical and mental suffering of the individual concerned. This 'Collective of wastefulness' goes on to say:  'Our pastoral roles make us deeply concerned about the impact the bill would have on the most vulnerable, opening up the possibility of life-threatening abuse and coercion'.  Is it just me, but the irony is not lost.   'Vulnerable'?  'Life-threatening abuse and coercion'?  I thought those attributes played a large part in the everyday life of those 'members of the cloth'.  (The words 'large part' and 'member' taking on a life of their own in more ways than one!).

 I'm all in favour of a second house, but one where the incumbents are elected to serve by the general population, not because you are high up in some religious sect or due to an accident of birth - a great-great-great grandchild of a so-called 'noble heritage', 'Yeoman stock' or diluted 'blue blood' with an unbroken family listing in DeBretts!

Meanwhile, back in the land of the living - including those who clearly wish they weren't - despite the Prime Minister's directive that Friday's vote should be 'free', Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary and the Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, one Shabana Mahmood, have both publicly declared they are voting against the bill on Assisted dying.  Wes Streeting has stated that passing this legislation will be costly to implement for the NHS and could 'lead to someone choosing to end their life early as a way of saving the NHS money'.  I thought he and Rachel Reeves in particular would be over the proverbial deathbed, if not the moon, should this be the case.   Surprise, surprise, Mrs. M, the L C & J Sec. sees the bill being passed as placing the country on a 'slippery slope towards death on demand'.  A tad dramatic in word usage, but then she is a barrister, as opposed to a barista, and not untypical of an MP representing a constituency that has a large Muslim population, in this case, Birmingham Ladywood.  Whilst she may well hold genuine concerns on moral and/or ethical grounds, one should never discount the percentage of motivation created by the guile and pandering of an MP in order to hold on to their seat come the next election.   As has been noted in the press, if the bill is passed, two of the 'Top dogs' involved in its implementation and success will be those who voiced their opinions and voting intentions.  That could cause a few problems methinks, still, I'm sure the good Mr. Starmer has all situations covered.  Thought...  There's always Novichok to fall back on if things look awkward - joke... joke!

Whilst it is a serious subject, I continue to be naively optimistic for a positive outcome.  The mischievous and whimsical side of one's nature does however allow one's mind to conjure up thoughts of a dictatorial regime - elected obviously - where subjects could be put down on the grounds of 'Being kind to them and good for society at large'.  What an opportunity to find space to drive on the M25 without the usual tailbacks?  It's the elderly that I have trouble with.  Now I say this as a 77 year-old in body, but 47 years-old in mind - well that's how I see myself.  Some may differ.  I do recall an instance when I described myself as 'Young at heart', to which I was subjected to the retort - 'More childlike really!'.  We still speak...

Queuing at a supermarket checkout usually causes blood vessels to enlarge, if not burst.  'Bert and Doris' stand between me and the customer being served.  They tut, they moan in dismissive, though hushed tones as their wait continues.  She sporting inherited broach on her coat, he sporting flat cap, as opposed to baseball cap, which often denotes ongoing chemotherapy in the elderly. They look at me for moral support in their dual irritation but their turn eventually arrives - and milk it they do!.  They are slow at packing, they are slow at paying.  Doris can't find her purse, the assistant gives me a sideways glance indicating her own irritation at their slowness.  Bert reminds Doris to show their Nectar card before the final sum is requested. That's also lost in the Tardis that serves as a handbag!  Much searching and a further minute out of my life, when 'hey presto' another rabbit is extracted. I am beginning to feel slightly more confident that this  couple will soon be on their way and out of my life. Bert then reminds Doris that they have vouchers.  More scrambling, same handbag, different pocket!  Just as I'm losing the will to live and asking myself why B&D had to be in front of me that day, I witness the debilitating ageing squawks seeking advice from said assistant who by now has joined me, and those behind me, in losing the will to live.  'Are any of these vouchers any good', Doris plaintively asks.  The assistant trawls through said collection and verbally confirms that six are irrelevant and three are out of date.  Doris puts them neatly back into her purse, which is then equally neatly placed in her handbag ready to be extracted on their next visitation in a week's time - at precisely the same time of  day.  These are people of routine! I am now served, my goods being placed quickly in my bags and with consideration to others behind me.  My Nectar card and credit card are to hand, I carry no vouchers.  A swift transaction, a smile, a 'cheerio' and I'm away.  Off to my car, but sadly snookered in my quest to exit the sliding doors as there stand Bert and Doris who have met up with Neville and Elsie, chattering like monkeys and oblivious to the their trolleys  being parked in such a manner as to stop all 'who enter here'  or  those wishing to exit and make up for lost time and a possible course of counselling.  Assisted dying?  A nudge in the right direction for some springs to mind...