The AM Glass Box
Good morning. Carolyn today. I know you'll make her welcome.
You may have read your morning paper and listened to the radio, and have some ideas you want to hear on PM tonight.
Perhaps a question about something in the news you would like answered - or better still, direct experience of something topical. Or maybe there's an aspect to a big story you haven't heard explored that you would like to hear.
It's best to post before 10.00.
Listen to PM
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~32~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I am very upset by the BBC tone/spin against EU re the Donner issue this morning . Below is a copy of the email I just sent to the Today programme. Could you get your PM team onto checking the points I raise also to get someone in from the Transplant service to enlighten us. otherwise it sounds as if there will be all kinds of unintended consequences such as wasted organs if reciprocation in EU is stopped and less donners through the innuendo.
email as sent to Today:-
Half the Story?? Lazy reporting??'Who gets the organ'. I am told it is oil rich type nationals who are the problem here not the EU patients who have their own systems at home 'thank you'! Can you please clarify as it affects people's decisions whether or not to be a donar. I have been aware of this situation for years so why has it only come up now?
I think you should find out for us how many EU patients came here for transplant and what exactly were the circumstances? I.e. there may be a sensible reciprocal arrangement between EU health systems so as not to waste organs through not being able to match tissue type etc which would be admirable. But this is different to health tourism by oil rich nationals and the like coming here for transplants which a doctor friend tells me is lucrative business for some doctors here !! You owe it to us to get in someone to explain this properly as the interview was not clear. Thank you
Complain about this comment
Another email sent to Today:
Further to my previous email re Donner organs and private money etc
The 7.35 'Today' interview with Ms Buggins (?) was still very hazy and jargonistic What would be useful to know is how many of our nationals get transplants from organs from EU reciprocal agreements and how the match and delivery of the organ works - ok it is a programme in its own right perhaps but surely this all could be explained by someone succinctly? Also, are those coming from the likes of Greece and Cyprus here for transplants also arriving in numbers to France Germany Holland etc... Can we have the full story please?
Complain about this comment
Wakey wakey! It is not that early surely?
Re the Poet Loreates's poem re the First World War.
Re Harry Patches poem - "War is organised murder"- will it be read out at his funeral? I hope so.
Eddie can you also cover this story:
Anyone else disturbed by the Met allowing officers to wear support badges for soldiers /war on their uniforms? Surely they should at least give the impression of neutrality/professionalism. As one who does not attend anti war demos because of the kettling situation (designed to keep the likes of me at home) and officers without ID whacking protesters I really object to our expensive police force being officially politicised in this way. What will happen to an officer who does not want to wear this badge ?????????????!
Complain about this comment
Could you try and get someone from the BMA to react to the ruling by the law lords on assisted suicide please? Will they for instance change their stance on supporting assisted suicide?
We hear that the vulnerable will be protected from undue influence and pressure. For instance, the DPP has indicated, perhaps one safe guard will be that there will be no financial gain for anyone involved in assisting. But, I fail to understand how such safe guards might opperate. How would this stand up with inherited wealth and property for instance? Also as a very brave disabled person pointed out on news night,"the thought of suicide has now been put into some peoples minds where before it wasn't there". How do you protect against psychological pressure? And what about poor people who can't afford 'legal' assisted suicide?
Complain about this comment
From Thursday's Daily Mail. page 14
"People don't go to Dignitas to die but to be killed. And killing can never be a therapeutic act."
Melanie Phillips
Complain about this comment
Pithywriter (3)
If what you say is true, (I haven't heard about this one)this is deeply concerning. What are the motives of the met allowing this? No, I mean the real motives. Are they saying its about supporting the troops and not the war? This is the mantra of the establishment when really it brings kudos to the war itself.
There are those who believe the best way to support our troops is to bring them home. Would officers be allowed to wear a badge pertaining to this? Or is the police force a police state? Eddie please?
Complain about this comment
Pithywriter (1) You say "I am told it is oil rich type nationals who are the problem here". Told by who? Without reference to who or where this "information" comes from, this is just hearsay. However, I agree with you that the reciprocal arrangements that we have with members of the EU are very important to keep. After all, it is these arrangements that mean that we can be treated if we fall ill while abroad.
Pithywriter (3) and fJD (5) I'm not concerned. In fact, I applaud the police officers on this. They're not all being forced to wear this badge. It is a choice by individual officers if they want to wear it. Surely freedom of expression (which is what this is all about) should be sacrosanct. The badges are in support of the charity Help For Heroes that is for support of injured servicemen, not support for the war. It is perfectly possible to support servicemen but oppose a war. I opposed the war in Iraq, however, I supported the service personnel who were over there and the charities that look after them. They go where they are ordered to go, and do the job they are ordered to do. fjd, you may believe that the best way to support the troops would be to bring them home now. Fair enough, that's a perfectly valid view point. However, that is unlikely to happen today, is it? So does that mean we should not support the troops in any other way because it's not our 'preferred' way of giving support? That, I would suggest, is a very blinkered view.
Complain about this comment
Sorry, I should have said fjd (6) not (5).
Scotch-git (5) Seriously, quoting Melanie Phillips????
Complain about this comment
#8
FF,
I think she feels, as do I, that this is the thin end of what could easily become a very nasty wedge. How long before we find ourselves killing people whilst pretending we are doing them a favour?
Complain about this comment
Just a 'small' story from Gaza...
...that will no doubt fall under the radar of news reporting. The Israeli army launched another cross border incursion into the impoverished Gaza Strip.
Four Israeli tanks and two bulldozers rolled several hundred metres deep into the strip on Wednesday flattening a newly cultivated field, fired a few shots in the air, then the six tracked vehicles reversed back over the other half of the field. There were no reports of casualties. As for the crops...
Complain about this comment
pithywriter - who is this Mr/Mrs/Miss 'Donner' of whom you speak ??
What are the facts of his/her case ?
Complain about this comment
I hope you'll cover the sad news about Sir Bobby Robson. Ok I'm biased and I did cheer during the '78 FA Cup final but he has done an awful lot for cancer charities which is sometimes forgotten.
Complain about this comment
#12
Totally support your view.
A good Co Durham lad who was a gentleman in every sense of the word.
Even when striken with cancer earlier in life he used the situation to raise awareness and funds. Telling that he was so well thought and spoken of in the game well before his passing.
Complain about this comment
Lord Bedd Gelert: Fair jibe re the donner as opposed to donor spelling!
As for rich using our NHS doctors for immediate private care - this is well known in the NHS and is the main reason for the Uk consultant waiting lists for NHS patients. (a scandal peculiar only to this country in the EU). I live close to Harley Street and walk along there regularly also have friend who works in a private clinic. It is easy to find all this out - PM could do a report as good as the one yesterday on Polish hotel cleaners being exploited. EDdi?? why not??
Fear less Fred 'our boys' are volunteers - arguably just as are security guards. Sadly they have chosen to go there. If the police badge read Harry Patch's 'poem' "War is Organised Murder" I might support it. But come on, this is blatant . Troops should be conscripted if at all and then only in a situation of genuine attack on our homeland - and perhaps even not then since conquerors and empires always fall eventually - as Hitler of course would have. Is the death and injury toll worth this fight? And some say it is about controlling pipe lines anyway!!!!! Passive resistance, as my conscripted Hungarian friend who was forced to serve in the 'Russian'/Hungarian army says, can be effective in that many refused to do Russian in school with their teachers' collusion so that when he had to erect telecommunications equipment for the Warsaw pact exercises, it could not be done as the instructions were in Russian and no one could read it even. Ha Ha ha so they just sent scribbled messages by foot calling at many bars enroute. (His part in the cold war)Another massive fraud on taxpayers everywhere!
Complain about this comment
FF (7)
Ok, I didn't understand it was for a charity. I was going on what the blogger at 3 had worded his post. Thanks for the info Fred.
However, I do agree with the Late Harry Patch about wars not being worth it and perhaps that they are organised murder. Perhaps some charities would reach more support if they chose their wording and titles so as not be so evocative and kudos seeking. There are many, many heroic people who have never had anything to do with wars. Why is it Ok to liberally apply this word 'heroic' to wars whereas, we are oh so careful about applying it to societal life? Many people fail to see the heroism of violent wars but, yes Fred you are right, I would support a charity to help the injured and traumatised. Not this one though. I feel my intelligence insulted by it thinking that the only way I can see war is in terms of heroes or not. I think Harry Patch was a hero for saying what he said. I would support the British Legion as they have recently supported my brother through traumatic social circumstances 30 years after he was discharged from the army unfit due to asthma. He would never have considered himself a hero but the Legion recognised his intent to serve not to be a hero!
Complain about this comment
15. At 12:50pm on 31 Jul 2009, funnyJoedunn wrote:
"However, I do agree with the Late Harry Patch about wars not being worth it and perhaps that they are organised murder."
Organised murder is what the nazis carried out and the war fought against them was certainly worth it.
Complain about this comment
fJd (15) No problem:-) Thanks for posting your thoughts re heroism. You are right that there are lots of acts of heroism that have nothing to do with war. Any fireman or woman who goes out on a "shout" is being a hero in my eyes. Willingly putting their lives on the line to save the lives of others is an act of heroism.
Pithy: Going back to your point in #3, How is this official politicisation of the force? Read the reports. Police officers are not being forced to wear this badge! All that has happened is that the Met have allowed them to wear it if they so choose.
Complain about this comment
#16 You are entitled to your opinion. So is Harry Patch. So am I.
I also think that if they are going to hold up Harry Patch as a symbolic figurehead like they have been doing. I'm sure Harry Himself would want his thoughts about his experience known. You see this is the problem with runaway romantic nationalistic ways of seeing things. It can become very selective about what it chooses to remember and use to gather kudos and support. I am not against a totally justified proportionate response to a very real national threat. I don't agree with gaining kudos for a cause by pressurising people into having to accept that there is no other way to conduct ourselves. I totally disagree with the Bush assertion "if your not with us, your with our enemy". Another saying from America goes,"my country right or wrong"...indicating blind allegiance. I wouldn't insult you by insinuating that you are of this ilk. However, you must allow others to express there opposite opinion on the same playing field.
Complain about this comment
18. At 1:48pm on 31 Jul 2009, funnyJoedunn wrote:
#16 You are entitled to your opinion. So is Harry Patch. So am I.
I cannot see which part of my opinion you disagree with.
Complain about this comment
After trawling news archives, it appears as though the top 80-90% of the area of the badges is taken up with a union flag, with the legend "Support our soldiers" and the charity's web address below. According to that website, they don't get involved in the reasoning behind conflicts, but send out messages of support, get well messages and "care packages" (shoebox sized parcels sent to named service personnel containing toiletries, snacks, confectionery, undies, T shirts, off-the-shelf medication, and recreational items [newspapers, mags, puzzle books, stationery etc.])
Complain about this comment
# 3. pithywriter
Ref: Police wearing of 'Support The British Troops' badges.
I agree, the decision to allow on-duty Police officers to wear this badge seems a remarkable decision. Will they also be allowed to wear 'Save Our Soldiers - Troops Out' badges?
I've sent an email to the 'Stop The War Coalition' organisers, suggesting they order some of these badges from the same manufacturer, with the alternative message. They can send them to Police stations. And why stop there? Nurses, doctors, teachers. Court officials. Judges even?
Complain about this comment
Ref 9. Scotch-git
"How long before we find ourselves killing people whilst pretending we are doing them a favour?"
We're doing it now in Afghanistan. We also did in Iraq.
Complain about this comment
17. Fearless Fred
"Police officers are not being forced to wear this badge."
Correct - which is even more of a concern. How would this affect confidence in Police impartiality?
Complain about this comment
fJd 18, Wasn't Harry Patch one of Capt. Pugwash's crew?
Complain about this comment
A footnote to the Legal Issues this week:
I wonder if a case could be brought 'against' the legal ruling that the DPP has to draft something to clarify the position....etc
What i mean is, suicide is currently legal. But assisting suicide (ie killing) is not legal. WHat the lady who won her case has argued, essentially, is that she doesnt know when she is going to die. And furthermore, she doesnt know when she is going to be incapaciated before she dies.
But none of us do.
The is no legal right here, and the DPP might be able ( if he were willing) to challenge the ruling.
nick
x
Complain about this comment
25. Nikki,
I've been following her case for some time and basically she wants to live as long as humanly possible. But she knows that her eventual dying will be slow and horrible. She wants to die quickly and painlessly but at the last possible moment (have you seen what a life-affirming positive happy lady she actually is?).
She is resolved to go to Dignitas. If she arranges to go very soon, she could travel alone, as some people in wheelchairs do. If she leaves it until she is fully incapacitated, she would only be able to travel with her husband's assistance, which he is willing to provide at her request.
She doesn't want him to be arrested in the UK and possibly sentenced to up to 14 years when he returns after taking her to Dignitas. She's been battling to get reassurance in advance that he will be left in peace. No helpers returning from Dignitas have been put on trial and only a couple were arrested and questioned so far. But for her it is not good enough. She wants to be certain or, as she says, she will have to go to Dignitas and die much earlier than she needs and wants to, while she can do it without his assistance.
In principle, DPP could clarify the position negatively, i.e. that the husband will indeed be arrested and possibly charged. But I thought he sounded kinda sympathetic. This lady is putting her case for her right to die as she wants in no uncertain terms. Nobody could for a second insinuate that this cheerful warrior is somehow being unduly influenced, I think...
I know a lady (retired University Don) with slowly progressing motor neuron disease who has not left her second floor flat for 15 years. They hoist her from bed to wheelchair at 8 am and hoist her back at 6 pm. She gets fantastic care, including a visiting hairdresser and dentist, but she cannot read or do anything for herself. When they brought me to meet her, she told me her story, which began with a "lazy eye". She says she has not received so much as an aspirin in all these years for her actual condition, it's incurable, her death will be awful (slow suffocation) and you should hear her on the subject of leaving it too late to take her own life. When we were alone, she started throwing heavy hints about needing assistance in dying. I fled and asked her doctor if he was aware of her mental state. He said, "It's OK. She keeps asking everybody to put her out of her misery. Just ignore it."
Who has the right to tell another human being that they are duty bound to suffer torments for somebody else's principle or conviction?
Complain about this comment
Thanks Cossackgirl!
I remember the previous posts where you have told us something of your story - mine is totally different, but there is a common thread between us.
And I too have been following this case very closely as you can imagine. I am sorry to hear about the retired lady you know.
All of these cases are 'hard cases' - and which will tug at the heart and cry out for compassion. But that does not mean we should bring in Univeral Legislation for Assisted Suicide, a massive step away from the principle of not taking another life.
I am sure we all want to 'leave it as long as possible'. But we none of us know how long that will be. And when she is incapacitated herself, I really disagree that her husband is the only one who can take her to Dignitas and assist her suicide.
I am accutely aware of the feelings around this. I want to be certain about what is the right thing to do, too. It feels totally wrong to hang on until it is out of ones own hands, and then get someone else to do the thing for us.
Wrong enough not to change the law, in my opinion.
I would love to hear more about what you think, too - maybe here, in a public forum isnt the best place; but maybe we can also here some others too.
best wishes and kindest regards
n-n
Complain about this comment
I would like to second Nikki Noodle.
I Know we have heard much heart-felt and thought out reasons for the act of assisted suicide. I have heard preciuos little of how the logistics will work in practice.
I heard an interview with someone who pointed out that when the abortion laws were enacted around 1968, it was passed through the house of commons because it was argued that there would only be at most a few thousand abortions carried out each year due to medical reasons.
Now there are around 145,000 per year, and in effect is carried out on demand now.
Whats to say we won't get to the same position with assisted dying? Perhaps with people hiring proxies...perhaps a whole industry with vested interests growing out of any favourable legislation. Also, the BMA do not support assisted suicide Why?
Complain about this comment
#28.funnyJoedunn
"Also, the BMA do not support assisted suicide Why?"
Don't know exactly, but would guess it's because they are a 'trade union' for doctors. The BMA's position on this issue has not been consistent; they've changed their stance several times.
They have said this:
".... the question of the criminal law in relation to assistant dying is primarily a matter for society and for parliament. The BMA should not oppose legislation which alters the criminal law but should press for robust safeguards both for patients and for doctors who do not wish to be involved in such procedures."
And this:
"The BMA has a firm policy on this issue in that we are opposed to assisted dying and we are not lobbying for any change in the law in the UK."
Treatment without consent. Compulsory treatment. Physician assisted suicide. Withdrawal and witholding of treatment by physicians. Managing pain. And not forgetting euthanasia. The moral and ethical questions in this area are boundless, and I guess the BMA have come to realise the current legal framework, whilst not perfect, has the benefit of legal precedent: their members know where they stand.
But the recent news is about the legal interpretation of 'assisted,' particualrly by relatives, friends and partners. Original legislation appears to have been drafted with the role of medical and care staff in mind. When considering the actions of relatives, friends and partners, what does 'assisted' mean? Leaving four weeks of medication by their bedside? Driving someone to Switzerland? Packing their suitcase? I think it's clarity that's required - not an overhaul of existing legislation.
Complain about this comment
Richard_SM
Yes, I agree with the main thrust of your post. Perhaps along with clarity, we should also mention enforcement. An earlier poster has stated something to the effect of, 'the DWP already making a clarifying statement by not prosecuting anyone who has assisted in Switzerland on their return'.
I also believe those who have been in the public eye in favour of assited suicide have given me the impression that the wider public interest comes a poor second to their own very vested personal interests in this situation. Yet the DWP has said on a couple of occasions that the reason for not prosecuting was that, 'it wasn't in the wider public interest to do so'. Lets hope that 'wider' public interest is taken into account in clarifying the law. Governments (especially this one) have good form in turning misunderstandings into a 'sows ear' of unintended clarification when it comes to law fiddling.
Complain about this comment
27. nikki noodle
Thank you for your post; you raise some very interesting points and I can only return a few brief thoughts in this space.
You wrote: "I really disagree that her husband is the only one who can take her to Dignitas and assist her suicide." I am 100% with you on this. But, as the law stands, he is probably the closest person who can be seen as acting out of genuine compassion and feeling a real need for his wife not to suffer. If I were to turn my sympathy with the lady I described above, even at her request, into practical assistance, society will not see how it is really my business to assist her in such matters, unless I can show a long association by family or friendship. Remember the splendid film, "They Shoot Horses, Don't They?" Right at the end the hero (Michael Sarazzin?) shoots the despairing heroine (Jane Fonda) after she begs him to do it; he fully empathises with her dead end situation. But the policemen who ask, "Why did you do it?" and hear "Because she asked me to", drily comment "Obliging ba*t**d". I always agreed with that verdict.
We no longer say that suicide is a crime, getting actively involved - is. Perhaps it's best left for now, but wider judicial or medical leeway introduced where the wishes of the person are in no possible doubt.
What would you say to two paramedics or similar, rather than friends and family (who can say good-buy privately), accompanying the person, once a court order was issued that this person is legally sane and capable, and stated their wishes in writing and in the presence of independent witnesses (appointed by the court). This sounds cold and clinical, but if the purpose is to end life with dignity and without pain, the service of people who cannot be accused of undue influence or ulterior motives should allay certain fears.
Complain about this comment
27. Nikki Noodle - if you can bear a bit more!
I think it's splendidly ironic that our technological advances provided the human race with ability to prolong life in such extraordinary and artificial ways that simple death, without being connected to a battery of pipes and tubes, becomes an object of desire!
A friend of mine, whose wife of 30 years collapsed and was found to have a terminal cancer, with just a few weeks to live, was jubilant - I am not afraid of that word - when she had a massive stroke and died in his arms in hospital three days after the diagnosis. WHY? Because the doctors have already started preparing to give her extensive (and futile) chemotherapy, and she cheated them, died with dignity before all her hair fell out... We both loved that woman, vibrant, strong, intelligent; we didn't want her to suffer needlessly.
The dreadful Doctor Shipman has taught all of us that death can be a matter of a moment - a needle prick when your sister puts the kettle on, no struggle, no suffering. Dignitas offers the same but with your eyes open. It should not be necessary, if more attention was paid to what is natural and what isn't.
After a massive cancer operation, half evicerated, I would not have survived without all the drips and tubes. I am grateful for my life, but I wouldn't like to spend an indefinite amount of time on life support just so that I go on living, because for me there is no quality of life there.
I like to read and paint: I cannot do it very well without glasses at my age. My quality of life is monumentally better because I have this techical marvel - a pair of specs! I am all for advances in medicine that improve our quality of life, or that put us back on our feet in a medical emergency, but NOT those that extend existence without quality.
As Fay Weldon's she-devil said, "The purpose of life should not be its prolongation but the manner of its living." I agree...
Complain about this comment
@31 and @32 Cossackgirl - i agree with irononical situation we are in!!
And maybe, just as there is a time to be grateful, there is also a time to say 'no thanks' when the medical team comes towards us.
If I have the communication skills left to convice a court that I am sane and have witnesses to what I want, then I am sure I have the skills to communicate my wishes for a taxi to, say, the New Forest or even, Heathrow.
Maybe I could even find a warm and sunny beach!!
As for me, I too would not have survived without all the drips and tubes that were used in my time on a life support machine.
I think you have hit the nail on the head when you write that "the purpose is to end life with dignity and without pain" - a wish greatly to be desired, but in my opinion, not my legal right.
Under law, I do have the right to end my life, but it might have to be quite painful to do so by myself.
as ever, grateful for you thoughts
nikki
Complain about this comment
33. Nikki
Always a pleasure reading your posts, too! I assume you know all about the "living wills" - they are new in this country and so far not legally enforceable I think, but that's a matter of time. I am going to research this subject on the Internet soon. A witnessed statement that one doesn't wish to be kept going on the life support machine in a coma beyond a certain time, or that no reanimatory heroics are to be applied after a massive heart attack - this is worth looking at, maybe...
Complain about this comment
@34 Cossackgirl
thanks, definitely worth looking at.
So far, all i had come up with is trying to obtain a stash of cash to get as far as an airport and then see what happens....
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS