 | Forum
Reply | Ouch.
at 18:47 3 Sep 2025
So did Szmodics and I assume you have time for him?
I think it’s a difficult situation for a player - why should they be practically enslaved to a club? If I want to move job, I can - despite my ‘contract’.
It’s not what I would have done, but don’t think he deserves absolute vitriol from some. [Post edited 3 Sep 18:51]
|
| Forum
Reply | Scones. Jam or cream on first?
at 18:56 27 Aug 2025
Hold on. Whipped cream on a scone? How did you get to be a TWTD master with views like that?!
Cream (Clotted) is the luxury item, so should go on last. Dolloped, not spread.
(I even live in Devon and know the Devonshire way is utterly wrong). |
| Forum
Reply | Azor Matusiwa
at 12:57 10 Jul 2025
A Dutch midfielder... Could it be? |
| Forum
Reply | The reality of assisted dying
at 19:42 20 Jun 2025
I’m so sorry about your step-Father and Grandfather experience. That must’ve been horrible for them and for you all.
Can I take issue with the ‘correct safeguarding’ comment. It what I hear a lot of people say. It feels like a word people just throw about, so that they can ignore their internal anxieties of ‘what if this isn’t safe’. They don’t actually take time to consider what safeguards would actually be ‘sufficient’.
This bill is simply not adequate in its safeguards - that’s been made quite clear by experts in the field eg Royal College of Psychiatrists, Royal College of Physicians, Palliative Care organisations.
The general trend appears to be that the more people look into the actual details (and not just whether they would want the option for themselves or their loved ones), the more serious problems come up that are not being addressed.
As a medic myself, I could speak for hours on this - I’m incredibly concerned about this bill. (Despite being sympathetic to the concept of assisted dying). But this is probably not the place. [Post edited 20 Jun 19:44]
|
| Forum
Reply | I see the assisted dying can has been kicked down the road again.
at 23:19 8 Apr 2025
It’s been delayed to allow people more time to consider the amendments in this incredibly complex and difficult piece of legislation that divided the country with some very real and legitimate concerns.
Personally I’m glad they’re taking their time. This is absolutely not the sort of thing that should be rushed. Many major potential issues are only receiving significant attention now the detail is being scrutinised.
Calling them toss-pots is a bit uncalled for. |
| Forum
Thread | Intimidating
at 22:25 3 Mar 2025
I saw penalties live for the first time in the last round Exeter Vs Forest. You’re very close to the action at St James’ Park.
I was really really surprised just how crazily intimidating it is going up against a wall of opposition fans hurling abuse at you. You just don’t feel it on TV in the same way.
Feel sorry for Taylor - particularly taking the last penalty. I would have slipped on my ass in fear… |
| Forum
Reply | Where are we on the Assisted Dying Bill?
at 15:44 13 Nov 2024
(Sorry long post!)
I work within in the medical profession, and it is likely that if this bill is passed, I could be asked to be involved in assessing whether someone is eligible for assisted dying.
I of course have huge sympathies with anyone going through these situations at present. However, I do have really significant concerns regarding this upcoming bill, and feel quite strongly about it.
Particularly in terms of safeguarding vulnerable adults. From my experience, ‘safeguards’ is a word that is used to make us feel better about our anxieties with this bill – but in reality, I don’t think any amount of safeguards will make this bill safe. (Eg. capacity is subjective, coercion/feelings of burden is extremely difficult to assess, mental health has rarely been assessed professionally prior, if one doctor disagrees – patients can just find another, some doctors will inherently be more ‘pro’ than others, and willing to sign off eligibility etc etc.)
Both sides come at this debate from a position of wanting the best for their patients, vulnerable adults and loved ones, and therefore I hope that all viewpoints can be respected.
I’ve adapted the below from a letter I sent to my MP regarding this. It’s brief (arguments not fully fleshed out), and not comprehensive, but hopefully it’s helpful to some.
I’m fully aware that lots of people disagree with me, and that is absolutely okay - I understand why. But I do think we should think very carefully about the full implications of this being passed, before coming to a decision – even if it is against what we might ‘want’ for ourselves/our loved ones.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst not an argument against assisted dying, it is vital to first consider the ‘slippery slope’. This is important, because whilst some arguments may not apply to the current proposed bill, it appears likely that this bill (if passed) will be subsequently expanded in the coming years.
The primary proposed ethical argument for assisted dying is frequently patient autonomy. If we grant this for those with terminal illness, there is limited logical reason to deny this treatment to those with non-terminal illness, disability, mental illness, those without ‘unbearable suffering’, minors who demonstrate capacity etc. In fact, it could be argued that not expanding it is discriminatory. This expansion in the scope of the law has been seen across the world (eg. Canada, Belgium, Netherlands). In Canada, assisted dying was legalised in 2016. In just in 5 years (2021), this was expanded to include non-terminal disability, and a bill (2023) has been passed that those with solely mental health conditions will be eligible from 2027. A Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying’ recommended in 2023 that the government extends its eligibility to minors with capacity. In both the Belgium and Netherlands, minors who demonstrate capacity can now apply for euthanasia – despite both laws initially (2002) just being for adults with ‘unbearable suffering’. In 2014 and 2022 respectively, Belgium and Netherlands implemented a law allowing euthanasia for children aged 1 to 12, under specific conditions.
We must be aware that if we grant assisted dying for one group, the argument to expand the scope in the future becomes stronger, and much harder to ethically refute.
From a practical perspective, it will be impossible for assessing doctors to rule out micro-coercion, as well as vulnerable adults feeling ‘a burden’ to their care-givers. The 2019 Oregon State ‘Death with Dignity’ Summary stated that 59% of patients listed the concern of being a burden on their family as a significant factor in their decision. We already see this in other areas of care (eg. decisions regarding care placements). How often have you heard someone – perhaps even a family member – say to you: ‘I don’t want to be a burden, just put me in a care home’?
The recent Darzi report into the state of the NHS in England was damning. Palliative care is particularly stretched, under-funded and unequitable across the country. As we know, this is also the case for mental health services, as well as social care. When we cannot offer reliable, good-quality palliative care and related health services, does offering assisted dying actually represent a real choice for patients? Our priority should be on ensuring these services are high-quality and equitable.
My overall view is that no amount of ‘safeguards’ will make this bill safe. The current law is the safeguard, and we should always default to the safe option that protects vulnerable lives. I have huge sympathy with specific individual cases, but making society-wide legal changes will certainly have unintended significant consequences. [Post edited 13 Nov 2024 15:45]
|
| | cinnamonITFC
|
Site Scores| Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 0 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.