Starmers Plans

Starmer's plans are based on the 1970's

Lose as much of his support as possible perhaps it has become so dire that the Conservatives and Labour can only muster low 30,s between them on important issues of trust. So no great Conservative revival then and Labour are fast going down the tubes, but never fear as Sir Keir says they have defeated populism. Having no voters left must be a sure sign.

Meanwhile his followers of fashion have gone from vote Labour for a better future into very hard times are ahead for everyone especially the poorest in society and it's not our fault. Not like anyone knew exactly what was coming.

The Assisted Dying Bill has the potential to save the country an awful lot of money ... that could be put to "better use". With respect to those who do not have the capacity to say that they do not want to "go on living" this government could arrange for "Ethics specialists" of some sort to determine whether such patients would want to be kept alive if they had the capacity to make such decisions.

The current law as per a 1984 House of Lords decision is that if a a patient does not have the capacity to understand what is going on then it is up to their doctor to decide what is in their "Best interests". The family have no say in the matter. If the family are unhappy with the treatment a family member who does not have "capacity" is receiving they cannot get legal aid to mount a legal challenge.

My wife's consultant was of the opinion that he, as her doctor, should have the right to decide if she should be kept alive ... without reference to her wishes, the wishes of her family (her mother, who "didn't like her", didn't want her to be kept alive ... she was in agreement with him about what should be done with her), or any interference from the law. Over a period of 6 years working in a British hospital he "engineered" the deaths of numerous patients before eventually being found "unfit to be a doctor" and sacked. He was never prosecuted. After he was sacked I contacted the local police, who said there had been other allegations against him and they investigated my wife's death ... but couldn't "nail him".

The concept that doctors should decide when people should die has quite a lot of support within the medical profession.

Both my brothers died in hospices. Whilst their deaths WERE benign there was "something going on". They both died unexpectedly ... with friends at their bedside having conversations with them. They stopped talking, closed their eyes, their blood pressure dropped and they died.

One of my brothers sons calmly said to me: "He did not die from the cancer".   

Shortly before my wife died I contacted Bayer Pharmaceuticals European doctor and reported my concern that my wife ... and all the patients on her ward (most of whom, unlike my wife,were elderly) were being given Ciprofloxacin (an antibiotic) three times a day ... "To protect them from hospital bugs". He said: "We are very concerned about the use of our drugs to engineer the deaths of inconvenient patients. We will investigate" (Cipro is not supposed to be used if patients have CNS disorders ... which my wife, and many other patients on the ward, had). Twelve hours later I received a call from the hospital: "Corinne is breathing her last breath". When I asked the nurse how she knew she said: "The doctor's with her". The next morning, after my wife had died, I spoke with her consultant ... he admitted that he had "Given her something".

"I have a duty to my patients' souls ... if they deteriorate too much they have difficulty passing over".

There's final twist to this tale: At the end of the conversation with me, as he left the room, he looked at me, made a movement like a "naughty boy" and, with a smile on his face, said: "I'm going to visit some handicapped children now". I suspect his attitude had something to do with the fact that his mother was a medic in London during the Blitz and told him about what she'd experienced ... and done. 

Unbelievable, eh? There's more:

Prior to my wife's final admission to the hospital she had spent a few days there after a "stroke-like" episode. She was discharged after a few days because she had "No treatable condition". Two weeks later I went out to do some shopping and when I returned my wife was gone. Our GP had seen me in town,  realised she was probably alone, got the key to my place from the landlady and sent her to hospital. When I arrived at the hospital a friendly ward sister said there was nothing much wrong with her (apart from her Multiple sclerosis) and she would be able to go home in a day or two. As she spoke a doctor appeared and ordered "removal of food and fluid" ... then left the room.  The nurse said: "We might have misunderstood" and went to investigate. I watched as a group of doctors and nurses "argued" with each other. A doctor, looking "upset", broke away from the group and came over to me, saying: "I've found a treatable condition!" I said: "Are they discussing euthanasia?" He said: "That doesn't apply now. I've found a treatable condition!"

I went to the police. A concerned sergeant rang the hospital.

A couple of weeks later I got banned from the hospital ... and threatened with arrest if I made another phone call to the Chief Executive. The Community Health Council were told: "We are not at liberty to divulge any information about this patient".

I was approached by 3 policemen in the street and one of them warned me that I would be arrested "under the mental act" if I continued to spread stories calculated to alarm the public.

There were local police who tried to help me ... including a detective.

I got a member of the House of Lords involved (Lord Cork and Orrery). He rang the hospital five times ... speaking to various people.

The local private nursing agency gave me the names of 4 doctors that they knew were "euthansing patients" ... and added my wife's doctor to their list.

Four hours after I was told my wife had died I went for a walk and met my landlady, walking her dog. When I told her my wife had died she "angrily" spat out: "People shouldn't have to suffer!" pointed to her dog and said: "I wouldn't let me dog suffer!"

I wonder what proportion of our present population believe in euthanasia?

Back in 1994 a lot of people did ... and they openly expressed their opinions.

"Terminate the majority of people with Alzheimer's ... just keep a few for research" was an opinion expressed during a TV debate.

Now that would save a lot of money, eh?