Time to choose?

Ali Handscomb argues that ".. the role of government in healthcare is to balance what is affordable with best quality and outcomes for the people it serves" and that seems to be a point of view that it is difficult to argue against. However, the divided nature of politics in the UK - especially in the present coalition situation would suggest that large proportion of the people will not be so served. Whilst the government feels the need to tinker with health care provision and attempts to sell such tinkering as providing extra choice  to service users, they seem to be missing two key points and they are these...when has increased choice ever been an issue and how does increased choice NOT translate into greater cost ( not less as proposed) Most people of my acquaintance want access to good health care, when they need it and they want it locally.
Many are not equipped to exercise any so-called choice since they don't consider different types of healthcare until they are in a position to need them. My fear is that by offering "choice" the danger of removing large elements of society from healthcare provision is extreme. I live in a fairly diverse neighbourhood where the middle-aged, (say those over 50) tend to be well educated professionals with small families and the younger element... not so much. It is clear that should the government sponsored choice materialise it will be driven by the vocal middle-aged. Good news for people like me who will need hip replacements one day, not so great for those who need teenage pregnancy midwives or  drug addiction services. Cheaper though!
The choice that is being held up as the key outcome of the new NHS reforms seems to me disingenuous. Reform should not necessarily be the role of government, monitoring and auditing of service driven reform that is informed by all of the members of local communities should be

Why I support assisted dying

Unless we are particularly unfortunate, or live under some form of oppressive regime, everything we do in our lives is more or less under our own control. What we eat, what we wear, where we live who we sleep with/marry/secretly lust for - it's all up to us. Until it seems you come to leave this life, when that happens the decisions about how and where you die can be taken out of your hands  by family or healthcare professionals with little or no regard to your own preferences. I like being in control of my own life and the thought that I will not be in control of the end of it fills me with horror, and that is why I am a supporter of assisted dying.  The Dignity in Dying website defines an assisted death as one where a doctor prescribes a life-ending dose of medication to a mentally competent, terminally ill adult at their request, and the patient then chooses to administer the medication themselves. Assisted dying is different to euthanasia and assisted suicide. Euthanasia is a term often used to describe life ending medication being administered by a third party. Assisted suicide refers to providing assistance to die to someone who is not dying. When it comes to it, I would prefer to chose how and when I die. This is not about doubts about standards of palliative care, not about concerns about adequate pain management and not because I have my doubts about the quality of end of life care in the UK - it is all about ending my life the way I've lived it....on my own terms

I appreciate that there are some people who hold equally strong beliefs, religious, moral or otherwise about the sanctity of life and I respect their right to hold those views. What I cannot understand is why such people are not willing to afford a similar level of respect to me