UK Gov’t Caught Issuing Hospitals ‘Expiry Dates’ For Patients

The state now prescribes when and how you die AND provides the drugs, equipment and people to do it.

The support group for relatives of victims of involuntary euthanasia (R.O.V.E), which I set up in 2021, now has almost 100 members. It gets busy in there, daily discussions being had, support and advice being shared and new friendships being made.

I decided to have a few days off this week but, suffering from severe FOMO, I can’t help but pop in a couple of times a day, just to make sure I’m not missing anything.

When I had a quick look this morning, I found this from KD, one of the members, remaining anonymous for this article so as not to jeopardise the legal proceedings in which they’re involved. The lengthy comment on excess deaths (the topic of the week as Andrew Bridgen MP prepares for his HOC debate next Friday (October 20th), raises some serious points as many fear the debate will focus solely on the toxic C19 jabs, thus sweeping all the euthanasia deaths out of view. KD addresses that here: 

“There is an important point that is being missed in the question of ongoing excess deaths since 2020. The rolling out of ‘palliative care’ into the mainstream NHS, care homes, and other community settings MUST be included in any analysis of excess deaths.

Previously, the NICE guideline NG31 – ‘Care of Dying Adults in the Last Days of Life’ – was intended for use in the last 2-3 days of life and the evidence base was mainly from hospice care of those with life limiting diseases such as cancer and heart disease. However, in April 2020, these guidelines were adapted into a new guideline NG163 – Covid-19 Rapid Guideline Managing Symptoms (including at end of life) in the Community.’

Not only were these guidelines adapted for use in a community setting, without proper safeguards and antidotes, but they also authorised much higher doses of dangerous drug combinations for the treatment of Covid-19, and for end of life prescribing.

If this new guideline – which was identical to the now-abolished Liverpool Care Pathway – was for community settings only, where was the guideline for Covid-19 treatment in NHS hospitals? Who decided that those who scored high in the accompanying ‘frailty score’ would also go straight onto an “end of life” pathway?

It would appear that the NICE guidelines of NG31 were followed, except for the requirement to involve family members and gain ‘informed consent’ from the person themselves. The other difference is that NG31 does not recommend the use of Midazolam and morphine immediately and at such high doses (NG163 recommended a starting dose of 2.5mgs of Midazolam and 2.5mgs of morphine) and only suggests prescribing such drugs if there’s absolutely no doubt that the patient is about to die.

The signing of a DNAR does not simply mean ‘do not resuscitate’, it also means that ‘anticipatory’, ‘end of life’ drugs are prescribed and sometimes used immediately, even if the person is not in the last days or hours of life and potentially has weeks or months to live. As it has previously been ascertained, blanket DNAR’s were used in some settings, often without the person’s knowledge or consent. 

NG163 also failed to establish the need to review the patient regularly to see if they stabilised, and were able to come off the drugs. This is one of the criticisms and potential dangers levelled by senior palliative care professionals as laid out in this letter in the BNP in April 2020.

The danger of misuse of the frailty score for disabled people with stable conditions was also highlighted by the Nursing Times.

The government are committed to extending the availability of palliative care to all who need it. But were those put on end of life pathways during the alleged pandemic actually in need of palliative care? It would seem that many – including the relatives of R.O.V.E group members – were not.

The UK is not alone as the LCP was exported to most Western countries. The World Health Organisation (WHO) wants to extend the availability of palliative care to every person in every country in the world.

At first glance, putting very ill people on palliative care pathways appears to be a laudable aim: some aspects of end of life care are undoubtedly good as they provide support for obtaining benefits, help with finances, plus social support, counselling etc., but there remains a murky side to it.

After the outcry about the LCP in 2014, the world of end of life drugs and palliative care is now coming, once more, to the fore. The Individualised Care Plans that were meant to replace it have, for the most part, not materialised, with the same sets of ‘end of life’ drugs routinely prescribed, without acknowledging the person’s own wants and desires, including the possibility of a natural ‘non-medicalised’ death.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post
Follow us on TruthSocial, X-Twitter, Gettr, Gab, VK, Anonup, Facebook and Telegram for interesting and mysterious bonus content!
Greetings! We thank our supporters from the bottom of our hearts for their generous donations that keep alive. If you'd like to join the cause and help us continue to deliver amazing articles, please consider making a 👉 PayPal donate.

نموذج الاتصال