KEVIN McKenna articulates many of the concerns that the public have about Kim Leadbeater’s Assisted Dying Bill ("The elites will use assisted suicide to target the poor", The Herald, November 26). Our communities have to be concerned about the possible consequences of our Westminster Parliament passing this Bill.

The equivalent bill before the Scottish Parliament is even more controversial, not least in the lack of safeguards for vulnerable patients.

News reports in the media, TV, newspapers and social media have inured us to the idea of violent and mass deaths being remote and impersonal. This has developed a perception that life is cheap and disposable.

The passing of legislation on assisted dying in other nations has created a precedent which is difficult not to follow. However, there is evidence that the original legislation and safeguards in, for example, Canada and Belgium, have become interpreted less stringently.

Legislation involving life and death decisions such as capital punishment and abortion is always contentious.

Without commenting on the rights or wrongs of current abortion legislation, the 1967 Abortion Act and subsequent changes have diluted the rigour to which decisions on terminations are considered. The authorisation by two doctors has become a tick-box formality and the vast majority (98%) of abortions are carried out “if there is a risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family”. This is typically interpreted liberally with regards to mental health to create (in some opinions) a de facto elective abortion service.

With the assisted dying bills the critical issue of coercion is also contentious as is the potential desire of older or disabled patients to not want to be a burden, physically or socially or financially, on their families or on the NHS.

MPs and MSPs should carefully consider what kind of society we want to live in if we can’t look after its most vulnerable members. They must take into account all aspects of the respective assisted dying bills before casting their votes.

James Quinn, Lanark.

Read more letters

The right to a personal decision

I HAVE no problem whatsoever if someone decides that they need a religion to complement their existence in this planet. They have an unequivocal right to do so. It is entirely a personal decision. Kevin McKenna has made this decision.

However, I also have an unequivocal right to make a personal decision, should I ever decide that this life is unbearable (for whatever reason) and I wish to terminate my existence.

In my career as a GP, I only had one patient who made use of the facility provided by Dignitas in Switzerland. We have a wonderful hospice in Forth Valley, but even they were unable to help this relatively young woman with her loss of dignity. She did indeed have less than six months to live, but she was unable to leave her house because of the smell of her skin secondaries, despite district nurses visiting four times daily. Pain had nothing to do with her decision.

Interestingly, as she had no family and very few friends, she took as her companion and support, her Church of Scotland minister (who was also a patient). The experience fundamentally changed his attitude to assisted dying.

I sincerely hope the bills in Westminster and Holyrood pass, but I am afraid that we are not yet mature enough to make this decision.

John NE Rankin, Bridge of Allan.

• I FIRST heard the Lord’s Prayer mumbled by 36 children on the day I started school. I really did think that Harold was his name and that “in his tendaliers” (tender years) was a foreign babygrow. Apparently I went home and told my parents that God had a chosen people and that he gave the other people boils... so that wasn’t fair and I’m not having him.

I have never changed my mind. I object to religious zealotdssaying that I should die in agony because of THEIR beliefs. After all, no one is insisting that THEY should avail themselves of assisted dying.

Eileen Stables, Paisley.

Why is a Scots MP voting?

MY MP, Tracy Gilbert, informs me that she intends to vote on the Assisted Dying Bill for England and Wales.

How does a Scottish MP have a mandate to vote on such sensitive and controversial legislation which affects England and Wales only? No Scottish MP is accountable to an electorate in that jurisdiction. Moreover the same matter is currently the subject of a legislative proposal in the Scottish Parliament and if passed would apply to Scotland only with similar but not identical provisions.

I would strongly suggest that Scottish MPs should not vote on a non-party-political Private Members Bill, such as on assisted dying, which applies to England and Wales only.

Gerard Meehan, Edinburgh.

Tracy Gilbert, pictured with Anas Sawar and Keir StarmerTracy Gilbert, pictured with Anas Sawar and Keir Starmer (Image: PA)

Stupidity of e-scooter trials

THE Scottish Government has confirmed that e-scooter trials using hired e-scooters could start within a year. There are 22 trials going on in England with hired e-scooters resulting in far too many injuries to pedestrians and e-scooter riders and even deaths.

In England hired e-scooters have been abandoned on pavements, causing injuries. Private e-scooters, which are illegal on UK roads, have added to the problem.

There is already enough chaos with bikes, e-bikes and fast food delivery couriers with no identification or insurance without allowing these trials. Those MSPs and Scottish councillors in favour of the idea should be forced to take part in the trial and have no access to any other form of transport. Now that would show them the stupidity of this dangerous idea.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow.

Flower soured

THE musically-unaccompanied singing of part of the Flower of Scotland anthem at our international rugby matches has become an iconic ritual to encourage the team. The problem is that increasingly some morons amongst the supporters take the opportunity of a short pause to shout a crude insult at “proud Edward’s army". In these ludicrously sensitive days of hate crimes, this could be ruled as racist.

Perhaps they think they are being macho by demonstrating their enduring dislike of the English. To me it only demeans themselves as well as the remaining bulk of the supporters who I am sure do not share this sentiment and would prefer them to shut up and go away. Does the SRU have a view on this or is it content to ignore this behaviour?

Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop.