Letter writer: Only those who are faced with a life -ending illness can define what the term “quality of life” means to them and judge how they wish it to be.
Brown’s record tells true story
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., uses a bull horn at a campaign stop in Watertown Wednesday,. Brown is running for re-election against Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren.
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown’s political advertisements create a photogenic image, but if you want a snapshot of the man, check out his voting record.
According to ProgressMass, before Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren entered the race, Scott Brown voted with Republicans 93 percent of the time.
This shows his true colors. Brown habitually voted with Republican obstructionist tactics. Notably, he voted to obstruct the first financial regulatory bill, which would’ve ended “too big to fail.”
Then he protected wealthy PAC donors, by voting to filibuster the DISCLOSE Act. CNN reports that Wall Street is Brown’s biggest contributor, and he has received more from the financial and real estate sectors than any other senator in either party.
On issues important to average citizens Brown voted against two job creation bills, middle class tax cuts, extending unemployment benefits, funding for food stamps and the equal pay.
He also voted for cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and job training assistance. Brown voted to repeal President Obama’s healthcare bill, while hypocritically using it to keep his 23-year-old daughter on his policy. He is really not “for us.”
Furthermore, a vote for Brown could put Republicans in control of Senate committees advancing their agenda to give favors to the very rich and corporations while dismantling programs that work for the rest of us. My vote goes to Elizabeth Warren, a strong advocate for the middle class and people facing hard times.
– NANCY NELKIN, Easthampton
Medical Association opposes Question 2
We oppose Question 2, which would legalize physician-assisted suicide for a number of reasons.
• The proposed safeguards against abuse are insufficient. Enforcement provisions, investigation authority, oversight, or data verification are not included in the act. A witness to the patient’s signed request could also be an heir. • Assisted suicide is not necessary to improve the quality of life at the end of life. Current law gives every patient the right to refuse lifesaving treatment, and to have adequate pain relief, including hospice and palliative sedation.
• Predicting the end of life within six months is difficult; sometimes the prediction is not accurate. From time to time, patients expected to be within months of their death have gone on to live many more months — or years. In one study, 17 percent of patients outlived their prognosis.
• Doctors should not participate in assisted suicide. The chief policy making body of the Massachusetts Medical Society has voted to oppose physician assisted suicide.
• The Massachusetts Medical Society reaffirmed its commitment to provide physicians treating terminally ill patients with the ethical, medical, social, and legal education, training, and resources to enable them to contribute to the comfort and dignity of the patient and the patient’s family.
– MASS. MEDICAL SOCIETY, Waltham
HAMPDEN DISTRICT MEDICAL SOCIETY, West Springfield
The terminally ill deserve a choice
In the Sunday Republican article about the physician-assisted suicide ballot question, opponent John Kelly was quoted as saying that it is “based on judgments on the quality of people’s lives.”
He is right. Only those who are faced with a life -ending illness can define what the term “quality of life” means to them and judge how they wish it to be. They have the right to decide individually how they desire to live and if faced with an undesirable end that would drastically alter that quality, only they can determine if, when and the manner of their death. With concerns about abuses by family members, the doctors, after a determination have the final say. As far as misdiagnoses, most patients get second and even third opinions.
If a patient’s doctor is against assisted suicide, there is no choice but to find another doctor. With regard to terminally ill patients who may be depressed, most doctors lean toward a diagnosis of depression and therefore would not participate in the suicide.
As Dr. Angell said in the news piece: “It’s not a question of life versus death. It’s a question of what kind of death.”
– HALINA ZABIK, Agawam