To the Editor:
I speak as a person who has Parkinson’s Disease. Presently, there is no cure. and the most effective medication causes many other problems. It is effective for a period of time then gradually loses its positive effects. The medication needs to be increased, then the frequency increased, until it is no longer effective. The longer you take the medicine, the more likely you are to have the negative side effects. Everyone is affected differently. Some people have a combination of slowness, tremors and walking difficulties, others with drooling, falling and swallowing etc. Everyone with Parkinson's gradually loses control of EVERY muscle. Pain is involved because of the constant tremors, tension in the muscles, inability to reposition, or let someone know what would help. Eventually, it is impossible to eat, talk, blink, make any physical movements, control bowel or bladder etc. In other words, I will be completely dependent for everything and there will be no way to make my needs known.
I look at life with my cup half full (instead of half empty) and also look for a positive within every negative. I do not ask “Why me?” But I do ask for the opportunity to have my life end with dignity. Not only for me, but also for the benefit of my family and friends also. This should be something every individual should have the opportunity to control. If our animal is suffering, we have the opportunity to help them by putting them out of their misery.
This Bill is written so the patient is in charge. The states which have already made this law have reported that a percentage of patients who make the request do not use it. That is their choice -- at least they have that choice!
Patricia King
Tewksbury
Fiona MacDonald
7:12 am on Sunday, November 4, 2012
I am so sorry that you have that awful disease. I also have a disease where the prognosis is unknown. I have MS and although mine appears to be mild you never know where these things end up. To have the opportunity to end you life with some dignity is something I feel everyone should have a right too. We are grown adults who are deemed quite capable of making all sorts of decisions in life - this should also be a decision we can make. Best wishes Patricia and to all those who wish for some compassion in their suffering.
Fiona
V.R.
7:57 am on Sunday, November 4, 2012
I have compassion for those suffering with chronic illness. When I first read of this bill, I was for it, as I would not want to suffer from a terminal illness. However, I have changed my mind. I now feel this bill is very dangerous with "side effects." It can, and most likely, would be manipulated, abused, given a broad range of interpretation, causing great heath danger to patients. The powerful pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies could withhold providing and/or payment of life-savings meds to patients deemed to have a so--called illness w/o good prognosis. And this would be a "death sentence" to one wanting to live, such as a patient needing chemotherapy, for example. And as it now stands, patients DO have the right to deny treatment. And doctors, "under-cover," DO help end-of-life patients die with certain means, such as increasing morphine. Very importantly, the Massachusetts Medical Society is totally against Question 2. Very Sincerely, Ronnie, RN, MSW
Kathleen Brothers
9:58 am on Sunday, November 4, 2012
If your letter, Patricia, and the letter from Jennifer do nothing else but get people to think before they mark their ballot that is a very good thing. I am sorry that you have this terrible disease, and I pray that they will find a cure during your lifetime. Just remember to take one day at a time and please know that I am praying for both you and Jenny.
Becca Bell
10:48 am on Sunday, November 4, 2012
I have deep sympathy for those with terminal illness, but the ramifications of this law are unknown and could be very far reaching. For example, the scenario that in the future euthanasia could begin to be the recommendation instead of pricey treatment. What if insurance companies down the road will only cover that option and won't cover life sustaining treatment for people who want to live? There are stories out of Europe that the NHS pays hospitals more when they get patients to choose euthanasia. It's a scary thought, but one that needs to be carefully considered when weighing the choice on Q. 2.
LouAnn Laliberte
8:29 pm on Wednesday, November 7, 2012
My husband and I went to switzerland in Aug so he could have this choice. My husband died on august 17th in a beautiful sunny garden and was allowed to end his life. Family at his side all supporting his right to decide if he wanted to die. I loved my husband it was harder to let him go than to be selfish and try to make him live with his dreadful disease. We should all have this choice. It took seven months and all of our retirement to go to switzerland. How dare people second guess his choice the choice we should all have. I am proud that my husband was not going to let als end his life he refused, he made his own choice on how and when he wanted to die.