Letters: End of Life Options Act and a women's medical decisions
Urge your legislator to support the End of Life Options Act
A 2020 poll by the Boston Globe showed that 70% of Massachusetts residents support medical aid in dying. The Massachusetts Medical Society went from opposing it, to declaring themselves neutral. Individual physicians practicing in Massachusetts support it by a ratio of 2:1.
The End of Life Options Act is now before the Joint Committee on Public Health. The bill has a Feb. 2 deadline, which means the committee must vote on it before that date in order for the bill to move forward. Because the committee has more bills than it can vote on by that deadline, our legislators need to hear from us about which issues are most important to us, their constituents.
Please join me in contacting our legislators to urge them to support the bill. Call, tweet, email or write a letter. You can find your legislators by using the Find My Legislator tool at malegislature.gov. Another option is to go to the Compassion & Choices website at compassionandchoices.org, click on “How You Can Help” at the top of the page, then click on “Contact Your Legislator.”
Whether this is your first time contacting legislators about the End of Life Options Act, or your second, third or fourth time, please do it now, ahead of the Feb. 2 deadline, to remind them to support the bill. The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Joan Milnes, Acton
Medical decisions should be made between a doctor and patient
I’d like to respond to Richard Carey’s Jan. 5 letter equating abortion to the simplicity of adding two plus two. While not denying an unborn’s right to life, abortion is not as black and white as his math example. What if the mother’s health is endangered by the child’s birth? Or the child will be born with unsustainable defects? Or the mother is a 13-year-old rape victim?
Who provides care for the mother during pregnancy? Once born, who provides care for the unwanted child? If killing humans denies their right to life, should a policeman not shoot a criminal? Should a criminal found guilty of killing a policeman not receive a death sentence?
Can someone defend themselves using lethal means? Should “do not resuscitate” instructions be ignored because everything should be done to save a life despite its resulting quality and cost?
The right to life must consider many circumstances that two plus two does not. I suggest that medical decisions are made between a doctor and patient, not by an insurance company, and certainly not by the Supreme Court. Using Mr. Carey’s words, equating a complex issue with simple math is “making a misstatement.”
Dale Donchin, Framingham
This article originally appeared on MetroWest Daily News: Letters: End of Life Options Act and a women's medical decisions
