Second Thoughts Connecticut leader Cathy Ludlum’s letter was published in the Hartford Courant on Sunday, May 2nd. This letter is part of discussions following the death of the state’s assisted suicide bill in the General Assembly Judiciary Committee.
Crossing line on ‘aid-in-dying’ bill
There is nothing wrong with vigorous debate. People have strong opinions, and the only way to create sound policy is for legislators to hear all sides. Unfortunately, Dr. Bluestein’s “Aid-in-dying bill is now personal” crosses the line [Letters to the editor]. By casting opponents of assisted suicide as having “no compassion, no empathy, no sense of decency,” he overlooks some basic questions. First, isn’t it more compassionate to provide a dying person with support, affirmation of dignity and first-rate pain-and-symptom management than to create a society in which ending one’s own life is seen as the highest good? Second, before accusing others of having no empathy, what might one learn from assisted-suicide opponents who have accompanied loved ones through difficult last days? Third, isn’t decency mingled with integrity and truth?
HB 6425 fails in part because it would have required falsification of the death certificate, did not prohibit an heir from witnessing the prescription request, and did not sufficiently limit the definition of “terminal illness.” These are flaws in the bill itself, identified by opponents in a discussion of policy. These concerns do not come from political or religious affiliation, and they should not be dismissed as such.
Cathy Ludlum, Manchester
Online link is to all the letters in today’s paper is here.