Anita Cenerini, this year's Silver Cross mother, holds a portrait of her son, Thomas Welch, who died by suicide within a few months of returning from Afghanistan in 2004. He was the first returning Canadian soldier to take his own life.LYLE STAFFORD
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
..................................................................................................................................
Meet our veterans' need to mend body and mind
Private Thomas Welch’s death by suicide exemplifies how necessary it is for the Canadian government to step up to the plate and ensure that it meets veterans’ need to mend both wounded bodies and minds as a result of serving Canada (No Longer Forgotten – Nov. 1).
Anything less is just not acceptable. The principle of “unlimited liability” on the part of the government in supporting our soldiers still remains extant, regardless of any legal legerdemain.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not present himself or the government in a positive light regarding veterans with his Edmonton Town Hall remark in February that “they’re asking for more than we are able to give right now.” This comment rings hollow when one sees billions of dollars expended on numerous pet projects, along with the recent revelations that the taxpayer is still beholden for the lavish expenses of retired governors-general. Lest we forget.
Bertram Frandsen, major (retired), Ottawa
Death’s schedule
I am a retired orthopedic surgeon whose wife recently died with the assistance of the New Brunswick Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program. She had inoperable bile duct cancer, with poor prognosis and short life expectancy. She refused chemotherapy, choosing to live her remaining days collecting family memories. We had an unexpected 10 wonderful months together, but her greatest fear throughout was slipping into a coma, becoming ineligible for “late stage consent” (A Moment Of Her Choosing: The Struggle To Make The Call On Assisted Dying – Nov. 1).
Fortunately this did not happen, and she died at a time and in the manner of her choosing, at our local hospital, with great respect and dignity, the family never seeing her in a diminished state. I feel that MAID is the most generous, thoughtful gift one can give loved ones. Its availability made me proud to be Canadian. Not nearly enough attention is given to end-of-life-with-dignity.
Eric Gozna, Fredericton
.........................................
Never has an opinion piece in a newspaper resonated with me as much as Gary Mason’s on old age (Getting Old Is Worse Than You Think – Nov. 2). I read it sitting in a hospital next to my 95-year-old mother. She recently fractured her pelvis in two places, and has gone from being independent enough to be able to live on her own to an utterly frightening world of diminished capacity, and a future of complete dependency for even the simplest activity.
If you’re like Mr. Mason’s Uncle Artie – handsome and outgoing right to the end, and happen to die of a heart attack at 80 under a gorgeous oak tree waiting to go for a swim – you are lucky beyond measure. For the rest of us, I think it’s going to be a much, much more unpleasant end.
It’s time to broaden the scope of assisted suicide. At a very advanced age, some people may simply feel they’ve had enough of living and that the misery of going on living just isn’t worth it. They should have the right to decide to end their lives, even though they don’t suffer from unbearable pain and imminent death. It’s their life, after all. Why shouldn’t they be able to choose when to end it?
Pierre Home-Douglas, Dorval, Que.
.........................................
Gary Mason raises issues that researchers and policymakers are grappling with; there are no easy solutions.
Many Canadians care for their elderly parents at home, and do not entrust their loved ones’ well-being to kindly strangers. If such duty toward our parents and elders is absent (this includes our elderly aunts, uncles, grandparents, and friends), then we can be assured that no state or paid strangers alone could ever provide meaningful and dignified care to the elderly. There are fundamental questions about values that need to be brought into the conversation – questions beyond policies and services, and that interrogate our very definition of family and the reciprocal sacrifices inherent in those relationships.
Hodan S. Mohamed, Ottawa
Propelled to extinction
Caribou are one of nature’s jewels. As biology reveals, these animals live on the grandest scales. They are the greatest pedestrians on Earth; their overland migrations are the longest; the changes in their abundance unfold over many decades. And, as biology now reveals, most caribou in Canada are in trouble (Researchers Call For Action As Human Activity Pushes Caribou Toward Extinction – Oct. 30).
But keeping caribou and their habitat is more than biological. At its core, caribou are a test – of whether we can adopt a larger view, whether we have the foresight to accommodate caribou and their habitat in the long haul, while acting promptly toward that goal. In short, whether we can reset our plans and desires to much grander scales, on par with the caribou themselves.
The future of caribou is uncertain. But the task is clear: Actions to keep and restore habitat, now. The consequences of inaction are also clear. By ignoring caribou, by denying the urgency, we don’t distance ourselves from the issue. We propel ourselves toward it.
James Schaefer, biology professor, Trent University, Peterborough, Ont.
Why do we tolerate it?
Re Discord, On Full Boil (letters, Nov. 1): I stood up from my breakfast, pumped my fist and shouted “Yes, exactly, that’s what I’ve been saying all along!” when I read retired major-general David Neasmith’s letter. Why do we tolerate politicians who divide us?
We are all on the same team. There should be no Us versus Them. If a particular party is in power, why does the opposition have to act like that party’s every idea or policy is “the worst idea ever” and do everything in its power to discredit it? What about co-operation and compromise?
Are politicians not there to represent all Canadians, not just the ones who voted for them? Look at what’s happening in the United States and you will see where that type of “representation” gets us. I’m fast approaching 60, have voted in every election since I was legally able to do so, and I remember voting for the person I thought would do the best job, not because they were affiliated with a particular party.
Party politics that demonize the opposition are not conducive to effective government. How do we get our elected officials (“our employees”) to behave like adults and work together for the common good? I wish I knew.
Brian Kennelly, Hamilton
Diverging priorities
Re Get The Picture (Nov. 1): As I turned the page to the Life & Arts section last week, I heard a radio news item about the multitude of starving souls in Yemen. The irony did not escape me as I read about a new “Romper Room for grownups,” a so-called “Happy Place” largely composed of plastic – 4,000 rubber ducks, while a plastic island the size of France floats in the ocean! Really?! – and serving hot chocolate, smiley-face cookies, and rainbow-coloured grilled cheese sandwiches.
The world is getting smaller with technology and social media, but sometimes our priorities are worlds apart.
Donna Macbeth, Oliver, B.C.