The Health Care Debate and Euthanasia

 

 R. M. Odom, M.A. , Blogger

Euthanasia means “good death” or “dying well.”  Everyone wants to die a good death, whether it is with loved ones close by, or peacefully while sleeping.  If the United States adopted a bill similar to Oregon’s “Assisted Suicide Bill,” many unwanted painful deaths could be eliminated.  In Oregon, only 91 cases of assisted suicide, in four years, have been reported.  This goes to show people are not using this has an “easy way out.” It also proves that Medicare is not cutting costs by ending the lives of people without the means to repay their debts.  Only the incurable terminally ill patients have the option of having someone assist them in death, and only in a small percentage of these cases Euthanasia actually occurs.

Because there isn’t a law passed to legalize assisted suicide, many people have and will suffer.  The main people who suffer are family and friends of the terminally ill.  In many cases, these terminally ill patients decide to go about ending their lives in much tragic ways.   Some decide to kill themselves by way of drugs or weapons.  In these cases, the families, including the children, are left with a horrible life changing event.  The terminally ill patient obviously suffers greatly also.  Some sickness, including cancers, take months or even years of great sickness and deteriorating to finally kill.  The family, in many cases becomes forever in debt with medication and hospital bills.  Another person who can suffer from the lack of a bill passed is the physician of the terminally ill.  If the physician in any way helps the patient commit suicide, even if it is as simple as handing them a pill, they will be charged and punished for murder.  The only thing a physician can legally do is let them die a slow painful death, even if it is against the patients will.  The majority of humans agree that putting a pet to sleep, when it is terminally ill, is the human thing to do.  To let your loved cat or dog die a slow painful death is considered inhumane and cruel.  Why then is Euthanasia of humans illegal and punishable?

Some misunderstandings of Euthanasia may hinder ones belief about the law.  A bill passed by legislature would by no means give people like Dr.  Kervorkian a way out of jail.  There are a few ways to categorize the different forms of Euthanasia to clear up misunderstandings.  There are two ways one may assist suicide which are actively and passively.  Passive Euthanasia occurs in instances in which the ancestor refuses to intervene in helping one die.  Active Euthanasia occurs in instances in which someone takes action in assisting suicide, such as lethal injection.  These two forms fall into three different categories each.  There is voluntarily, involuntarily and non-voluntary.  Involuntarily is when a patient is incapable of making a decision for themselves.  Lastly, non-voluntarily is when a patient does not want to die, but is put to death anyway.

Obviously the only legal way to communicate with Euthanasia should be “Active-Voluntarily.”  A patient must first not be forced to, but under their own will, decide to die.  There would have to be a waiting and approval period before anything could take place.  This would give plenty of time for the patient to think over their decision and give a second or third physician to see the patient.  If after this period the patient still wants to die he or she would be prescribed a lethal antidote to be taken where the patient decides.  The patient could then be put to rest in the hospital, awake or asleep, or be able to be alone with loved ones at home.

Many people who would like to die are unable to do it themselves.  Asking someone to help them should not be murder and punishable with jail terms.  The Kantian model of ethics states that human beings have the ablity to reason, and therefore the ability to reason, and therefore the ability to make decisions for themselves, based on their own reasoning.  Life and death could be the largest decision one could make for his or herself.  It should however, not be punishable if someone helps carry out a persons’ decision to die.

 

Help stop internet censorship laws in the U.S.

Did you know that countries like China, Iran, and the U.A.E. block large portions of the public internet from their citizens?

Did you know that the United States senate just proposed similar legislation?

Stop internet censorship before it starts!

The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) is an internet censorship bill that was only introduced a week ago and is already set for a hearing on Thursday, Sept. 30th. If you don’t want your internet access censored, monitored, and controlled, then you need to make your voice heard now!

This act proposes that the federal government (with the aid of major corporations and media conglomerates) will ultimately be able to decide what websites you are permitted to visit. It’s goal is to completely bypass all of the current legal safeguards in place that ensure web developers, news stations, and other online communities may speak their minds openly and freely.

If you care about freedom of information, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, then you should sign the online petition at http://www.demandprogress.org/blacklist and call your congressman about this issue.

There isn’t much time! The senate is trying to push this through before major media outlets catch on, with only a week long window between the bill’s release and it’s hearing! Don’t let censorship sip it’s way quietly into your life!

Voting for The Health Plan

In their first years of schooling, we teach our children that 50% plus one is a majority. If there are 100 votes out there, it takes 51 to be a winner. Or, so we thought. This continues to be true in the House of Representatives, but not always in the Senate. Some senators want us to believe that President Obama needs 60 out of 100 to pass the health bill This is not true.

The Senate has a rule that says the vote cannot be taken until the debate has concluded. The debate is not over until the last senator who wants to speak, has spoken. If a senator refuses to stop talking, there can be no vote on the bill unless 3/5, or 60, Senators vote to close the debate and get on with the vote. Then, they simply need a majority, or 51 votes.

This fillibuster rule was often used to kill civil rights legislation. It was used against The Voting Rights Act. It was used against the Civil Rights Act in 1963, 1964 and 1965. President Johnson didn’t back down. If a senator refused to yeild the floor, no one could go home until the talking was over. Sometimes they talked all day and all night, but they were not allowed to go home, until they stopped for the vote. This type of leadership appears to be missing today.

Low Census Count is a Silent Killer

Once again, The Odom Political Report is pleased to share the following article about the importance of the upcoming 2010 census. Albeit the story reflects the opinion of the writer the effect of an undercount in any city or state cannot be denied. A low count or undercount could truly be what the writer refers to as the, “Silent Killer” in obtaining future federal funding. We (Americans) cannot afford to be missed because the risks are simply too great. Please enjoy the article and I look forward to your important feedback. R. Mark Odom, Blogger

There is a silent killer in Harrisburg called not responding to the US Census. The US Census is conducted once every ten years and is used to draw new congressional maps and determine how the federal financial pie gets sliced. A low census count from Harrisburg could have a dramatic effect on our congressional representation and even more importantly, our level of federal funding for the next ten years. Census numbers also affect school funding, transportation dollars, and health care resources.

If the census was taken every year, or every presidential election cycle so that municipalities had the opportunity to correct low counts it would not be as potentially devastating. The ten year cycle of the census makes the potential effects of a low census count disastrous on a city like Harrisburg, which already has its’ fair share of challenges.

Several factors conspire to make urban centers like Harrisburg, victims of a low census count. The prison industrial complex that has flourished in rural Pennsylvania benefits from prisoners from Harrisburg, and other cities who are counted as residents of that rural area rather than the city from which they came. The loss of jobs and the high cost of living in urban centers, along with the allure of warm weather and good food has drawn many of the former residents of cities like Harrisburg back to the south. While the population in many southern cities and suburbs is flourishing, urban centers across the Northeast are dying a slow and painful death.

Among the most rapidly growing populations in urban centers are non registered residents who fear reprisal if they complete the census forms. Many are uninformed that the United States Constitution does not require people to be US Citizens to be counted by the census. What is required is that you reside at the address for which you complete the questionnaire at the time of the census. A general distrust of government cuts across racial and ethnic lines completes the list of low census count contributors.

The disturbing lack of attention paid to this issue by media and community leaders alike, makes us all complicit in allowing the silent killer to ravage our community. Pennsylvania has experienced a tremendous loss with the death of US Congressman John Murtha. His departure makes it even more urgent that we maintain our level of influence on how federal dollars are allocated to states through the census. In fact, not only does the census affect representation at the federal level, but it also impacts representation in the capital. With important races looming on the horizon such as the 103rd state legislative district, we would be wise to pay attention to making sure Harrisburg is fully represented in the census count.

We still have time to stand up and be counted as a community and region. This is not a partisan issue about democrats or republicans. This is about the people of the Greater Harrisburg region and what our quality of life will look like over the next ten years in terms of federal funding. Complete Count Committees at the city, county and regional level working in conjunction with census partnership specialists can make a big difference. Complete Count Committees consist of community leaders, government officials, clergy, business owners, educators, and others who work on building awareness about the census to their various constituencies. They stress how important it is to get an accurate census count, and help our community by getting more people to respond to the census questionnaire than otherwise would.

Each of us can make sure that when the forms arrive at our homes in April that we don’t put them in the dreaded file 13. Complete the census forms accurately and send them back so that we can have every person counted. Speak to friends, relatives, and co-workers about the importance of getting every person in our community to fill out the census form. By raising our voices and completing the forms we can take positive steps toward restoring our city to sound financial health.

Rev. Martin D. Odom is the Pastor of the Bethel Village A.M.E Church in Harrisburg and Political Action Director for the Interdenominational Minister’s Conference (IMC) of Greater Harrisburg. martindodom@aol.com

The Haitian Triage

When disaster strikes and medicine resources are low, someone has to make the decision as to who is treated first. This is done by setting up a Triage Center, along with the appointment of a Triage Officer. If 100 people are hurt and we have only 50 life-saving pills, the Triage Officer decides who should receive this medicine. Therefore, the patients must be classified by priority. Some will probably live without receiving any of the pills. These are the first to be left alone, in favor of the others. Some will probably die regardless of how much they receive. They too, will be left alone, in favor of those most likely to live. If more help arrives, then we can return to those who were by-passed and determine which of them should be treated. Those who appear closet to death, probably will be the last treated. Let’s all do what we can for our neighbors to the South. The Haitian people need your help – not later, but now!

Elections in the Age of Anonymity

The Odom Political Report is extremely pleased to present our guest blog for October and November 2009. The article was written by the Rev. Martin D. Odom, Senior Pastor, Bethel Village A.M.E. Church, Harrisburg, PA, and Apostle Brenda M. Alton, Pastor, Kingdom Embassy Church of Harrisburg, PA and the President of the Interdenominational Ministers Conference. Bloggers Note: Not since 1791 (218 years ago) has there been so much upheaval in Harrisburg the Capital of Pennsylvania. On Tuesday, November 3, 2009 the citizens of Harrisburg elected not only their first female mayor, but the first African-American as well. Mayor-elect Linda Thompson’s electoral success is due in part to her dynamic community-wide message of social encouragement, and desire for a better quality of life for all its citizens. Mayor-elect Thompson received the collective support of the African-American community, and the spiritual encouragement to go forth with her campaign against the odds from Harrisburg’s black ministers. Those actions spoke volumes about her past and future leadership abilities. The Harrisburg Ministers Conference electrified their respective congregations under the theme, “More Souls To The Polls.” Generally speaking political operatives know that theme is a universal one, and has been used for at least the last two decades by national grass-roots organizations to give meaning to the final goal which is of course, election day. The “Get Out The Vote or GOTV” effort means mobilize and go into action. That simple message is an appropriate one for unifying the electorate during the final days of a well-managed campaign. The dynamic and courageous group of ministers of Harrisburg, PA should be commended by all for wisely using their right to fair speech (aka) “First Amendment Rights” to encourage the community to vote.

As intelligent (thinking) individuals we should recognize that their support should in no way be considered or construed as an official church endorsement for the former Mayoral candidate. (Calling for change from the status quo is one thing, but having the leadership and guts to pursue real change is unique. – R. M. Odom, November 2009.)

The Odom Political Report is pleased to present the following article for your review and comment.

Our society is ever changing and evolving. We have come through the Industrial Revolution, the Great Society, the Transportation Age, the Baby Boom, and we are currently in what some have termed the Information Age. Information is readily available at our fingertips with the press of a button. We can search engine someone’s name and find out all sorts of information about them. This information may be positive or negative, accurate or inaccurate, celebratory or hurtful.

The sad reality is that this age of information has also ushered another more potentially ominous age, the age of anonymity. Anonymity is a two edged sword. Its’ redeeming factors include the ability of two people to meet on the internet and get to know one another without ever having to meet in person. The myriad dating sites that abound in cyberspace are evidence of the success of these ventures. That same anonymity can be disastrous when one of those people is a teenager and the other is a predator masquerading as a teenager.

A more recent example of the potential pitfalls of anonymity is the recent election we experienced in the city of Harrisburg. Anonymity provided people on both sides the opportunity to launch a continuous stream of accusations and attacks under the mask of an anonymous user name. It is one thing to make a hateful comment and attribute your name to that comment. It is something altogether different to issue a continual barrage of attacks on a person’s character, family, and or personal life, without the risk of having your name attached to that statement. Most newspapers today will not print letters to the editor that come from anonymous sources, but the internet has made it possible to post vitriolic statements to newspaper sponsored web sites with no personal attribution. Such is life in the age of anonymity.

One of the dangers of the age of anonymity is that the ability to say the same thing over and over again, whether accurate or not tends to lend credibility to the statement. It is potentially hazardous when mainline news organizations begin to treat anonymous accusations with the same level of seriousness as they do those which come from sources which reveal their identities. Journalists have always had the right to protect the identity of their sources and many have suffered to protect that right. One case that comes to mind is the Watergate Scandal of the 1970’s in which two reporters from the Washington Post kept their source of information so secret that his identity was only recently revealed.

The right of journalists to protect the identity of their sources should remain intact. However, our society has drifted into a different place when rather than protecting the identity of their sources, journalist no longer know the identity of their sources. When reporters begin to follow up on anonymous accusations as though they are true then their reporting is compromised. This is not the protection of sources or the freedom of the press, this is a shallow replacement for real investigative work that informs the public and benefits society. Moreover, if this type of source attribution is to become the standard practice then there ought to be a benchmark that says that all anonymous accusations will be pursued about each candidate and with the same vigor. In this most recent election we do not believe that standard was always met.

Our society thrives on encouraging the most talented and integrous people we can find to run for office. We ask these people to make tremendous investments of time, finances, and emotional energy, and to reveal themselves in ways that most of us would feel uncomfortable. In the age of anonymity, however we are not only asking these people to defend themselves for past transgressions, mistakes, or bad choices, but against anonymous and potentially untrue accusations. We are asking candidates to defend themselves against an enemy whom they cannot see, and who is allowed to make unlimited attacks no matter the credulity. People who want to have it both ways by making accusations no matter how ridiculous and posting them anonymously for the world to see. Seldom have so few had the potential to do so much damage to so many.

Ultimately, the responsibility does not fall to candidates for elective office, or even to newspapers, editorial boards, or other media outlets. It falls to each of us to decide how we conduct ourselves in the age of anonymity. Whether we succumb to the temptation to post a negative comment and hide behind our screen name, or to express ourselves in the coliseum of public opinion in a way that does service to ourselves, our fellow citizens and our society.

Rev. Martin D. Odom is the Pastor of the Bethel Village AME Church of Harrisburg, PA and Political Action Chair of the Interdenominational Ministers Conference.

Apostle Brenda M. Alton is the pastor the Kingdom Embassy Church of Harrisburg, PA and the President of the Interdenominational Ministers Conference.