I
Nancy Elliott Chair of EPC - USA |
I know this bill is for a STUDY, but studying things that would be harmful if passed is a waste of taxpayer money and runs the risk of giving legitimacy and momentum to this practice. If we look down the road where legal we see people's lives being ended who are not necessarily dying, such as an individual with diabetes, who refuses to take his insulin, using this on people with psychological problems and forcing this on people who object as in the Dutch woman who was held down by her family while her doctor forcibly euthanized her.
This particular study seems biased as to its makeup. Instead of having legislators who would be able to weigh the input from different points of view, this committee is made up of "stakeholders". I find it interesting that there are no grassroots organizations representing the disability or elderly communities, who this topic most affects. Why is there no representative from Not Dead Yet? And why is the elderly representative a lawyer, which tend to be more interested in wealth preservation for the estate. And the two religious members are coming out of a grouping of churches in which many support Assisted Suicide. By designating this organization the state is eliminating influence from churches that are not members and may be more in the best interest of our citizens.
I believe that this commission is dangerous to our citizens because the report that will come out, will indicate an imaginary mandate for Assisted Suicide. We all know that these reports are taken very seriously. This report could very well replace the scrutiny that typically takes place on a bill in committee. As legislators, do not replace your position as protectors of society with "Stakeholders".
Please vote SB490 Inexpedient to Legislate. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Nancy Elliott
Former NH State Representative
Chair of Euthanasia Prevention Coalition - USA
2 comments:
Diverting scrutiny is one of their primary tatics. They use “self administration” in their sales pitch almost every time to divert normal scrutiny then in the law/bill omit an ordinary witness to the administration which enables predators with no scrutiny allowed by law.
Great letter, Nancy! You are absolutely right. I emailed Senator James Gray last night to advocate that he oppose the bill.
Post a Comment