Dear Editor:
RE: Negative image, Aug. 3.
The renowned scientist and cosmologist Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
I see none of the latter in the anti-MAID (medical assistance in dying) arguments offered by Chris Woode. For example, “We have heard that MAID (medical assistance in dying) has been offered to people in place of treatment geared to getting better…”
We have also heard that childhood vaccines cause autism, that Donald Trump is an agent of God, and that climate change is a hoax. Just because this type of conspiratorial silliness is out there does not mean we have to be taken in or, worse yet, embrace it.
Based on the fact that two physicians and/or nurse practitioners have to independently approve a MAID request and that they would do so if there is a chance of recovery is absurd.
Similarly, the notion that doctors are compelled to practice euthanasia and they are not able to opt out is utterly untrue.
The balance of the letter dealing with the government’s allocation of funds and the billing practices of physicians I am going to place in the realm of conjecture unless and until I am provided with specific documentation.
Allan Berry,
Fergus