Right-to-Die Story Sad, Bad

The Feb. 4 article on the residents of Leisure World and their meeting Derek Humphry, a right-to-die advocate, is truly a sad commentary on our society.

I have lived all over the world and have seen people living in much worse conditions then the folks in Leisure World. The health care available to these people is some of the best in the world.

I am a middle-aged man in reasonably good health. I have never considered myself a Bible-pounding Christian, but your article has made me reevaluate my position.

This story brought to mind an old priest’s sermon. He spoke of suicide and the right to die. He challenged us with one simple question: “If Jesus Christ allowed himself to suffer and die on the cross for our sins, who are we to think we can take the easy way out of our suffering?”

At first I thought that it was easy for him to say that, not facing a painful death. The more I thought about it, the more I saw what he was getting at. Every day we are challenged in some way to do the right thing. What gives us the right to forget that on what could become our last day on this earth?

JOHN GROSS

Mission Viejo

* I was surprised and dismayed by your report that “Derek Humphry came to Leisure World on Monday to teach people how to kill themselves.” As one of those present, I find this account unworthy of The Times.

You took no account of the salient fact that, while Humphry did offer a prescription for avoiding a botched suicide attempt, the prescription was addressed to two special groups.

One was, as Humphry said, the 10% of terminally ill patients whose suffering cannot be mitigated by current medical intervention and who, in the absence of legal recourse to physician-assisted suicide, have no option but to wait for death to end their suffering or take matters into their own hands.

The other group was people who, though at present in good health, might want to make provision against such a contingency. These people are no more contemplating suicide than householders who buy fire insurance are generally contemplating arson.

Contrary to what you implied, Humphry was at pains not to counsel suicide but to indicate some of the ways in which a rational and socially responsible adult, terminally ill and suffering without relief, could accelerate the process of dying.

Humphry nowhere said that such an individual should commit suicide; only that it was the moral right of the individual to make such a decision for himself and that if he does, some ways of doing it are more effective than others.

To describe his talk as teaching people how to kill themselves is as misleading as to describe a talk on birth control as teaching people to practice abortion.

SHANE ANDRE

Seal Beach