Kudos to the Tribune Editorial Board for its critique of Illinois’ End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act (“Illinois’ right-to-die law meets the right to say no,” Sept. 11). The act not only legalizes ending one’s life through the taking of a requested lethal prescription; it also mandates moral complicity in ending life by requiring referral for this procedure by those physicians who refuse to participate due to conscientious moral objection. The editorial board rightly notes the “legitimate concern” of Catholic providers who are suing the state over this mandate. Referral of a request is the first step that eventually leads to the final outcome, the death of the patient after ingestion of lethal medication. Mandating referral for this procedure is forced complicity, a moral injury to some.
I am also troubled by the fact that the act makes it illegal for the physician to list in any manner on the death certificate that the ingestion of lethal medication was the cause of death. Rather, the physician must list the underlying disease as the cause of death. Thus, the act prohibits an accurate listing of the immediate cause of death. This constitutes a legal mandate for the physician to falsify the actual cause of death. This may hinder the ability of the state to monitor the use of the procedure, also known as assisted suicide, to limit inappropriate uses beyond the defined class of patients.
Respect for patients, physician/providers and others and truth-telling are among the core foundational commitments of bioethics. The act overrides these principles and imposes on physicians and other providers at least one or both of these moral injuries: legally mandated moral complicity in causing death by referring for self-killing and legally mandated falsification of actual cause of death.
The future of medical professionalism hangs in the balance. If lying is legally mandated, medicine is no longer a moral profession but merely an amoral tool of the state.
Some may think these concerns are merely academic. However, legalizing assisted suicide may lead to expansion beyond its narrowly defined initial limits to wider groups. Illinois government should acknowledge the moral injuries noted above and others in the act and rectify them forthwith.
Until then, at a minimum, a moratorium would be in order.
— Dr. Peter Jaggard, Winnetka
Does ordinance actually help?
I sat through a Housing and Real Estate Committee hearing recently and felt nothing but despair. As a city, we do have a real problem with housing affordability, but what I witnessed was a performative exercise. The aldermen in attendance hardly paid attention to the speakers; there were many speakers on both sides raising real issues. The fact is that nothing in the proposed Protecting Renters Ordinance does anything to make housing more affordable. The litany of new requirements, prohibitions of fees and new costs would do the exact opposite.
Anyone who understands basic economics understands that the price is set by supply and demand. If the aldermen really want to make housing more affordable, they should be doing everything to increase supply. What businessperson in their right mind would put a shovel in the ground to build more naturally occurring affordable housing? Sure, they may build the shining new towers in Fulton Market or River North, but not in the great neighborhoods of Chicago where the housing is most needed.
The sad thing is people are suffering, and all our elected officials do is play games. Those who vote in favor of PRO are sticking it to the proverbial “man,” but you know who suffers in the end? The people they claim they are trying to help. Yes, there are some bad landlords, and we need to hold them accountable. Is that addressed by this law?
I implore our City Council members to stop this madness and sit down like adults with all stakeholders — tenants, landlords, builders and government — and work cooperatively to actually solve the problem.
If we don’t, we will continue adding to the reasons many have for leaving this great city.
— David Goss, Chicago
Enforce basic traffic laws
Aldermen are calling for action to improve traffic safety, which, as an avid bicyclist as well as an auto driver, I can’t help but applaud (“Riley O’Neil died a preventable death. We can’t cut funding for safe streets,” Sept. 15). Calls to improve infrastructure and education including encouraging the “Dutch reach” are fine plans. Surprisingly, aside from bike lane blockages, there is no mention of simply enforcing basic traffic laws. I travel the full length of North Avenue through the city multiple times a week, and I observe auto and motorcycle drivers speeding around traffic to blow through stop lights.
Heavy motorcycles weave and often drive between traffic lanes and routinely use the bike lanes and, at times, even the sidewalks! Stop signs on many side streets may as well not even be there because they are ignored so often. I see these behaviors weekly. Sure, I don’t want to be “doored” when I’m on my bike or forced into traffic from the bike lanes, so attention to that is welcomed.
However, the thing I fear the most, who have caused the close calls that I’ve had, are the entitled drivers breaking the basic safety laws. Mayor Brandon Johnson lives near me in Austin, so I find it hard to believe he has not observed these all-too-common behaviors on the northern border of his own neighborhood.
Where is the call for the simple enforcement of the existing laws?
— Kurt Hedlund, Oak Park
Get kids involved in activities
As a Chicagoan, retired Chicago Public Schools teacher, former Park District supervisor and former director of athletics and activities for CPS Sports Administration, I believe future violence and teen disturbances can be addressed by providing recreational and social activities for young people. This should include all activities kids are interested in. Our impressionable 9- to 12-year-olds are the future, and early involvement in organized programs will deter them from involvement in teen takeovers in the future.
Research tells us that as a result of participation in organized activities, kids perform better academically, attend school more frequently and have fewer discipline issues. Activities also help physical, mental, social and emotional development.
More Top Picks Best Kindle E Readers
Not everyone can make the school athletic teams, but if funding is added, all kids would have an opportunity to participate in after-school activities in their school buildings with their peers. The Chicago Park District should also be offering free recreational athletic programs. These programs should run from 3 p.m. until 10 p.m. Monday through Friday under the physical instructors with time slots for each age group. Kids can come in right after school for free.
We must include individuals who can write these programs. CPS and the Park District are being undervalued and underused. Free programming is a great weapon to combat violence and teach life skills that will help produce well-rounded young people and eventually well-rounded adults.
Mayor Brandon Johnson is involving young people to help design programs they like and will gravitate to, but leaders have to involve experienced experts who can write and facilitate the fall, winter and spring programs that people like me grew up on. The individuals at the head of the parks and CPS sports programs are inexperienced in this area. Experts with firsthand experience are needed. These programs help produce good citizens.
The sister Park District and CPS programs can be the change agent to address some civil disobedience and help shape young people for the future.
Not only the mayor but, also, all mayoral candidates should look at this because it can have a huge impact on young people and the city for the future.
— Calvin Davis, Chicago
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].