Fear of being a burden is altruism

Alex Penk of the Maxim Institute writes (Don’t be so sure, Jan 10) that in Oregon 55 per cent of people choosing medically assisted dying give one, just one, of the reasons being ‘‘fear of being a burden on family, friends etc’’ as if this is a very negative thing.

What is so wrong with not wanting to be a burden, Mr Penk? It’s called consideration for others, also known as altruism. Combined with other issues such as long-term suffering and pain it is a perfectly valid reason for wanting to choose the time of one’s death.

It is also OK to want not to be a burden on the health system and taxpayers.

I am old and may well experience, as did my father, a long-drawn-out dying. I want to be able to have the choice to save not only myself but also my nearest and dearest from this, and this should be the right of anyone who so chooses.

Mary Singleton, Raumati Beach

Real time, real pain

Forget ghost chips, Wellington’s got ghost buses. These are the ones the Real Time system says are due in four, three, two, one minutes but never arrive. The entries drop off the screen and, if you’re lucky, a real bus may turn up 10 or so minutes later.

Complaints to Metlink will get you a perfect description of how the system used to work pre-July 2018, but no acknowledgement of the issue or any attempt to fix it.

I understand Real Time was originally introduced to provide customers with more reliable arrival times for a system at the mercy of events that prevent buses from adhering to the advertised schedule.

Unfortunately, ghost buses are yet another outcome the regional council (and its new provider) have failed to resolve in their pursuit of money over customer service.

I wonder when the more economic routes, higher bus fares, lower operating costs and lack of effort to resolve complaints are going to translate into something more real than ghost benefits for its customers and ratepayers.

BJ Knight, Karori

Science or scientism?

One gets the feeling on reading Wilfully ignorant waging war on wildlife (Jan 9), on the use of poisons to kill animals we don’t value, that writer Dave Hansford protests too much.

While the Brookvale community might have got some of its science wrong, the fundamentals of its ethics seem sound. Unfortunately, anybody who disagrees with Hansford’s views gets labelled a science denier, a conspiracy theorist, a zealot, a cabalist among other things.

As Hansford never says what ‘‘science’’ actually is and uses the term in a mantra-like way, one starts to think that his beliefs are in the ideology of scientism rather than in science.

This ideology pretends to objectivity but is based on unexamined values where the idea, in this case, of the existence of consciousness and the ability to feel pain in animals is devalued and the idea of technical competence is overvalued and divorced from ethical thought.

Hence one can countenance the use of poisons that cause gross suffering to kill animals one devalues.

However, just as protests arose against the medical establishment in the early 1900s for its vivisection practices, so there have arisen protests against the Department of Conservation and other groups for their uncompassionate use of poisons. Dr Graham Bull, Levin

Pure profligacy

No amount of weasel words (Ministry’s $45K a month travel bill, Jan 11) justifies the profligate expense of the Ministry for the Environment sending staff on 58 junkets overseas in 18 months.

For an organisation whose aim is to protect the environment, those responsible for authorising this extraordinary expense and contribution to our carbon footprint should be brought to account.

No doubt, one of the arguments will be that the planes were flying anyway – but that’s no excuse. We live in the age of the internet. Surely those charged with saving the planet should at least attempt to ‘‘walk the talk’’, rather than it being an appalling case of ‘‘do as we say, not as we do’’.

Just goes to show ‘‘certification at the highest international standards’’ counts for nought.

Richard Arlidge, Lower Hutt

Verity’s a gem

I love columnist Verity Johnson.She is 24 and I am 72 and I find her columns lively, honest and fun to read. They are often very insightful about human nature and relationships. She’s a gem. Jane Blackman, Christchurch