Letters: Coronavirus, PM, Heather du Plessis-Allan and hospices

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. Photo / AP

Opinion

Better late than never.

A big thank you to our Prime Minister for stepping up and doing the right thing for New Zealanders' health, by imposing tight travel restrictions and cancelling large events.

It's never easy to make decisions that are likely to be unpopular, but that's what leadership is about. Making the right decisions, based on principle, not pressure.

The short-term pain of not being able to go to a sports game or a concert, and the temporary stalling of the economy, is far better than the longer-term risk to the vulnerable in our communities. We need to all think about the elderly, and those with health conditions for whom this virus is a very real and present danger.

The world will bounce back. And on the upside, all these cancelled cruises and flights must be good for the environment.

Sue Kurtovich, Tauranga

Who's grandstanding?

Within hours of the PM's announcement on Saturday, Heather du Plessis-Allan had accused Ardern of political grandstanding.

To suggest the PM is intentionally using a time of crisis to promote herself as a strong leader, as opposed to acting in the national interest, is appalling.

Does du Plessis-Allan actually believe this? She is promoted as a name "you can trust". If this extends to being relied upon to use a time of international crisis to promote her brand, her ratings and her employer, du Plessis-Allan is indeed very trustworthy.

Ian Findlay, Napier

Slanted opinion

After repeatedly reading the opinion pieces written by Heather du Plessis-Allan slanted in favour of the National Party and deriding the Labour/NZ First coalition, I am left wondering if she could possibly be standing in a safe National electorate in the upcoming election in September.

Jon Stafford, Hastings

Support, not snide comment

The tone of Heather du Plessis-Allan's column is mischievous and reprehensible at this time of a global emergency. To imply that protections put in place to maximise the safety of us all are simply political decisions made on the fly is dangerous. We need to support all our institutions and co-operate as best we can so that the impact on our most vulnerable is minimised. This is no time for snide comments and dismissive statements.

Suzanne Kerr, Waiheke Island

Thou shalt not

Jack Havill says "it is extremely difficult to find any biblical basis for their strong assertions" (referring to opponents of euthanasia).

How about "thou shalt not kill" ?

John Hampson, Meadowbank

Hospices at risk

Traditionally, those close to death were reluctant to enter hospice for fear of having their death hastened there against their will, which led to many entering later than desirable.

More recently, hospice authorities have gained the trust of such people, as they make their policy very clear that hospice care neither hastens nor delays the natural process of dying.

Now representatives of the euthanasia lobby such as Ann David (Letters, March 8) are exerting pressure for hospice to include the assisted suicide of some of their patients.

It is very concerning that the End of Life Choice Act does not contain any protection for hospices to remain true to their values.

Any reader who doubts the heavy-handed bureaucratic pressure that is likely to come upon a hospice refusing to kill some of its patients should check out the struggle faced by Delta Hospice Society in Canada.

Despite the fact that the hospice's contract does not oblige it to provide euthanasia or assisted suicide, its future is now in doubt.

The threat to the future of hospices is sufficient reason to vote against the EOLC Act.

Mariano Mendonza, Henderson