Letters: We must address financial inequality in NZ

NEW Zealand is the best country in the world — it is an exquisite tapestry formed from our beautiful native forests, majestic maunga, and pristine tributaries, streams and rivers (what is left of them).

Another piece of the fabric that forms the rich tapestry is the people. New Zealanders are renowned for their manaakitanga, compassion, kindness, and humility. I am proud to call myself a New Zealander.

However, we have some serious issues to address — one of which is the rapidly growing financial inequality in this country.

This inequality has been facilitated to a large degree by political decision-making over the past 40 years.

Recent statistics illustrate that homelessness has increased, food bank usage has increased, and a large proportion of New Zealand children live in relative poverty. These are some of the consequences of a failed economic system.

Another symptom is increased security presence in our society.

A family member noted there was an increased presence of security guards in Auckland stores, more than he remembered from his last visit to Auckland a number of years before, and this can be generalised to most cities in New Zealand.

Academic Noam Chomsky notes that increased security presence is a symptom of growing societal dysfunction, which is manifested by financial inequality. Is this the society we want? I say no.

The economic theory perpetuated by successive governments since the mid-80s has helped lead us to this point. It has benefited a small minority, while the majority of people have either stagnated or gone backward.

The paradigm that has been in place since the 1980s has to change to one that benefits all New Zealanders, that allows people to more than just survive, enables every person to thrive.

We need to repair and maintain our tapestry so that it remains strong and beautiful for generations to come.

HALIM SHERIDAN
Whanganui

What a cracker

I would like to express my thanks for the wonderful contents of the Xmas Cracker.

Winning it was truly a wonderful welcome to the stunning wee city of Whanganui, where I have recently come to live.

I'm one of those people who enters competitions without expectations and buys raffles simply to support the cause, so this windfall really came out of the blue.

I'm deeply grateful and will enjoy sharing it around family and friends — and give myself a treat or two as well.

I hope everyone has a safe and happy holiday season.

WENDY WATSON
Whanganui

Not logical

Dianne Cooper would like to make a false distinction between suicides facilitated by doctors and unassisted suicides. This is not logical.

She cannot presume to speak for family members who have lost a loved one to suicide. No one family member responds in the same way.

To quote Maryan Street, at the public debate in May: "This bill will divide families", because, as she also admitted, "Families are complicated."

In the Netherlands, where it is fast becoming the norm to exit this life via lethal injection, many young people are traumatised by the awareness that they were not worth staying around for; that their grandparents would rather choose death than spend time with them.

The person seeking to bring their life to an end is doing so in both cases because of unbearable suffering. It is impossible to compare or to rank different sorts of suffering.

D J SCOTT
Waitakere

Xxxxxxxxx
I think the people who would most disagree with F R Halpin (Chronicle letters, December 11) that assisted dying is "suicide" are the bereaved.

Those who have lost a loved one to an untimely death by suicide are invariably traumatised and grief-stricken. Their anguish stems from the fact they know the person was traumatised, desperate and alone at the time of dying.

By comparison, those who have lost a loved one to assisted dying are not traumatised, though they mourn, as is natural. But they are usually at peace because they know the person was at peace and felt supported at the time of dying.

Palliative care does not help between 4 per cent and 8 per cent of patients because some patients do not respond to the medications available or because such medications cause worse side-effects.

For these patients, palliative care offers "terminal sedation", the practice of withdrawing food, water and deeply sedating the patient until death. It can take up to two weeks for either the disease, the starvation, the dehydration or a combination of all three to end life.

Is that suicide? Killing? I think not — it's an attempt at a gentle death. So is assisted dying.

ANN DAVID
Waikanae

Send your letters to: The Editor, Whanganui Chronicle, 100 Guyton St, PO Box 433, Whanganui 4500; or email editor@wanganuichronicle.co.nz