It is good to read Sonia Sodha’s piece on assisted dying (“Assisted dying seems humane, but can we protect the vulnerable from the malign?”, Comment), especially in the light of the recent announcement that MPs on the health and social care committee are to open an inquiry into assisted dying this year. However, I do not agree with her conclusion, which seems to be that, as it’s difficult to provide appropriate legal protections, we shouldn’t try. Yes, it’s difficult, as it’s bound to be with such a fundamental moral issue. All the more reason for having an open debate and putting great efforts into protecting the rights of those who want control over their lives, including the time and manner of their dying.
Having recently accompanied my wife to Dignitas, I can only wish that she hadn’t had to deal with all the additional stress and anxiety caused by this country’s current laws.
Dave Sowry
London W4
I am a palliative medicine doctor who spent last weekend working in a broken system. The hospice I work in stepped up to help transfer many patients out of our local hospital, to help dying patients get the care they deserve and free up beds for patients waiting in A&E. It was hard work by nurses, doctors and transport teams that ultimately helped not only our patients but those who could not even get into the hospital.
It chills me to think of assisted dying being an option in our current system. We can’t get you a care package, but we can offer assisted dying! We’ve not had time to assess you thoroughly but we do think assisted dying is right for you? It’s ridiculous to imagine a magical source of staff and resources that would mean patients were protected from these offers. Can we please focus our efforts on excellent palliative care and fund social care properly?
Dr Sarah Foot
Chelmsford, Essex
I agree with Sonia Sodha but my additional worry is that big organisations will misuse “assisted dying”. I know and trust my cancer team, but I fear distant, powerful corporations whose aims are opaque.
Public bodies are under extreme pressure to make savings (austerity, anyone?). Early in the pandemic, hasty assumptions meant that many people were sent home and counted as “excess deaths” because they were old, frail, had underlying health problems or were disabled. Not the kind of assistance with dying that campaigners hope for, but it’s what was doled out anyway. Money was wasted on inadequate personal protection, but saved by not having to pay for years of caring. An act of parliament on assisted suicide may be elegantly written, but too much will be left to regulations, codes of practice, habits, assumptions and statutory instruments. Small decisions and little prejudices add up. How many years before consent is deemed?
Name withheld
Cardiff
Clarkson’s comeuppance
In the style of Mrs Merton, AKA the late, great Caroline Aherne, I’d like to politely inquire of Jeremy Clarkson et al: “So what was it about the attractive, successful, articulate, non-white, young Meghan Markle that first threatened your white, middle-class male belief system and values?” (“Among the Meghan-hating fraternity in the media, Clarkson isn’t even king”, Comment).
Sarah Lindley
Exminster, Devon
Headteachers need support
Governance of schools has never been as important as in the current context when too many headteachers are either stepping down (emphatically not “quitting”) or considering doing so (“Despairing and exhausted heads quit as cuts to school funding push them over the edge”, News). Even more significant than governors’ role in setting the strategic direction of their schools and in holding them accountable is the more immediate need to support headteachers’ wellbeing through understanding, and, as far as possible, mitigating the unprecedented pressures schools are confronting.
That priority can help prevent both personal disasters and institutional ones. Governors need to be pressing for reform not only of school funding but of the very dangerous high-stakes accountability culture that is taking a major toll on school leaders’ ability to cope, let alone thrive, in these fraught times for state education.
Prof Colin Richards, former HM inspector of schools
Spark Bridge, Cumbria
Responsible gambling?
Your article on the pernicious consequences of a gambling addiction is salutary (“Police to screen suspects for signs betting addiction is driving crime”, News). I am always puzzled that MPs, regulators and bodies such as the Gambling Commission seem to accept the betting companies’ line that they are concerned about the addiction of many customers and that they favour “responsible” gambling. In fact, these companies rely on punters spending more and more cash on what is essentially a sure way of losing their money in order for the companies to make huge profits. We need closer regulation and higher taxes to reduce profits and pay more towards combating addiction.
Even though broad changes are needed, there are a number of minor actions that can be taken to ameliorate the situation. First, there should be a ban on all free bets. If such enticements were stopped, it would inhibit punters trying “just once more”. Second, there should be a ban on gifts to customers of more than a token value. Finally, even though it is known that many addicts begin gambling in very small ways, why does the BBC Radio 4 Today programme continue to give out horse racing tips each day?
Michael Meadowcroft
Leeds
The Twitter Files matter
Kenan Malik is quite correct that shrugging of shoulders is a common response to the Twitter Files (“The Twitter Files should disturb liberal critics of Elon Musk – and here’s why”, Comment). But they should in fact disturb more than Musk’s critics. What the Twitter Files reveal is a story about US governmental leaders and agencies at the highest levels clandestinely and probably illegally conspiring with Big Tech to quash freedom of speech and advance their own political narratives and power. It is equally a story about a new level of blind subservience and lack of journalistic integrity in the vast majority of the mainstream media – and much of the US public.
And it is a story about all the above – leaders, agencies, media – flat out lying to the public, even when their illegalities and deceptions were identified and pronounced. To be clear, this was not a case of simply getting it wrong, or making errors. Nor was it an isolated case. This was knowing, wilful, persistent and pervasive collusion and deception of our government and Big Tech for their own political and perhaps monetary rewards.
Dr Greg Salsbury
St Pete Beach, Forida
Pelé’s Scottish fanclub
Jonathan Wilson’s resonant article (“Pelé’s shimmering legend was forged in the heat of the 1970 World Cup” Sport) reminded me of the only time I saw Pelé play live. In June 1966, I was part of a crowd of more than 70,000 at Hampden Park in Glasgow to watch Scotland take on Brazil in a friendly match and see Pelé in the flesh.
Friendly it was not. My abiding memory is of Pelé being cynically kicked, hacked or body-checked whenever the ball came near him. This led to loud and sustained booing and slow handclapping from the crowd, which did not appreciate the brutal treatment being meted out to the great Brazilian.
It is the only time I can recall a Scottish football crowd vociferously castigating their team for doing what it felt was necessary to win a match. It spoke volumes about the unique popularity of Pelé and the respect in which he was held by all lovers of the game.
Mike Pender
Cardiff
