Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Re: “Proposition 106: The Colorado End-of-Life Options Act

Mr. Williams:

A brief review of your organization's website, www.mtaas.org, begs the question whether there is any (and I highly doubt there is) death with dignity legislation that would be acceptable to you. That greatly diminishes the nits you pick about the Colorado legislation.

You would have the death certificate list the cause of death as "poison." Your word. Presumably, you would require that description so as to punish he or she who "poisoned" the patient. That's absurd; the patient administers it, and the patient is gone. There is no one to prosecute even if your term "poison" is used.

You would require a "witness" to the delivery of the drug(s). Why? Not only is that macabre, but there seems to be no legitimate purpose for the requirement, unless traumatizing the surviving family and friends is legitimate in your view.

You state:

"I encourage people to read the Oregon model bill before taking a, or expounding on their position. We will agree no matter our starting position that this Prop 106 does not deliver.
This bill is not the one."

It appears that you are endorsing the Oregon model rather than Proposition 106. In fact, you find neither acceptable. You should just say so instead of sending your readers on a wild goose chase to find a law for which you failed to provide a link and do not support.

Finally, "we will agree no matter our starting position that this Prop 106 does not deliver."

Wrong. It does deliver. We have no such agreement.

Posted by Bill W. on 09/28/2016 at 1:13 PM

Re: “The battle for Nevada Ave., animal abuse, Clinton and Trump, and more

The town already has a daily newspaper that 'edits' comments by dictating which story readers will be allowed to comment on. Not to be confused with 'censorship', of course.

Posted by Robert Gentry on 09/28/2016 at 1:05 PM

Re: “The battle for Nevada Ave., animal abuse, Clinton and Trump, and more

Do you guys edit any submissions? O wad Judd wondrinn.

Posted by mediumlondon on 09/28/2016 at 12:12 PM

Re: “The battle for Nevada Ave., animal abuse, Clinton and Trump, and more

A solar powered light rail down the middle of Nevada ave. from UCCS to PPCC, going right through CC is perfect! I despise guys who buy a house in the neighborhood I grew up in, and start yappin about powerful friends...wretch! Go home jerk, the real one, way over there. Oh yeah, if you live by Safeway, you ain't OLD NORTH END...which is a new term anyway... Used to be UPTOWN! Before that it was little London. Whatever...you got skinned if you bought in after the nineties...lemme guess you came west in a Toyota in 2006...First National Bank Uptown was at Boulder and Tejon. Downtown was at Pikes Peak. The tejon trolley tracks are still in the asphalt connecting uptown and downtown.

Posted by mediumlondon on 09/28/2016 at 12:06 PM

Re: “Opinion: Manitou Springs' war on hikers

War on Hikers? They built a huge lot on the E. end of town with a free shuttle right to the trailhead! How is that a war on hikers? They're just trying to protect the Ruxton residents' quality of life.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Nicole Rosa on 09/28/2016 at 11:44 AM

Re: “Proposition 106: The Colorado End-of-Life Options Act

The Colorado promoters of assisted suicide are guilty of false advertising. Their bills do not deliver as promised.
Colorado Prop 106 provides no ordinary witness to the “self-administration of poison”.
Even as the promoters have inundated us with their claim that the lethal dose “must be self-administered” and mentioned it 9 times in their 11 page Prop 106 they do not provide an ordinary witness to the act. That omission effectively eviscerates all of the so called safeguards. The process seems to be full of requirements on the front end up until the script is written. Then an heir can pick up the script and administer it without oversight. Know that only 2% of the doctors have attended these events in other states.
Even the front end “requirements” have fatal flaws. A predatory heir may be a witness to the initial request along with a staff member of the facility. Does that sound like good public policy?
The rest of the family is not required to be contacted. And everyone involved gets instant immunity. The death certificate is falsified by this law which makes it impossible to prosecute a murder when the death certificate states the underlying illness is the cause of death. There really is no transparent reason not to post poison as the cause.
This bill Final #145 Article 48 provides that a predatory heir can facilitate the signup process, murder the individual and receive immunity all before the rest of the family is notified. This is neither reasonable nor prudent public policy. This is dangerous public policy that puts the entire population (all ages) at risk of exploitation by the medical-industrial-complex, organ traffickers and predatory heirs.
I encourage people to read the Oregon model bill before taking a, or expounding on their position. We will agree no matter our starting position that this Prop 106 does not deliver.
This bill is not the one.
Respectfully submitted,
Bradley Williams
President
MTaas dot org

Posted by Bradley Williams on 09/28/2016 at 11:33 AM

Re: “Meet the new editor at the Indy: Matthew Schniper

Congratulations to the CS Indy and Matthew. You're both great for the Springs. Keep up the great work.

Posted by CraigR on 09/28/2016 at 10:30 AM

Re: “Manitou raises fees and fines for Incline parking

This all goes back to the inability to raise sufficient revenue, thanks to TABOR. Cities revert to those nasty little faux taxes called fines and fees. They don't have to ask anyone in the general public, they just do it by edict. Same as a tax, same green money, but even less say by the public. Just like having to replace shocks, wheels and tires just for driving on miserably maintained roads due to lack of funding...

No to 71 so we can mount some kind of effort to get TABOR tossed. If that effort has to be mounted in every State Senate district it will be much harder to accomplish. All voters will still get to vote on the issue, it could be retained, but at least it can make it to the ballot!

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Vietnamized on 09/28/2016 at 10:03 AM

Re: “Proposition 106: The Colorado End-of-Life Options Act

The reality is that each and every one of us has the right to end our lives at any time we deem appropriate. The number of arrests and convictions for attempted and/or successful suicides stands at zero.

For those who have never had to witness a loved one suffering a lingering and painful death, this is a theoretical question. For the rest of us, it's all too real.

There is no question that we treat our pets with more dignity and compassion than we treat the terminally ill. Proposition 106 will change that and give terminally ill patients compassionate options to end their suffering.

Those who would dictate that we all live out our natural lives in pain may want to consider their own inevitable deaths. You might see options to end your own suffering as a welcome solution to medical problems that will never get better but will certainly get worse.

It's worth thinking about. And if you haven't done so, it's a good time to prepare medical directives for your caregivers and medical personnel. We will all die. You can choose how you want to be treated when it's your turn.

I highly recommend that anyone who doesn't have medical directives in place visit the "Five Wishes" website (www.agingwithdignity.org) for a low cost, legally binding document. Don't want until it's too late.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Bill W. on 09/28/2016 at 9:48 AM

Re: “Meet the new editor at the Indy: Matthew Schniper

Hurray for Matthew and Colorado Springs😁

Posted by Kerri Olivier on 09/28/2016 at 9:34 AM

Re: “Proposition 106: The Colorado End-of-Life Options Act

The bill states: "The attending and consulting physician must refer the individual to a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist if either one believes the individual may not be mentally capable"

Sounds foolproof, right? Has the words "must refer" --- but then it says "if either one believes"

As in Oregon, where 1000 people have been given suicide death pills, it's up to the doctors to decide if a mental health evaluation is needed. While most people receiving a terminal diagnosis probably have some level of depression, only about 5% of the 1000 people killed in assisted suicides in Oregon were referred to a psychiatrist or psychologist. Only 5%. Is there any reason to think it will be different in Colorado?

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Willam Nat on 09/28/2016 at 9:22 AM

Re: “Colorado Gold Distillery relocates to Colorado Springs

Follow @HempVodka on social media.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Christine Kringle on 09/28/2016 at 8:35 AM

Re: “Why is private security patrolling our public streets?

The best response to this type of overstep by downtown businesses is to shop elsewhere.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by null on 09/28/2016 at 6:01 AM

Re: “Our special district conundrum

That's a phrase for the downtown crowd to justify collecting taxes citywide and dumping a lopsided portion of them downtown: police resources, park and trail resources, highway projects, museums, etc. It makes you feel better about pouring your tax dollars into the downtown area despite the overlooked needs of your own neighborhood when you hear "languishing core of the city," doesn't it?

1 like, 3 dislikes
Posted by Joel C. Miller on 09/27/2016 at 8:36 PM

Re: “Our special district conundrum

The core city is languishing? My "sprawl" neighborhood is languishing! No library, no YMCA, no bike trails, only the tiniest neighborhood parks. The nearest shopping is not friendly to walkers or cyclists. The closest "open space" is closed off to the public. The core city looks much better to me. And is more expensive for smaller/older homes.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Elle Ameno on 09/27/2016 at 3:11 PM

Re: “Millibo's value, road rage and bicyclists, Trump, Stein and 69

As a disabled vet with a retired wife and a damn good insurance plan I've been skeptical about ColoradoCare. I voiced some concerns and received a very intelligent, compassionate, personal reply from Bill Semple from the ColoradoCareYES management team that allayed some of my concerns. After doing the math on what part of my income would be taxed and how much CC would save me, and how beneficial it would be to "the least among us", to borrow from the Christian philosophy, I've decide to vote for Amendment 69.

I left the VA HealthCare system years ago after they made some inexcusable gaffes with my health. I have paid for my own insurance ever since. I have lobbied for single-payer health insurance for veterans modeled after Tri-Care since 1989, and I was in favor of a national single-payer plan during the debate about the Affordable Heathcare Act (I refuse to be baited into calling it Obamacare).

If I were injured or to fall ill while, say, in France, even as an American citizen I would receive free (that's right - FREE) health care that would not forward any charges to my insurance carrier or to me. My earlier post about the conversion of not-for-profit health insurance to for-profit health insurance stands as my primary argument for ColoradoCare, coupled with my savings, and the end of health-related bankruptcies.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Vietnamized on 09/27/2016 at 11:23 AM

Re: “Trump's true colors, nurses for ColoradoCare, secrecy and the mayor, and more

Oh, and swing state votes are 10 times as significant as solidly red/blue state votes. If you want Trump to win the split the vote here. If you want another option then swap your vote with someone in a state that's already solidly held and you'll do no damage. Call someone in New York or California and have them vote for Johnson for you, and vote for Clinton...because the alternative is (and I'll do this again) TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!

Posted by Vietnamized on 09/26/2016 at 10:48 AM

Re: “Millibo's value, road rage and bicyclists, Trump, Stein and 69

When Richard Nixon was president the health care insurance system was converted from a not-for-profit system to a for profit system. On one of the Nixon tapes the question was asked how that conversion would work and the reply from the CEO of Blue Cross/Blue Shield was heard to reply that BC/BS would continue collect premiums but in order make a profit they would deny service to members. Nixon replied "that sounds like that would work", and the for-profit industry was off to the races. There is about a 30% disparity in the amount that is collected that goes to bonuses for CEOs and profits for shareholders and the amount that is paid out for actual care. The biggest problem for providers (doctors, nurses) has always been the insurers. There is no reason for them to take less - they actually could do better under ColoradoCare, but that's a guess.

To summarily compare ColoradoCare to other poorly run government health care systems (the VA comes to mind) is inaccurate and unfair and smacks of Reaganesque "the government is the problem" rhetoric. Government can work for the people - no - SHOULD work for the people. We simply cannot allow continued mismanagement and cronyism, and we do that by un-electing the schmucks and electing statesmen/women.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Vietnamized on 09/26/2016 at 10:39 AM

Re: “Opinion: Manitou Springs' war on hikers

I no longer park on Ruxton. Too expensive and more importantly out of respect for the residents who have to put up with Cog railway traffic anyway. I park down near Memorial Park and jog the mile and quarter up Ruxton. I have found that the jog warms up the legs and gets the blood aerated for the ascent up the Incline. Do your body (and wallet) a favor by not rolling out of the car seat and going straight up the incline.

17 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by moderateguy on 09/26/2016 at 9:42 AM

Re: “Our special district conundrum

Banning Lewis has not been developed because it is in a floodplain, and will require close to a billion dollars in mitigation to be safe for development. As soon as Norwood, the Mayor, and City Council figure out how to shift that financial burden to the taxpayers, development will begin. Until then developers will just have to keep building on landslides. Plenty of corporate welfare as it is, at least TABOR offers some protection for the average taxpayer.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by hippyhelper on 09/26/2016 at 8:02 AM

All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent   |   Website powered by Foundation