To the Editor:
The Aug. 29 visitor essay by Daniela J. Lamas, “A Becoming Ultimate Present From Jimmy Carter,” is a heartfelt tribute to Mr. Carter.
Whereas Dr. Lamas acknowledges hospice’s unpopularity (noting that “the very phrase ‘hospice’ so typically conjures the thought of demise and defeat”), she however makes a persuasive case for it.
Hospice shouldn’t be about giving up hope — it’s about taking advantage of the time we now have left. The important thing to a profitable hospice keep is early enrollment, and the truth that Mr. Carter has already benefited from a number of months of care is a testomony to this strategy.
Maybe Mr. Carter’s actual present helps us all to beat our reservations and misguided stereotypes about hospice care. His instance ought to make policymakers rethink present laws so that every one People may at some point obtain — and perceive — the complete advantages of hospice care.
Michael D. Connelly
Johns Island, S.C.
The author served because the chief govt of Mercy Well being (now Bon Secours Mercy Well being) and is the creator of “The Journey’s Finish: An Investigation of Dying and Dying in Trendy America.”
To the Editor:
The idealized fantasy of at-home hospice care is simply that: a fantasy.
Households who flip down at-home hospice care are proper to take action. At-home hospice care is extraordinarily profitable for the hospice businesses exactly as a result of they supply so little care whereas the households do all the work. We had been informed to not name 911, and most of us do not need medical or nursing coaching and are on our personal, in approach over our heads, caring for a dying cherished one who might be in misery and is commonly frightened.
My husband’s demise was traumatic for the entire household. Primarily based on my expertise, I urge households confronted with the heart-wrenching choices round end-of-life care to think about the household’s wants and the affected person’s wants — not the false promoting of the hospice businesses or the naïve suggestions of docs who don’t reside with the results.
Deena Engel
Greenwich, Conn.
To the Editor:
As a retired hospice nurse, I can completely relate to what the Carters are going via. It’s exhausting for individuals to simply accept that the demise of a cherished one will likely be coming quickly and that combating towards it in a hospital is an unnatural approach to die, involving pointless and meaningless care at a excessive value.
Being at dwelling (or generally in a hospice facility) surrounded by household and mates with consolation care is a lot better. Being woke up to be poked and prodded 24 hours a day in a fruitless and costly effort to maintain a dying individual alive is simply not a great way to go. Hospice can present all of the care {that a} dying individual wants, with a lot much less hustle and bustle.
A part of the priority about hospice care is that it makes use of drugs that aren’t all the time utilized in different practices. Morphine remains to be the perfect ache management obtainable, and hospice makes use of it — rigorously, with strict controls. Often, hospice additionally makes use of ketamine, which has a really unhealthy rap due to abuse of the drug, however is a potent ache management drug if used correctly.
Hospice care is effectively established in different elements of the world, however within the U.S. we now have a tough time accepting demise as being inevitable.
It warms my coronary heart that the Carters selected hospice care. It reveals but once more what forward-thinking and considerate individuals they’re, setting an instance for others even in demise. Godspeed, Jimmy!
Michael Orlin
Denver
Altering Our Election System
To the Editor:
Re “To Enhance Democracy, Get Rid of Elections,” by Adam Grant (Opinion, Aug. 23), about utilizing lotteries to pick our leaders:
At first look, Mr. Grant’s essay appears approach too radical to even think about, however everybody ought to learn and mirror on it.
I, for one, am uninterested in continually having to vote for the “lesser of two evils” to serve in a Congress stuffed with representatives who lack the fundamental {qualifications} and moral compass to do their jobs.
I’m uninterested in the corruption in our present election system from gerrymandering, the anemic controls on marketing campaign contributions and spending, and the infusion of shameless mendacity into what we name “spin” or “marketing campaign rhetoric.”
Add to that the ever-present risk of hacks into our election methods, laws to disenfranchise voters, and baseless allegations of voter fraud that undermine public confidence in our elections.
We might not be able to undertake Mr. Grant’s proposal, but it surely is a vital topic for debate that shouldn’t be ignored.
Bruce Wilder
New Orleans
To the Editor:
Adam Grant is correct: Profitable elections swells the egos of leaders, who think about that they’re superior to everybody else. However so does the admission system at elite universities just like the one the place he and I work. The tiny fraction of candidates who get in are led to assume they’re higher than the huge hordes who acquired rejected.
That’s why we should always admit college students utilizing a weighted lottery, just like the one Mr. Grant proposes for choosing political leaders. College students would want to exhibit sure competencies to be thought of. However their admission would additionally relaxation on luck, so they may not fake that they earned their approach right here just by benefit.
The schooling of our management class begins early. And we’re instructing all of the incorrect classes.
Jonathan Zimmerman
Philadelphia
The author teaches schooling and historical past on the College of Pennsylvania.
Reflections on the G.O.P. Debate
The second is regressive. We noticed little or no civility between the candidates and from the candidates to the moderators. These persons are operating for president of the USA, our nation’s “face” to the world. Do we wish that individual to be crass, impolite and disruptive?
Jade Wu
Collier County, Fla.
Replicating the ‘Magic’ of Camp
To the Editor:
As a loyal former summer time camper myself, I recognize all the joys that Sandra Fox illuminates in her visitor essay “There’s No Treatment for Campsickness. That’s OK.” (Opinion, Aug. 21).
Summer time camps supply a form of time-bound, immersive magic that, as Dr. Fox writes, can’t be replicated at dwelling. However it’s additionally value asking why youngsters have such a necessity for “an escape, a possibility for self-reinvention and an invite to be messier, weirder and simply extra myself” within the first place.
Why can’t actual life be extra like summer time camp? It may be, and already is (no less than in some respects) for younger individuals fortunate sufficient to attend colleges which can be centered on serving to them develop into the absolute best variations of themselves. When studying is energetic, immersive and significant, youngsters change into fluent in addressing real-world issues. In these colleges, belief, robust relationships and a wholesome, respectful group are prioritized as a lot or greater than take a look at scores.
Lengthy reside summer time camp! Might its magic attain and serve each youngster. However actual life could be magical too. The truth is it have to be, to ensure that younger kids to develop into succesful, caring adults.
Andy Calkins
Gloucester, Mass.
The author co-directs the nonprofit schooling group Subsequent Technology Studying Challenges.
