In his denial to the Legislative Yuan to legalize euthanasia (“Government cannot take lead in law on euthanasia: Hsueh,” April 27, page 2), I suggest Minister of Health and Welfare Hsueh Jui-yuan (薛瑞元) should come clean and admit that his ministry, through selective neglect of national health insurance, is responsible for countless assisted deaths. Denying insurance coverage for serious cancer patients is the same as pulling feeding tubes for assisted suicide.
I am referring to advanced-care cancer patients who are deprived of critically needed medicines due to the National Health Insurance policy to cut funding to counter high costs, with the excuse that the NHI “can’t cover everybody.”
By failing to cover the seriously ill, is this not de facto assisted suicide? Whatever happened to the ministry’s slogan of Health for All?
As a cancer patient and a Taiwanese citizen with lymphoma, I am currently deprived of all insurance funding for my essential medication (Opdivo), for which there is no known substitute. That means that every fortnight, I have to pay out of pocket more than NT$48,000 for an injection, and that comes to nearly NT$100,000 each month.
Last year, it was shocking to learn from my oncologist at Taipei Medical University that tens of thousands of people are like me. Many are bankrupt or facing it, or just scrapping by covering costs. Many who cannot get their medicine without assistance give up and wait, likely with NHI “life-extending care,” for certain death by cancer without their vital medication.
Hsueh, as a lawyer, likely knows that late-term cancer patients make easy targets. They are elderly, distracted by illness and depression, lack resources, are often shut in and lack contact — and are well conditioned not to question bureaucratic decisions that will end their lives. Is this not the moment for all medical staff and officials to rally to the Hippocratic Oath, stand up and do their utmost for vulnerable patients? Was this not the vision of health insurance?
Last year, in the first term of my cancer, my doctor told me that I was “lucky,” as there are only limited cancer patients covered through a type of “lottery system.” Apparently, that lottery selects who gets covered while the others get bumped. This year, my coverage term ran out and that cancer lottery went against me, and I have joined the many Taiwanese in an isolated journey without end.
Curtis Smith is founder of the Union of TAITRA Workers.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS