OPINION
Peter Allan Williams
Writer and broadcaster for half a century. Now watching from the sidelines although verbalising thoughts on www.reality check.radio three days a week
peterallanwilliams.substack.com
As I approach my 70th birthday, it’s an unbelievable privilege to have a living parent.
My old Mum (born a week before her parents married in 1931! ) turns 93 in a few weeks.
Until a couple of months ago she was generally keeping decent health but then had a fall in her retirement village apartment. That meant a couple of weeks in hospital and the realization – in my view and that of medical staff – that she couldn’t live alone anymore.
So she is now, as she describes it herself, “in care.”
She started off at what was classed as “rest home level” but after assessment and monitoring it’s been decided that she should now be in a “hospital level” facility.
Both institutions are operated by the same organization, Presbyterian Support Otago, and as regular visitors, my wife and I get to see first-hand the brilliance of the aged care industry and the outstanding work of the staff at management, nursing and support level.
There are of course male and female residents but the staff is predominantly female.
Management and nurses are mostly European. The support staff are primarily, but not exclusively, immigrant workers often from the Philippines or India.
When I visit, and I noted the same when my late father was in his final facility, the staff are thoroughly helpful and do what must be sometimes unpleasant work with a smile and without a hint of reluctance.
Mum, despite her physical frailty, still has most of her cognitive facility but she shares her rest home with some whose minds are, shall we say, past the point of no return.
While they’re peaceful, they’re essentially sleeping all day and would seem to be unaware of their circumstances. How they respond to visiting family I don’t know, but I suspect there would not be much connection.
But as I look at them I still see people who through the kind assistance of staff, are retaining their dignity, in the waiting room until their inevitable but peaceful demise.
What is important is that Mother Nature will end the life of these people when she is ready, and that is the way it should be.
That’s why after visiting Mum in recent days I was thoroughly riled by a Michael Laws rant on The Platform about residents in aged care with dementia – which he pronounces in a weird way highlighting the ‘t’ – and suggesting that we are wasting time and money by keeping these people alive.
It would be much simpler, he said, if we just put these old people out of their misery, if we euthanized them.
“After all” he ranted “they’re not going to get any better.”
“What is the point of their life? Why do we continue to operate what are essentially dementia farms?”
Now having been in the business myself for a while, I know it helps in talkback radio that you be as outrageous as possible.
I also know Laws a bit. He lives not far from me. I usually like his style as a talk radio host. He has a great ability to talk to himself for long periods in an entertaining and provocative way. That is some skill.
But isn’t suggesting that old people with dementia are killed for convenience just taking controversy a touch too far?
The worst part of this preposterous rant was that Laws actually meant it.
Yes, his own mother died what he has told his audience was a horrible death from dementia. How he knows that I have no idea.
The people I see in Mum’s rest home are about as at peace as it’s possible to be. They don’t know where they are so how can they be suffering?
Laws has a history of wanting to kill people before nature does its job.
He introduced the first voluntary euthanasia bill during his time as an MP between 1990 and 1996. He often states that he proudly championed Death with Dignity legislation 25 years before it finally became law.
But there is significant and obvious difference between voluntary euthanasia and just popping off granny because she’s taking up space and doesn’t know where she is anyway.
I find Laws attitude on this issue thoroughly offensive. While I’m always a champion of free speech, we know that such free speech comes with limitations. Those limitations are essentially about inciting violence and suggesting people should be killed.
A broadcaster on a regulated network would be taken off air and probably fired for the suggestions Laws made about dementia patients. The station or the network would no doubt be severely reprimanded and possibly fined.
But Laws works in the unregulated online space. The Platform’s founder Sean Plunket deliberately set up his business in this manner to escape any form of regulation or punishment.
So nothing will happen. Laws will be free to continue espousing the ultimate in hate speech. What else can you call advocating to kill some sick and demented old people because they’re of no use to anybody anymore?
As somebody who believes in the sanctity of a natural life, I don’t think I could be more offended.
I look forward to visiting my old Mum on a regular basis, whether or not she moves on from her current sentient world to some place else.