Disclaimer:
To those whom I know who have chose to stay, I wish you all the best, and I respect your choice. The following is my opinion on how things ought to be done, ethically, and with a conscience.
___
It's the time of the year again. Universities are having their Summer Graduation ceremonies in a couple of weeks time.
And as expected 439823958 of our sponsored graduates would choose not to return home but continue working overseas.
Yes, I readily, willingly and openly admit my utter annoyance and disdain towards the selfishness of such individuals. And I can't (and haven't) ranted enough about it.
The doctrine of freedom of contract rightly holds that a contract is only valid subject to the presence of free consent between parties who entered into the said agreement. So, the claims of you being 'forced to return' to serve the country doesn't stand. You signed your 'freedom' away, so to speak. You agreed, pledged and sworn that you would return to your country upon completion of your studies. You begged and pleaded for a scholarship (In English: attempted to impress the interviewers) with an unwavering promise that "Saya akan balik dan berkhidmat untuk negara". And look now, where are you!
You can't have the best of both worlds folks! You want a sponsored education and are NOT WILLING TO PERFORM YOUR END OF THE BARGAIN! If so, do the right thing and repay back what your sponsors have spent on you.
And I must emphasise, the fact that you scored a string of A1s in your SPM exams does not accord you a divine right towards the 'conferment' of a scholarship. You are just 'tad luckier than many others who missed out on an 'insignificant' A in subjects like P.Moral or History and as a result were not given a scholarship. It is your privilege to be a sponsored student, and appreciate that fact. Do not gloat over it, as it is not something very great these days. Academic results are worth nothing but a piece of paper out in the world. And who cares that you were a scholarship holder in the dog-eat-dog world out there. You've perhaps had your moment of glory when the results were announced, and when the scholarship offer letter arrived. Those days are long gone, and you must stop banking on 'past glory' and land back on Earth with a loud *thud*.
At this point, I must emphasise that I have no problems with self-sponsored students who choose to remain and work overseas, and/or scholarship holders who have gone the 'ethical way' i.e. those who chose to work overseas BUT HAVE REPAID their debts!
Shame on those who chose not to return AND defaulted on their loans or breached their scholarship agreements.
Come back and report to your benefactors upon completion of your studies. It's your duty and call! Should you have done so and have not received any reply from them, you may rightfully claim that they don't need your services anymore. But well, this would rarely happen especially for those doing the so-called 'critical courses' (you know what I'm talking about).
You can't have your cake and eat it too, people! Wake up!
Should we blame the sponsors for their inactions? Or should are the sponsored students to blame?
Fewer sponsored students returning = Lesser man power
Higher number of scholarship defaulters = Increase in the amount of 'wasted expenses' in sponsoring such ungrateful students.
Well, that's my 2 cents worth from the narrowed world (fishbowl) of mine.
Suck it up and do your end of the bargain!
No free lunch, mate! In your dreams, maybe...
-LV-
Friday, July 04, 2008
Who's to Blame?
Monday, June 23, 2008
Akibat Kerakusan Manusia
It's hard to find the exact words to explain how I feel. And, I'm actually unsure of why I feel this way.
Why am I feeling the way I do?
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Increase, Increase, Increase...
My fellow Malaysians,
LOOK AT THE QUEUE!!!!!
Yup, that's right, the long queue in the road in front of my place. There's a petrol station round the corner from where I live. And I was wondering why there was a traffic jam along the road since 3pm today! Yeap, that was before I knew about the 40% hike. It's 10:40pm now, and the jam shows no sign of easing...
No prizes for guess the headlines for tomorrow. Yes, a 40% increase. It costs RM2.70/litre now. Feeding Bob costs me 40% extra now. Oh well! Just grin and bear with it. No choice!
This drastic increase would undoubtedly cause much shock to us, who have been enjoying petrol subsidies for time in memorial. But, give it a day or two, we will move on. Complain is all we can do, but we'll have to suck it up and move on. We have no choice but to pay a heftier sum, as we need our cars/motorbikes/scooters/etc as our means of transport.
I sincerely hope that the review in subsidies would mean more funds for other purposes.
http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/bnm/20080604/tts-abdullah-savings-3-last-putrajaya-993ba14.html
RM13.7 billion extra to spend!!!!!! Now, that's money, baby!
My 'extra money from petrol subsidy' wish list is as follows:
First and foremost, I would like to see more funds being allocated towards the improvement of access to healthcare and yes, healthcare facilities in our country. Private healthcare is costly in our country. And although many complaints have been lodged against the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK e.g. MRSA bug in particular, I do hope that a similar system would be implemented in Malaysia one day. For this to materialise, we need money, money and money... apart from more manpower and a good long-term blue print.
Secondly, would be for the improvement of our public transport system. Better public transport links. Improvement and a total revamp of the railway system, which in my opinion could be improved and ought to be capitalised on. Faster trains to cut short journey between states. Better railway links in the outskirts and to/from other states. (Not only in Klang Valley). I know it will take ages for the public transport system to rival that in the UK, but I long for the day. I really miss those days where I could travel from Manchester to London solely on public transport alone, from Sale to Birmingham, from Leeds to Banbury, from Manchester to Paris to London to Windsor to Rome and back to Manchester again (yes, planes count as public transport too!).
There are more things towards which I would like to see the extra funds being channeled to.
But the last on my list would be for the provision of more scholarships e.g. JPA. Too much money is being spent on the scholars who are not too eager to return to serve the country upon completion of their studies. Demands for a scholarship are being placed down as if it were their divine right. Yes, some are willing to repay the government in order to 'break the bond' but, they pay very much less. Imagine paying (if I can recall properly) RM200k for a UK medical degree, the government absorbs 2/3 loss. Now again, tell me; why are we suffering from a shortage of doctors?
Now, that's a heavily stripped down version of my 2 cents worth.
Bob, it's gonna cost me more to feed you now... *pats*
-LV-
*I wanna marry a Tauke Minyak! Just kidding!
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Chimera Embryos
Something to think about this weekend.
BBC News: Brown Urges Embryo Support; 18 May <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7406773.stm>
BBC Health: Q&A Hybrid Embryos; 19 May <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6233415.stm>
BBC News: MPs Back Embryo Hybrid Research; 19 May <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7407589.stm>
____
A touch-and-go write-up of the 'Chimera Debate'
____
The planned Bill and subsequent amendments to the HFEA (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990) to allow for the cultivation and use of Chimera hybrids in genetic research has sparked an intense bioethical-legal debate. In essence, a animal + human embryo will be created, for research purposes and the UK Parliament is lobbying to pass a Bill (Bills - i.e. a proposed law. Once tabled and passed, it will become an Act) on this.
I did a short topic on this during my Philosophy classes last year. If I recall correctly, John was all for allowing the use of Chimera hybrids for purposes of genetic research. And I do agree with the use of such hybrids purely for research purposes.
"What are chimeras?", some may ask. In essence, or rather in Wikipedia terms
"... a chimera is an animal (in zoological terms) that has two or more different populations of genetically distinct cells that originated in different zygotes.
Chimeras are formed from four parent cells (two fertilized eggs or early embryos fuse together) or from three parent cells (a fertilized egg is fused with an unfertilized egg or a fertilized egg is fused with an extra sperm). Each population of cells keeps its own character and the resulting animal is a mixture of mis-matched parts. An analogy is two jigsaw puzzles cut using an identical cutter, but with different pictures. A single puzzle can be made out of the mis-matched parts, but the completed puzzle will show parts of both pictures..."
What are the concerns about the work?
Opponents say this is tampering with nature and is unethical. Critics say they are repulsed by the idea and there must be no creation of an animal-human hybrid. It is already illegal to implant human-animal embryos in the womb or bring them to term.Exerpt from BBC Health: Q&A Hybrid Embryos
But then, IF the HFEA is amended to allow for the use of such chimera hybrids, there would definitely be parties who are bound to find loop-holes within the legislation and perhaps attempt to push the limits. This poses many dangers; most strikingly the haunting possibility of the birth of a human + animal progeny.
How do we (and will we ever be able to) effect a successful mechanism of control over these mad-scientists???"We think there is nothing illegal, immoral or unethical about this. While we understand the concerns, we think they are largely founded on misinformation. People think we are generating some sort of hybrid animal. This is just cells, just for science. No animal is ever going to be created."
Will they NOT be tempted to further push the boundaries???
____
Further exerpts from BBC Health: Q&A Hybrid Embryos; 19th May 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6233415.stm
What does the law say?
Although ministers felt the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 needed updating as science had moved on significantly, they were initially cool on the idea of creating human-animal embryos.
However, they bowed to pressure from scientists, who argued a ban would hamper medical research.
In addition, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee carried out an inquiry into the proposals and concluded that the creation of hybrid embryos was necessary for research and that there should not be a complete ban.
(I agree, but there is definitely a pressing need for a strict enforcement mechanism.)
A draft bill published in May 2007 allows for the creation of human embryos that have been physically mixed with one or more animal cells.
Will the bill become law?
(If the House is able to by-pass and find a way through the religious oppositions, the Bill would certainly be good law in no time. But, how would one tackle such highly sensitive issues? There are already strong oppositions going against the use of human embryos for research (mainly based on arguments that it is wrong to create an embryo knowingly that it wouldn't be afforded any opportunity of growing past the 10 day (or is it 14 day) stage, and now, creation of hybrid embryos? Are they any less human than 'normal embryos'?)
Opponents are determined to block the proposals. Several leading members of the Catholic Church have described them as immoral.
In his Easter sermon, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, leader of the church in Scotland, described the legislation as a "monstrous attack on human rights, human dignity and human life".
A significant number of MPs, including several Catholic members of the Cabinet, are also reported to have serious concerns about the legislation, leading to speculation of high profile resignations...
Some 200 medical charities have urged MPs to support legislation allowing the creation of animal-human embryos. And Labour peer and fertility expert Lord Winston has accused the church of misleading the public over the issue.
____
Question:
Is there really a need for the creation of what some term as "Frankenstein Hybrids"? Or would we be able to find a better ethical alternative to this?
In whatever decision that will be made, there is a need to thread with utmost caution.
Perhaps, the pressing consideration would be, if we allow for the creation of Chimeras now, how and where do we possibly draw the line in the future? There is a danger of the opening of floodgates and a free-fall to oblivion. And mad scientists would be keen on capitalising on loopholes and if not, finding justifications for their reasons for e.g. going beyond the 14 day permitted limit.
How do we control????
-LV-
*more answers to the above question in my new post. Off to read now!
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Of Grants, Scholarships and Sponsorships
Very often, I feel like writing. Especially on days like today where I get back from a long day of classes; to digress and destress...
My brain is so conked out, yet I still have to prepare for Wills & Probate tomorrow.
Nose went havoc AGAIN this morning, popped the pill to keep it under control. Result: Palpitations, plus endless talking during class. *hic* Pity those who have to bear with me...
China just won the Uber Cup: 3-0
___
SPM results are out, STPM results are out. It's the time of the year again, where people jump with joy, or drown in tears of sorrow over their success or failure.
Scholarship offers aplenty, applications are submitted.
I can't help but wonder, what exactly is the selection criteria for scholarship offers?
Pure academic excellence? 10As?
(Oh, pardon me! 10As is so passe, it's 20As now... *rolls eyes*)
An all-rounder with say, 9As but who is a state athlete, head prefect, debator, active in community service, sports?
That bloke with 7As who walks in, gives you a confident handshake, and talks eloquently and convincingly?
But then, the burgeoning number of students who have 20As, 19As and 18As further poses problems to the selection criteria. Is a 20As student (who is a pure bookworm) better than a 10As student (Cos he/she only took 10 subjects and not 20 unlike our Kiasu friend) who is an all-rounder?
How do we assess?
Academic Excellence?
Undoubtedly, putting a cap on the number of subjects a student is allowed to sit for in the SPM would provide for a more equal/level playing field for all parties. Therefore, I feel in that the STPM with its maximum of 5 subjects per candidate ruling, provides with a fairer basis of assessment of the credentials of a candidate. The interviewer's eyes would not be blinded by the surmountable number of bling (Sorry, I mean As) on an applicant's certificate. Rather, in cases of scholarship applications, it would provide for a more careful and stringent selection and filtering method. Only the cream of the crop would be given what they deserve.
An All-Rounder?
I feel strongly against awarding scholarships to applicants purely based on academic qualifications. A student with 20As who is a pure bookworm (and probably a librarian. Well, yeah, that would be the only "KK" he has on his school leaving cert.) is in NO WAY better than an all-rounder who scores 10As and is a District level debator, Head Prefect, Rotary Club member, state athlete and active in social and community services.
The former only knows how to study, memorise and probably make short notes. Whilst the latter knows how to lead, communicate, play, study and socialise. Needless to say, the all-rounder would have a better education, and would certainly stand a better chance of 'surviving' in the working world. He/She has acquired the necessary communication skills, is able to work as a team and has the core values needed in the real wide world out there. I'm not saying that the bookworm is doomed to fail in working life. But, the all-rounder, by virtue of his/her acquired skills and experiences would fare better than the former.
Therefore, please award the grants and scholarships to these deserving individuals. They ought not be marginalised by virtue of scoring 10As lesser than their peers.
Financial Standing?
Academic qualifications aside, those from the middle-income class are often caught in a quandary. They are 'neither here nor there'; i.e. not rich enough to support themselves for education at a top-notch university (their parents would probably have to dig up their financial reserves to fund their studies overseas and the student would most likely have to work part-time) BUT at the same time, are not poor enough to be deserving of a scholarship based purely based on financial needs.
Do think about it, 10As oil tycoon's bookworm son vs 10As tauke balak's son vs 10As teacher's daughter (Middle-class income) vs 10As Insurance Agent's bookworm son (Again, middle class income) vs 10As rubbertapper's daughter.
Who deserves it more? And why?
If you choose the rubbertapper's daughter, how would you justify the non-selection of the teacher's daughter?
If the tauke balak's son win, why not the Insurance Agent's bookworm son?
If the oil tycoon's bookworm son is selected, why?
Would his non-selection be based SOLELY on his dad's wealth - richer thus can afford self-funded education?
Would you assess him based on a stricter criteria, as he is born with a silverspoon in his mouth, and therefore if he were to be deserving of a sponsored education, he must perform doubly well to impress you?
____
But then, the SPM, STPM and scholarship application days are far behind me!
PG and UG (Postgrad and Undergrad for the uninitiated) are also long gone!
I'm at the final leg of my long journey now.
So why should I even bother?
The Old Quadrangle, University of Manchester; June 2006
- Can you recognise me? Oh yes, I so love those shoes of mine!
-LV-
*apathetic
*1130pm now, forget bout Probate, I'm going to bed (no pun intended)
On LDRs
People in long-distance relationships never cease to amaze me.
With their sheer determination, unwavered trust and confidence in each other...
And their ability to withstand temptations...
It's just amazing!
-LV-
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Salute Cukup-cukup, Berhabis-habisan
I believe that some of you might have read my previous post regarding my Telekom Saga. (Note: Post has since been edited)
Anyway, I've received a reply from them today... and it's got me in stitches.... laughing that is...
"... With regards to that matter, we are very sorry for any
inconveniencecaused to you. We have been escalated your complaint to our respectivedepartment for further action and we will feed you back in a soonesttime..."
Taken verbatim, without any alterations/editing.
Hence, the typographical errors. And of course NUMEROUS grammatical errors in this SHORT reply.
Man! The part where they offered to "feed me back ASAP" takes the cake! *lols*
Wonder if they passed their SPM English or bother to at least proof-read their emails. A 3 sentence long email, but with significant errors in all sentences! *salute kau kau man!*
I could not have done any better! *salutes kau kau again!*
Should I reply clarifying my 'demands'? *grins*
-LV-Dear Sir/Madam,
I was just requesting for a refund of my RM75. I did not ask to be fed.
Thank you very much for your kind offer.
*now I know why Mum made me do those English grammar and spelling exercises when I was a young kid.... *forever grateful*
Monday, April 07, 2008
Faith vs Religion
Po Lin Nunnery, Hong Kong; September 2007
"Faith" is one's belief and trust in/towards a certain thing.
Whilst "religion" is a set of personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction;
or
what we both refer to as a subset of faith.
or
in a variety of cases; lies 'in between'.
There can be religion without faith. Not everyone has 'faith' in the religion they profess to believe in. In fact, in some cases, they are just 'born into the religion' i.e. by default; they go through the many motions of religious rituals without even understanding its true meaning and significance. They 'believe' in God, because they are brought up with that sense of belief. In such cases, it amounts to religion by default and not religion by choice.
Furthermore, although the word "faith" is commonly reserved to describe one's belief in religion, I (We) believe, that it encompasses a wider spectrum of things. "Faith" is often used interchangeably with words like "believe", "hope"... and as such, covers a wider variety of things which are not necessarily linked to any religious ethos.
Do let me know if you beg to differ. We would like to hear from you.
What's your equation?
Religion = Faith
or
Faith = Religion
or
Religion x Faith
or
Faith x Religion
-LV-
______
Note:
The above were exerpts from the conversation I had with Mel the other day.
Re: Her debate with a friend about faith vs religion.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Growing Up
"He Walks!"
(Picture Credits: http://flickr.com/photos/lollybob/94160838/)
____
How would you define your "finally grown up" milestone?
-->
Learning to walk?
Learning to talk and say "Daddy"?
Outgrowing our milk-teeth for permanent ones?
Completing Secondary Education?
Entering University?
Graduating from University?
Entering the work force?
Purchasing your first car?
Placing the downpayment for your first property?
Getting hitched?
Having kids?
... and so, the list goes on
____
I was on the phone with a friend a couple of days ago, and as usual... we babbled on endlessly from one random topic to another.
Anyway...
We were talking about living away from home, and the difference it makes to an individual.
I do think that we often reach a certain point in our lives where we feel the need/urge to 'explore' the whole wide world out there, and there will definitely come a time where we will do the inevitable; i.e. leave the comforts of home in pursuance of our dreams.
Therefore, baby bird...
It's time to leave the nest and to spread your wings and fly.
___
As they always say, the first cut is always the deepest,
Likewise, here the first steps may prove difficult, same like you taking your babysteps when you were 10months old (just a random figure, don't know much about a baby's developmental milestones). But ask anyone who've been out there on their own, 99% of them would tell you that the experience is worth while.
"Leaving the nest" does not necessarily mean being whizzed off to a strange country for studies. Neither does it connote with a self-imposed exile for a certain period of time. Some of us may leave home to pursue our studies in a foreign country, in another state, or probably in a neighbouring town. Others may leave behind the creature comforts of home to work in a foreign land, in a different state, or in another town. Whilst there are some who leave home due to marital commitments i.e. setting up your own home.
Whatever the reason may be, one seeks to gain a lot from the experience. Why?
Simple - you are left on a frolic of your own and are forced to grow up and make everyday decisions alone, all by yourself. Swim, and you'll survive; sink, and you'll die...
I must admit that I was one who did not expect to gain much from that experience. I thought I was sufficiently independent. But boy, I was wrong! And I realised that "growing up" meant assuming responsibilities for small little things that I've taken for granted or overlooked all along!
I was put into deep waters (literally) and forced to stay afloat or die! *drama* Overnight, I learnt how to open bank accounts, manage my finances, pay my own bills (don't you take these for granted?!), plan my meals (love cooking, but hate washing!), stockup on my groceries, take my car for repairs (hate it to the MAX!), learnt how to change lightbulbs (yes!), shop for computer pheriperals (it's still a go into the shop and grab whichever looks OK process to me...), make medical decisions on my own and on behalf of a friend, survived a couple of ordeals in the hospital wards ALONE (*lols* Never again! NS: Remember that Malaria case? Syok giler!), cancel phone contracts, manage FOREX, and the list goes on....
I made countless mistakes and had a helluva adventure (wanna know more personal and in-depth stories? Buzz me!) along the way. And am left without a choice but LEARN!
I still live away from home (but not too faraway) now. And my past experience of annual relocations have taught me well...
I guess it doesn't matter whether or not you elect to return to your nest at the end of the 'ordeal'/'adventure' as some of you may put it.
Do seize the opportunity to spread your wings while you are young and full of vigour. Time to break away from the 'cocoon' and cottony comforts of home.
Learn how to pay your own bills, shop for groceries, do your own laundry, fix your own lightbulbs,....
And I assure you, you will return home a better person at the end of it.
Most importantly, with a different perspective of the world!
Trust me, it is different when you work + live on your own c/f (contrasted from) work + live at home; OR study + live in hostels/rented houses/rooms c/f study + live at home...
It's a whole wide world out there! And a different ball game altogether!
"Albuera Pier, Children at Play"
(Picture Credits: http://flickr.com/photos/jeridaking/481261830/)
Alas, childhood seems like such a long time ago!
(Malmo, Sweden; Sept. 2007 en-route home)
-LV-
*growing up is a process, and I still have a lot more to learn...
Do guide me home when I'm lost,
Do offer me reassurance when I'm down...
Saturday, March 01, 2008
My Reply
Dear SW,
My reply (in blue) to our *ahem* academic debate....
(1) You mentioned about a patient who is heavily dependent on drugs and machines for survival. There are major differences between an ‘omission’ act like withdrawing the consumption of drugs and switching off the life- machine, compared to a ‘killing with an action’ like asking someone to strangle him or stab him till death. The patient in the first category is allowing the ‘disease’ or ‘illness’ itself to kill him ‘naturally’ by withdrawing from any external help for survival, which is in some sense similar to a cancer patient who refuses to undergo chemotherapy (and we don’t usually call that ‘euthanasia’). But the latter is equivalent to a suicidal act by deliberately accelerated the process of dying. The two forms of ‘euthanasia’ would need separate discussions regarding the different ethical issues attached to them.
-->
I totally agree with you on this point as I have 'jumped the gun' in my discussion about euthanasia. I deliberately omitted to discuss both active and passive euthanasia. Well, blog post... not thesis writing... so malas a bit mah! Btw, thanks for the clear definition.....
(2) You mentioned also that ‘euthanasia’ is different from an express sanction of suicide. Let consider a hypothesis example of this teenager who is an outcast from his societies, despised by all people in his surroundings and find life extremely meaningless and hence decided to commit suicide. Applying your three ‘reasons’ of why euthanasia should be allowed: (a) the teenager should be given the choice to live the life he desires, including ending it; (b) he is deprived of his means of communications (though in a different sense) in that he is an outcast and no one is willing to listen to him, and (c) he understands the nature and consequences of his action. Question: should he be allowed to take his own life away?
-->
YES
So long as he is competent, his wishes should be respected.
Autonomy triumphs.
(3) There are some conflicts between the second and third reasons that you mentioned. I wonder how a competent adult manage to express his desire to die if he is not able to communicate. And if he is able to express such desire, it means that he is still able to express his own feelings, and hence according to your second reason, his life is not meaningless. So he shouldn’t be allowed to die.
-->
In this context, I am therefore proposing for healthcare practitioners to give rise to living wills and perhaps, to a certain extent allow for PAS (physician assisted suicide). The individual, in giving rise to his wish for euthanasia (in the future), would do by means of a living will. Don't think that there's a conflict in my arguments as such. Expression of feelings and intention is done when he had 'testamentary capacity', so as to allow for PAS in the future.
The main purpose of wills (as we learnted from our Wills & Probate lectures... if we managed to stay awake ;) ) is to give rise to the intention of the testator upon the occurence of an event. In giving rise to this intention, so long as one has testamentary capacity, the individual's intentions as to how his property is to be divided amongst the intended beneficiaries ought to be respected, and not questioned.
Likewise, in giving rise to PAS, the individual's wishes would be documented. And when his condition reaches the point when he no longer wishes to continue on living, the physician ought to invoke the said living will and administer a dose of lethal injection so as to ease his passage.....
-LV-
PS: Not really thinking straight right now, so arguments might be a bit patchy and all over the place... We shall battle it out in class tomorrow! :P
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
To Kill or Not To Kill?
"Please End My Suffering Now"
(http://thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article852585.ece) (The Sun UK, 27th February 2008)
Should the decision lie in your hands, would you have granted Chantal Sebire her plea for euthanasia?
-LV-
PS: SW, still owe you a reply to your previous comments..... In the midst of it.... Not really up to it these days... Quite depressed and demotivated...
Friday, February 22, 2008
Would You Choose to Die?
Euthansia; or in some cases referred to as 'mercy killing' often brings about mixed reactions from different sections of the society. I had an opportunity to reconsider this issue recently and am still of the view that competence is the key.
An interesting point that I recall from my Philosophy classes is that some individuals may contend that life is a gift from God. And as such, we have no right to request for it to be ended, no matter what.
But, should anyone of us be put in this unfortunate position of suffering from a severely debilitating illness, without any hopes for cure but only a slow road to death; would you think differently? You will gradually lose control of your bodily functions, and although able to think and reason, are unable to express your wants and needs. You lose your ability to earn a living and as a result of this illness are heavily dependant on machines and drugs to sustain life. Your family is unduly burdened with your sky-high medical bills. You are not able to do anything, but sit or lie down and watch the hours/minutes/seconds tick by everyday. Would you then champion for the right to end your life?
I must stress at this point that, I am not an advocate for euthanasia per se. But, I believe in autonomy and competence. And all these would inevitably tie in with the right to euthanasia, abortion and to refuse medical treatment. So long as a competent person decides to end his life due to the severely debilitating illness, his/her decision should be respected. *period*
Why? You may ask.
Three simple answers.
Regardless of whether we consider our lives to be that of ourselves alone or that which is 'on loan' from God. We will be the ones who would inevitably live these lives. Therefore, it is only rightful that we are allowed to live the lives we desire. Should we decide to soldier on with the effects of the illness, so be it. Should we decide to end our lives at a certain point, so be it.
BUT
This is by all means, not to be taken as an express sanction of suicide. Though the end results to suicide and euthanasia are similar, they are by all means, different sides of a coin.
Put in simple words; "Your life, Your choice"
Secondly, taking a leaf out from John Harris's book, "The Value of Life". Life is only meaningful when one is aware and able to communicate. Language is used as means of expressing one's feelings. It need not be spoken and comprehensible to each and every person. The inability to communicate is then synonymous to a life devoid of meaning, so says John. (I just love attending his lectures, though I bet people like Iain would surely be gunning for his head for his arguments above). Put into context, this argument may seem academic at first glance. But upon further consideration, I find it increasingly comprehensible; reasons of which I decline to talk about further at this point.
Would it be easier to turn off the ventilators of a person in PVS in comparison to a patient who is suffering from a severely debilitating disease? Think, Diane Pretty and her fight for the right to die.
And lastly, he/she is fully competent i.e. understands the nature and consequence of his/her actions. IF we respect a 5 year old's decision to have an apple instead of an orange, why should we treat a 60 year old's decision not to be trapped in a battle with a severely debilitating disease? I think it is neigh time for us to respect Living Wills and DNR orders.
Opinions please....
-LV-
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Facebook Relationships Defined
Day 3 of my Gaya Hidup Sihat routine... I'm surviving..... Just need more will-power~
_________
Throw a random rock/shoe/duster/book into a crowd and chances are (98%) you will hit someone in the crowd out there who has a Friendster, Facebook, Bebo, MySpace, Ringo, hi5 or some social networking account.
I rarely feel secure about these sites as it just makes personal information about yourself easily assessible to anyone. Yes, I restrict assess to my accounts and accept only people whom I know on to my list. But still, the risk is prevalent.... Well yeah, this blog is not too safe either.... Who knows which freak/stalker would chance upon my blog.... *shudders*
But anyway, the advent of such so-called 'social networking sites' has brought a new definition to the concept of relationships. Pada zaman dahulu (back in those days), relationship status used to be definied with two words; "single" or "attached" aka "in a relationship".
This is no longer the case today. Facebook, Friendster and the rest of the lot have redefined relationship status. Nowadays, one could be:
(i) single - aka lone ranger
(ii) in a relationship - aka attached/taken
(iii) it's complicated - aka I don't know what to do man!?!? She/He loves me; She/He loves me not
(iv) in an open relationship - aka not taken but booked
(v) engaged - aka taken and booked
(vi) married - aka out of bounds
*lols* I find these over complex definitions hillarious at times!
NOW, what's your status?
-LV-
12.45am now, off to sleep in-line with my new policy.
Heath Ledger - May your soul rest in peace
Friday, December 21, 2007
Domestic Help
It is undeniable that we are increasingly reliant on domestic help these days. Whilst they may be helpful around the house with household chores and probably when taking care of the kids (while the parents are at work) is concerned, this does not mean that one is relieved of the burden of performing their respective duties (when the family is concerned). I.e. a mother should not rely solely on the domestic helper (shall refrain fr using the term "maid" as far as possible) to take care of and to bring up her kids and a child should not rely solely on the domestic helper to take care of their aging parents. Yes, they might relieve us of the burdens while we are at work; but this does not mean that they could be allowed to take over our respective tasks.
Scenario 1
A (a young bloke, probably in his early 20s) returns from a long journey home. Drove a couple of hours to reach home. Upon reaching home, he sounds the car horn to summon the domestic helper to open the gate, and to unload his bags from the car. And what does A do upon arrival? A merely gets off the car, and walks straight into the house.
Question: Is is really that hard for one to carry the few bags that one has? It ain't that difficult.
Scenario 2
Same situation, but with slight variation to the facts. Family goes out with the matriach, arrives home. Yes, the horn sounds again. And the poor domestic helper has to scurry out. Why? One may ask. Answer - to help their mother/grandmother get off the car, while the rest of them just walk off into the house.
Question: Is that necessary? 2 healthy young persons, and none are able to assist? Come on folks, she ain't heavy; she's your mother! Ever hear of retribution?
Scenario 3
Family outing. Domestic helper tags along, and at the look of things, it appears that she plays the role of the mother more than the mother herself!
Question: Why have kids then?
-LV-
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Different...
With glasses, sans glasses....
(Menara Tun Razak, KL; 19th November 2007)
Conclusion: Yes, I look diff....
PS: This was meant to be an aimless post... Well, Friday nights with nothing else better to do....
-LV-
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Stupid Solution to a Non-existing Problem
News that has been hitting local headlines recently: "12 year old girl commits suicide over UPSR results"
Question:
If failure to score 7As (the candidate scored 4Bs, 2Cs, 1D) in the UPSR examinations results in suicide.
Fail CLP means how? (English: What would happen if one fails CLP?)
Answer:
Fail then resit la, what to do! Won't die one.... (English: Worst situation, will just have to resit.)
Note: Who cares about what you got for UPSR when there are so many exams to be taken many years down the road? It's not the end of the world.
-LV-
(hopes to avoid being shot in class on Friday)
Monday, August 20, 2007
Different sides of me
(i) the professional - where I use words and phrases such as "it is contended", "it is arguable", "much remains to be seen", "it is justifiable"...
(ii) the idealist - where I often reflect on some "too good to be true" thoughts and where I write based on at times, unachievable ideals... I must admit...
But well, there's no harm dreaming...
Isle of Skye, July 2007 (Note: The different hues on the 'islands')
-LV-
