A paramedic closes the doors of an ambulance at a hospital in Toronto on April 6, 2021.Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press
Stay open
Re “Amid a jump in illegal crossings, residents of Canada-U.S. border states scoff at proposals for a wall” (Jan. 30): Rightly so.
Canada and the United States have the longest international border in the world. The majority of Canadians live within 160 kilometres of it.
For the most part, we speak the same language and share so many cultural similarities, save the funny way we spell and pronounce many words dating back to our British heritage. We are also large trading partners.
The “build a wall” chants sound like nothing more than political rhetoric. The politicians calling for it seem to be conflating the political mess at the U.S. southern border with a comparatively non-existent problem at ours. It’s like comparing a leak to a flood.
The U.S. is considered Canada’s closest ally, although the U.S. does not always seem to reciprocate. Nevertheless, from my perspective, our relationship is really one of neighbours, friends and allies.
Gary Raich Westmount, Que.
Lightweight
Re “Canada used to punch above its weight, but our defence capacity now seems an impossible dream” (Jan. 29): This should sound a clarion call to our government leaders and other policymakers as to the dire straits in which Canada finds herself, in the midst of numerous hostile actors who wish this country and our way of life ill.
We have ignored the inevitable for far too long and continued hiding behind the skirt of the United States will likely not stand for much longer. Canadians should be outraged at the state of our foreign, defence and security affairs.
Are we ready to send this message to our politicians?
David Collins Victoria
Canadians seem unwilling to confront the fact that democracies are in danger.
To further develop this point, I recommend research fellow Ed Arnold’s piece in the Royal United Services Institute, “NATO societies must be ready for war.” The contrast of the awareness of danger between Canada and countries such as Finland is stark.
Time to wake up.
John Gledhill Saugeen Shores, Ont.
SOS
Re “Pakistan is forcing women and girls back into the clutches of the Taliban” (Opinion, Jan. 27): Conditions for Afghan refugees in Pakistan are abysmal.
Those who have languished there for more than two years are mostly penniless, fearful of being deported to face a promised death sentence. Their homes are now occupied by the Taliban.
It should be incumbent on this government to fulfill its stated commitment to Afghan colleagues who worked for Canada. Following the opening of the Afghan embassy in 2003, local staff were instrumental in facilitating the work of Canadian diplomats, our armed forces and the RCMP liaison.
Visiting ministerial and parliamentary delegations profited from their insight and guidance in addressing their counterparts. They kept us informed, and they kept us safe.
We mustn’t let the danger to Afghans – who put their lives on the line for us – be overshadowed by the occurrence in other conflict situations.
Eileen Olexiuk Deputy head of mission, Kabul; Ottawa
Roster shakeup
Re “Thousands of Sault Ste. Marie residents about to lose their primary care, adding to an Ontario crisis” (Jan. 30): Perhaps the problem is the rostering system.
Rostering restricts both physicians and patients. It prevents physicians from giving care to someone not rostered and those rostered from getting care elsewhere.
In places with low numbers of primary care providers, we should not allow rostering and instead let patients go where there is care and physicians be paid by the visit. Rostering, so far, does not seem to have the means to assess accessibility. Because physicians are salaried (according to the number of rostered patients), sometimes there is no incentive to see more patients even if there is demand.
I have been a visiting specialist to Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., for 40 years. I have seen the steady decline in the provision of primary care since rostering came in, long before the current crisis.
Often it is easier to see me than a primary care provider. This has to change.
Frances Leung MD, FRCPC; Toronto
What next?
Re “Why delay?” (Letters, Jan. 31): A letter-writer predicts that the recent decision on medical assistance in dying will “force patients once again to seek justice and mercy from the courts.”
Even with a desired positive outcome, as experienced by my friend Hanne Schafer in 2016 when she received the first court-ordered exemption for assisted dying in Canada (outside of Quebec), the costs were approximately $17,000 including the removal of the publication ban. The latter was needed in order to publish the obituary she had drafted.
The financial costs mean that a legal route is affordable only for those with resources. Beyond that, imagine the emotional and physical challenges involved in a seriously ill person going to court.
Is this scenario really what Canadians want?
Mary Valentich Professor emerita, faculty of social work, University of Calgary
I believe the government’s recent pause on expanded medical assistance in dying is the right move.
It is not just the logistics of the safeguards at stake, but the suggestion that humans may be capable of understanding and responding to the complexities of despair without resorting to medical intervention. The medical community, I suspect, can breathe a sigh of relief, however temporary, that absolves them of responsibility for forced complicity on an issue seemingly so complex that it is not.
Historically speaking, a “quick fix” is a path the profession has avoided for good reason: They don’t know what they don’t know. Cures for any number of previously incurable illnesses were found through diligence, determination and research.
At an individual level, loving, supportive and practical relationships within caring communities trump the extremes of despair, and have been known to make significant differences for sufferers of both physical and mental illnesses.
Joan McNamee Kamloops, B.C.
On high
Re “Play it again” (Letters, Jan. 29): I also have memories of a piano recital that I will not forget.
As a young child at my first recital, I approached the piano with some trepidation. I had never seen a piano so big in my life.
As I tried to demystify the grand piano, I looked for middle C. Then I rattled off my piece as quickly as possible.
The only problem: It was an octave too high. My mother tried to comfort me by telling me it sounded like a music box.
Sharon Thompson Toronto
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com