Droppie [opensoc]abc.net.au/news/2026-02-11/lov…
i aspire to sensitivity here, not just ride roughshod over the grieving "survivors", but nonetheless feel somewhat irritated at the overarching tone of this article.
compare that to hitherto "traditional" options, whereby his partner would have been either in excruciating agony, or medicated into comatosity to avoid the former, for days if not weeks before... ergo, no matter how upset he might feel now, the alternative seems infinitely worse. before, he would have "lost" her far earlier, wrt being able to share their love right to the last.
ofc it is terrible, this is undeniable, as everyone who has lost a loved one, then later returns to the ever-changed home, well knows. however...
this is infinitely more than anyone ever got, or gets, after their loved one dies a "non-VAD" way. so sure, ok, a "post-VAD counselling service" might be able to be made better, but my point is, & thus why this article sits badly with me, from the perspective of the survivors, VAD is so much better than the alternatives, & for that reason this article IMO lacks proper perspective & proportion.
Jude🇵🇸
Fabien Nicolet ✊ 🏳️🌈🏴
Winbuzzer
News Beep
TOV
Spel Hubben
Alexander J. Stein
National Secular Lobby