 |
 |
Listmembers, <fontfamily><param>Times New Roman</param><bigger>Having read the mails that are yet in my mailbox, I thought it all over and like Arthur Hirsch I too remembered the "serenity prayer", but in another way than Arthur Hirsch. For me the link was not the aspect of "nothing new", but more "when will we ever learn". Two of the main problem objects on the list were recently: the difficulties with the funding of research, that would possibly in the near future result in PD being a curable disease and those horrible stories about what people have to go through when they need some financial help from social security or disability funds. The story of Ivan, who is alone and needs somebody to look after him, but cannot afford it, and can neither have it financed, is a sad example. =20 Yet another thing struck me : In a letter that was written to a congres member or to a paper, it was highly stressed that asking the money for research was in no way something like begging , because it would turn out to be. as far as money goes, a profitable investment. In putting this forward as an argument one averts to be required to use an in the long run more sound argument, which is something like increasing the quality of life. Only if it is conceptualised this way, the cry of Ivan does not=20 necessarely have to compete with the cry for more research. The financial problems of PWP's, who need money to have an acceptable existence with their disease, can be solved straightforward by money. The results of=20 spending money on that, will be something positive, but not easy to measure in money profits. The serenity prayer, says something like ( I don't know the exact words) "give me the strength to change what can be changed"; we know for sure that the financial problems like Ivan or Barb have them, can relatively easy be solved. The money spend on it will not be "lost". The same is not so sure of money for research. We can't predict what exactly will be the result of research. We can only guess that humanity will not soon be freed from all incurable diseases it is now suffering from. So it will not be useless to think about how to manage the problems this causes and what every decent society should do for the victims. If possible the most important thing is of course to beat the Enemy itself by reasearch. If that is not, or not yet, possible many things can be done, and we as victims know how worthwhile it may be to us. We, including our caregivers, know that better than healthy people because they often are not able to imagine that life with an incurable disease might be worthwhile anyhow. So this aspect should have some attention too in campaigns for visibility. If not, the attitude that patients who can't be cured are "lost" anyhow and money spend on "band-aids" is lost money, will be strengthened. Regards, Ida Kamphuis P.S. for Ronald Vetter: I tried to create this text using Windows notepad (txt-file), but no dice. I could not transport that file into e-mail. So I used, as of old, Word 6. Sorry!</bigger></fontfamily> -------------------------------------------------------------- Vriendelijke Groeten / Kind regards, Ida Kamphuis mailto: [log in to unmask]