KEY POINTS:
Here is an earlier selection of Your Views:
Alex
From the legal point of view, it may be legally wrong to neglect medical assistance to someone who needs it to live on. On the other hand it makes me sound stupid. If given the right to decide, I will deny him the treatment, let me be stupid, let me be sued and found guilty of negligence, let me be put behind bar because this is the only way that we will be looked after well by our kind government!
Disgusted (Auckland)
I think this is an absolute joke! Why should we the tax payers be spending our hard-earned money on something like this! He is a murderer and if he wants this operation he should pay for it himself just like everyone else! Sometimes crime does pay doesn't it!
Tracy
How many other everyday law-abiding citizens with leukaemia also receive $1 million worth of free treatment? It appears those in jail get better health care and treated better than those out of jail.
Mary
Are they mad? We all have to go on a waiting list, this animal is a killer. Does this mean every time we have to go on the waiting list we go out an commit a crime just to get immediate attention?
Liam McMahon
When this person was convicted of these terrible crimes, the judge sentenced him to a minimum non-parole sentence of 21 years in prison. That was the judge's sentence. The sentence was not "21 years minimum non-parole period and, furthermore, this man is not to receive any medical treatment at the cost of the taxpayer". If there was a change to the law to the effect that "convicted criminals cannot receive medical treatment at the cost of the taxpayer", this would be a contentious and complicated piece of legislation. The despair at this man costing the taxpayer $1 million for medical care is understandable. In many countries, or states of the US for example, convicted murderers are sentenced to death. This is not the case in New Zealand. If this man was denied life-saving medical treatment then he would effectively be receiving a death sentence. The only answer to this problem is to improve society so that crimes like this do not happen. Either way, this man will rot in hell for a long time, whether he receives this treatment or not. He is an evil person but it is the policy of our country to provide welfare to our citizens. However, I really don't think he should have access to broadband internet and movies (unless he pays for it with his own money like we all do on the outside). And on the up side, at least he is providing employment for the guards, surgeons, and the like. So while he is costing the taxpayers a million dollars, he is also helping to keep people employed and keep the economy humming. Now, go away and work that one out!
Paul Ahipara
He should not get the operation. It would be denied to an old person no matter how good a citizen they had been simply on the basis of that the money would be better spent elsewhere. If a selection is made on the basis of insufficient money to do all procedures for everybody, then this person would be a very unsatisfactory recipient, just as a severely mentally retarded person would be. His potential for dangerous behaviour towards medical staff and anything less than total cooperation from the patient would also rule him out in my book.
Don Montana
He killed two people in cold blood and destroyed a family, how can that be justified with receiving a million dollar operation? Put him at the end of the waiting list!
Colin England
It is not 'the current government' that has brought in the laws that guarantee prisoners their human rights they've been there for a couple of decades. I believe we used to be quite proud of them. It seems, though, that NZ is starting to become a fascist state. Anybody who does anything out of the ordinary is castigated in some way. Interestingly enough it has been said that fascism is the result of a failed democracy. What causes a failed democracy? Increasing crime to the point that the people are scared to go out and an increase in poverty. What causes an increase in crime and poverty? Failure by society to care for those in the community that need it most.
Pete (Japan)
New Zealand Herald, you have heard the loud and angry views of your readers. For what it's worth, I agree he should go on the list like anyone else. Many a good Kiwi has and will die on the list. What will you do about it? We, the average tax paying sucker can vent our disgust & anger here and choose to vote out a PC government, but what are you, the all powerfull media going to do, at least, try to stop this injustice? Or are you just grabbing a "good" story? Watch and see dear readers that is, if they will print this watch to see our beloved national newspaper fight the good fight and make those responsible for this lunacy responsible. Come on NZH, you can get good mileage from this, we the public are right behind you. I live in hope.
Lee
Typically, this topic has brought out the nutters. Reihana is a New Zealand citizen, and is entitled to exactly the same health care as any other New Zealand citizen. He has been punished according to the law, and the law does not require that his rights to cancer treatment be removed. Nor should one's access to healthcare be compromised by a criminal conviction, since this would make punishments inequitable for those criminals in poor health, and punishment is supposed to fit the crime, not the criminal. In any case, those who believe in the death penalty are still wrong in this case. If Reihana had been sentenced to death and was on appeal, the state would have still had to pay for his operation to make sure that he was around to receive his sentence. That is how the law works. Generally, even when you are sentenced to death, the state has the responsibility to keep you alive and in good health until the sentence can be carried out.
Stephen Chester
I think it is appalling that this individual will receive this operation when 1000's are languishing on the waiting lists. I agree with the family that a bullet would be much cheaper for this lowlife.
Don (Auckland)
What next? He gets a KiwiSaver plan while being in the slammer? I won't be surprised. He has forfeited the right to be among society in general by committing this heinous act shouldn't that also forfeit his right to privileges to medical care paid for by taxpayers?
Gwen (Katikati)
What a waste of valuable taxpayers money, so that a convicted criminal can have his life extended, when he gave no thought to the people he murdered, I am sure that it could be spent on more deserving patients then this double killer.
Confused
I am confused by the attitudes expressed in many of the comments here. Why, when providing medical care to prisoners appears to be policy of the Department of Corrections that predates the current Labour government, people are so eager to place the blame on the current government? This is not to say that it is a good policy, but claiming that it is somehow the result of a liberal conspiracy of sorts is misguided and only serves to betray an ignorance of how the New Zealand government (both past and present) and various civil services operate. Unless of course, it can be shown that the MP's of the current Labour government introduced medical treatment for prisoners, or that the order for the medical treatment for this specific case came from a Labour MP. I doubt that this will occur.
Wellington
Such a debate is thoroughly idiotic. Sure, the cranks have come out of the woodwork, all the people who believe McVicar and the Sensible (hysterical) Sentencing Trust is right and that criminals should all be locked up forever with no rights etc. This is rubbish, we have a judicial system in place to decide punishment for any crime. If not a murderer, how about a rapist? Do they get healthcare? And what if it was statutory rape by a 16-year-old upon a willing 15-year-old, for example? What if is was a murderer who has been released from prison, after serving their life sentence? Who decides this pathetic mob writing in today? Nice to see the hysterical mob mentality is alive and well among Herald readers, I'm just glad we have a decent government to legislate instead.
Eagle
This guy should get medical treatment either painkillers (I'm a compassionate person) or lethal injection, anything else is a waste.
Simon (Sumner)
Spend $2 on a bullet and put him down. That leaves $999,998 change from the leukaemia operation. This also saves around $1.5 million because we don't have to keep him locked up for 21 useless years. It also saves the cost of any other expensive operations he may have wanted in the next 20 years. Whatever the scenario, we're talking millions of dollars. Since we don't have unlimited money to spend, it really is a choice between spending millions of dollars on one double-murderer, or helping out thousands of citizens (hip ops, herceptin, whatever). Hmmm, spend millions to ensure a double-murderer gets to walk amongst us in 21 years and leave thousands of deserving citizens without the care they need, or deal to him and ensure that our future streets are safer and thousands of deserving citizens get the care they need. Is that really a difficult decision?
Brian (Hamilton)
No, he should not be given this operation.
Madarab Hasab Omb
That is called cruel and unusual punishment. Why punish him with our health system? Isn't prison enough?
Nicki (Forrest Hill)
Absolutely not! I believe he gave up his rights when he went to prison. Lots of people have life threatening ailments and never get the help they require. Why should a murderer, of all people?
pCb (Auckland)
When there is talk of the rationing of health care and the inability of the system to care for the population in general this is the worst use of resources that I have ever heard of. I just can't believe there are people out there who would discount the crime this guy has committed and have the audacity to point the finger at those who query his rights to health care. If you commit an inhuman crime (and double murder can't be more inhuman that is more than an "accident") you give up your right to be treated as a human (isn't there a parallel to a pit bull defending its territory and we put them down). Long ago I realised that human rights don't cover the victim, that rehabilitation on the whole is a practical joke on the rest of the population and that liberal beliefs have consequences that the perpetrators don't realise and the majority have to deal with.
Kim (Auckland)
Of course! He should get the operation, then he can go back on the street and kill again! Let's support him not!
Hard working
Give him painkillers and let him raise his own funds! If he can raise it by appealing to soft-hearted New Zealanders then good for him. What goes around comes around. By grants and handouts you are caring for the lazy at the expense of the hard working. Wake up Helen the people that you actually want and need here are leaving because of your socialist policies. It is time for change, it's the 21 century!
Really?
Where does it end? We had a convicted rapist able to smuggle semen out of hospital to father a child, now a double murderer able to receive a million dollar operation, and cases of prisoners receiving ACC for injuries inflicted whilst committing crimes! (Drunk drivers etc.) I thought prison meant you lost certain personal liberties. I would love to know what these are as far as I am aware prisoners get fed well, warm clothes and beds, a shelter over their heads, more than adequate health care, the right to see family and friends (and so it seems to father a child). This is far more than some sectors of NZ society currently receive. We have children that lack the basic essentials of life such as food, warm clothing, adequate housing, the list goes on. My question is, where do prisoners' rights end?
Jeni the Best
This guy doesn't deserve anything, and he certainly doesn't deserve to get a life saving operation before others who need it more. How about looking after all the people who have lived good lives, paid taxes etc first. Then maybe he can have an operation, but with the chances of him getting out and re-offending I am surprised someone out there thinks his life is worth saving.
Tony (Auckland)
I agree that he should go on a waiting list for this treatment. We are not unfair. It is just that he should be at the bottom of the list and should get this treatment only after there are no other people waiting for treatment. That way we can't be accused of denying treatment to a person that needs it. I don't think that he should be treated ahead of a person that has not caused so much harm into the lives of so many people.
Email the PM (Auckland)
I have read many comments. As one person said: let your politicians know. pm@ministers.govt.nz email your prime minister. Tell her that it is unacceptable. Let her know that you will not be a donor should this go ahead. I have. I think it's disgusting and while I have empathy for the prisoner I do not believe he should get treatment above others and certainly not at taxpayer expense.
Lindy Lou
This is absolutely appalling! For a start, has he been on the 'waiting' list like everyone else in the country has to? And this while good people/patients are being forced to travel overseas for treatment this is unbelievable and unacceptable. Abhorrent!
Brain
Okay, I get the whole fair sentencing thing, yes, maybe he should get/be entitled to the medical treatment on a technical matter of human rights and what we stand for etc etc etc, but if so, put him at the back of the waiting list. An extremely long waiting list behind elderly hip replacements and the like.
Honest hard-working taxpayers have earned the entitlement to dignified, fair health care, and shouldn't be brushed aside to cater for the cavalcade of sociopaths running through our society who's only function seems to be trying to fill our A & E dept's hospital with fresh victims as fast as they are able. Let us as a nation finally move forward with laws that reflect common sense and justice for a change!
Annoyed
This is so disgusting, my mum had to move all the way to Australia to get a transplant done, if my mum had waited in NZ she would have died, the list is far too long and unfortunately if you can't afford it then hard luck, it's so disgusting that a man that has taken away not 2 life's but 4 those of his ex partner and her partner and the kids. How can our government sit there and justify how this man is more worthy of a young child or someone that is willing to contribute to society not destroy it. Wow, maybe my mum should've become a criminal and then maybe she would've gotten a free operation.
Patirck Rossiter
The guy should be allowed to die of his disease (although pain relief would be acceptable). That way his life sentence (which should be life) could be shortened in an acceptable way.
Huia (Gold Coast, Australia)
PC policy will dictate that he be given treatment. However it should not be at the expense of those awaiting operations and definitely not for a million dollars. Put him on some alternative healing treatments that are relatively inexpensive. If they work fine and if they do not work, well sorry mate that is as far as we go. If a state-owned enterprise can turn off the power to show people they mean business, and as a consequence someone dies, then the same rules should apply here. After all, who was ever charged over that? No one.
The obvious answer is to let this clown go peacefully, and permanently. Saves a lot money, after all 21 years not having to feed him and the 1m can go on more deserving cases. If he was a dog you would simply take him out and shoot him.
Infuriated tax payer
This sucks, I cannot afford dental treatment, maybe I should commit a crime so that I can get free treatment whilst I live in semi-luxury in jail. Let him suffer just like he has made the victim's family suffer. Enough is enough.
Paula Sanchez
A country is like a family but much, much bigger. We gave our black sheep a chance. Now, the money we have, we need to spend on the other children, who haven't used up their "share".
Mea
Perhaps if I go out and rob a bank and get banged up inside for it, does it mean that I could get a double hip replacement, which I can't have done at the moment in the public system, because there aren't enough funds to pay for it? But who cares if I'm a law abiding citizen, walking around in pain day in and day out, taking pain relief medication, paying taxes and doing community work in an effort to bring about some social justice? Hmmmmm, makes one wonder if crime really does pay! Somehow I think it might!
John (Auckland)
Simply unbelievable that someone who would have been hung a few years ago, now has a life saving operation. It seems that murderers, illegal immigrants etc, have the best medical and legal service. Most people must wonder why they lead blameless lives!
Hamilton
What cheek! This is the PC world gone crazy. Why should we the tax payer have to pay for these over the top medical costs on top of keeping him feed & sheltered for the next 21 years of his life. I don't disagree with him getting the treatment but I don't believe it should be funded at the tax payers expense. He should be added to the waiting list just like every one else & he should have to pay for his costs. I would rather see the government funding the breast cancer drugs to keep more mothers alive with their families then fund this convicted killer who has taken a mother from her family.
Next