Why Does the Anti-Cancer Commune Stipulate That Aid Funds Are Not Limited to Medical Use?

This rule of the Anti-Cancer Commune has been criticised by quite a few people. Those in the nonprofit sector may think it does not conform to nonprofit practice, but the Commune has its own considerations.

First, as the original motivation: from the experience of a family member's illness, we felt that people should have money to do non-medical things in the event of a serious illness — for example, when treatment can do little against a terminal illness, they can travel and enjoy life, or improve their quality of life. This is also a kind of compensation for the loss of life, a form of treatment in another sense.

Second, the Commune does not advocate excessive medical treatment, especially in the face of a terminal illness, which may only add to the suffering.

Finally, the Commune defines itself as a supplement to public health insurance and commercial insurance. We may already have covered the medical expenses by other means, so the Commune's funds can fulfil other wishes of the patient.

That said, we do not think it unreasonable to limit fundraising to medical use; that approach has a reasonable side. Each has its pros and cons.