Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
--------
Question: Paragraph: In almost all the 12 countries polled, three-quarters or more of those responding to questions posed by the Swiss Medical Lawyers Association (SMLA) said people should be able to decide when and how they die. Two-thirds to three-quarters of them said they could imagine opting for assisted suicide themselves if they suffered from an incurable illness, serious disability or uncontrollable pain. “In practically all European countries, many signs indicate that the prevailing legal system no longer reflects the will of large parts of the population on this issue,” the SMLA said. The results of its poll “should allow politicians to take democratic principles into account when considering legislation on these issues,” it added in its introduction to the study. Assisted suicide is now allowed only in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Switzerland. The German government has proposed legalizing it as long as no profit is involved while France is debating whether to allow it. In both Germany and France, the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches oppose legalizing euthanasia and argue for better palliative care to ease pain for dying patients. The study was conducted by the Swiss pollster Isopublic in Austria, Britain, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. It did not survey the four European countries that allow assisted suicide, or countries in eastern Europe. Germans were most open to letting people decide when and how they die, with 87 percent supporting the idea, and results slowly descended to Denmark’s 71 percent in 11th place. Greece was the only exception to this strong support, with only 52 percent backing the idea of allowing assisted suicide. Spaniards were the most willing to consider asking for help to die, with 78 percent support, followed closely by Germans (77 percent) and the French (75 percent). In Britain, 71 percent said they might seek assisted suicide while Greece was again the most reluctant with 56 percent saying they might do so. More than three-quarters of those polled in all countries said only doctors or trained practitioners should perform assisted suicides. A majority of all respondents said doctors should not lose their licenses if they help a patient die. Results ranged from 84 percent in Britain to 58 percent in Greece. About 30 percent of those polled thought dying patients might occasionally be pressured by relatives or doctors into accepting assisted suicide if it is legalized. Roughly another 30 percent thought this would almost never happen. In Germany, where the government’s bill is now being debated in parliament, 76 percent said the proposed law was wrong to ban assisted suicide if the doctor is paid for the service. The bill would not punish those helping patients commit suicide, for example by accompanying them to Switzerland where assisted suicide has been legal since 1942. A rise in dying foreigners - particularly from Germany, France and Britain - ending their lives there has prompted calls for tighter laws, but Zurich voters rejected in 2010 a proposed ban on what opponents called “suicide tourism”. In the United States, assisted suicide is allowed in Oregon, Washington and Montana. Massachusetts voters narrowly defeated a proposal to legalize it there this month. Claim: Large Europe majorities for assisted suicide: survey.

Answer: Large majorities of west Europeans favor the legalization of assisted suicide, now allowed only in four countries on the continent, according to a new survey.


Question: Paragraph: "Charlie Crist’s most recent TV attack labels Republican Gov. Rick Scott as ""extreme"" on women’s issues. A few days after he snagged the endorsement of Planned Parenthood PAC, Crist issued an ad showing a series of women attacking Scott’s record on abortion, birth control and equal pay for women. One of the claims in the ad is that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" PolitiFact Florida has fact-checked multiple claims about Crist’s record on abortion and we gave him a Half Flip for holding various positions on it throughout his career -- even before he switched parties to become a Democrat. Several media reports have also covered bills signed by Scott that limit access to abortion. Here we decided to fact-check Scott’s record on birth control. (Technically the Florida Democratic Party paid for the ad, but the Crist campaign announced the ad and promoted it.) Legal decisions about birth control during Scott’s tenure We reached out to Scott’s office and campaign and Crist’s campaign and searched news archives and found very few statements Scott made related to employers and birth control. Scott, a former health care executive, campaigned for governor on his opposition to President Barack Obama’s health care law in 2010. The law includes access to birth control for women; however, that was not at the root of Scott’s opposition to the law, which was more broadly about the federal government’s role and the individual mandate. We only found a couple of statements Scott made related to whether employers should be forced to provide birth control. The 2010 health care law required that most plans include birth control coverage without out-of-pocket costs. The Obama administration carved out a religious exemption for most churches and some parochial schools, finalized on Jan. 20, 2012. Certain religious entities, including Ave Maria University in Florida, opposed Obama’s rules. On Feb. 10, 2012, the White House announced a compromise: If a religious employer objected to providing birth control in its health plan, the employer would not have to pay for it, but the insurance company would pay. The next day, Newsmax TV asked Scott his thoughts about that decision while he attended the Conservative Political Action Conference. Scott said: ""This week what they did with regard to the Catholic Church and the contraceptives, it's an example [of] when government gets more involved in something they take away your rights. And this is, they are telling the Catholic Church what they have to buy. The government should not be telling us what type of insurance we should buy with our own money. The change they made makes no sense -- saying the insurance company is going to pay for it? That makes no sense. Money is going to be coming out of the Catholic institutions’ pocket to buy that insurance, so they are paying for it."" About two weeks later, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi joined six other states in a lawsuit to challenge the birth control mandate arguing that it violated religious institutions' First Amendment rights. (Scott wasn’t a plaintiff.) In July 2012, a federal judge in Nebraska threw out the lawsuit arguing that the states failed to prove they would suffer immediate harm once that part of the law was enacted. The states appealed, but lost in 2013. On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that certain companies like Hobby Lobby that have religious objections can opt out of the birth control mandate. The companies opposed providing certain types of contraception that they believe is equivalent to inducing abortion, including morning-after pills and IUDs, while they didn’t oppose other methods of birth control. We asked a Scott campaign spokesman if Scott made any statements about Bondi’s lawsuit, the Hobby Lobby case, and in general if he thinks employers should be able to deny women birth control coverage. Spokesman Greg Blair pointed to one statement Scott made after the Hobby Lobby ruling, when a radio station reported that Scott said that the Supreme Court ""upheld our freedom of religion again this week."" ""Gov. Scott believes that people should have access to the contraception and health care they want, and he also believes in religious freedom,"" Blair told PolitiFact Florida. Our ruling Crist’s ad states that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" We struggled to find statements Scott made about employers and birth control. His spokesman didn't give us a denial when asked. We found a couple of statements which show he is against the federal government dictating to companies that they must provide birth control -- something that certain religious institutions opposed. It’s also worth noting that Scott doesn’t appear to be flat out against birth control but it’s clear that overall, he doesn’t like telling employers what they have to cover." Claim: "Charlie Crist Says Rick Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."

Answer: "Crist’s ad states that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" We struggled to find statements Scott made about employers and birth control. His spokesman didn't give us a denial when asked. We found a couple of statements which show he is against the federal government dictating to companies that they must provide birth control -- something that certain religious institutions opposed. It’s also worth noting that Scott doesn’t appear to be flat out against birth control but it’s clear that overall, he doesn’t like telling employers what they have to cover."


Question: Paragraph: Dr. David Hager is a part             of the teaching staff of the University of Kentucky College of             Medicine and has developed a reputation as an expert on gynecologic             infections. This eRumor was circulated before Dr. Hager actually became a member             of the committee. He is now a part of the panel, although he did not become the             chairman of it. He is a conservatively oriented physician and is a speaker and             author in the Christian community who describes himself as pro-life. He objected to this eRumor saying that he does not know who wrote it             and that no one had interviewed him for it and that some of it is             not accurate. He says that he does not refuse to prescribe birth control for             unmarried patients. He is an advocate of abstinence but for patients who do not make             that choice, he is not opposed to birth control prescription. He also says that his opposition to RU-486 was based on his concerns             about the safety of the drug. He says RU-486 was approved under an “Accelerated Approval             Process” reserved exclusively for anti-AIDS and anti-cancer             drugs and an antihypertensive agent. He says that normally the             FDA requires one or more than one randomized, controlled trials             before approving a drug, which was not done for RU-486. He also says that he does not believe that standard birth control             pills are abortifacient and has never written it. He says he co-edited a book that referenced various views about             birth control pills but that not all of those views were his own. Regarding his views of how to deal with stress-related disorders in             women, he says “I have always offered a holistic approach to             therapy. I suggest diet/exercise changes, medications as             needed, counseling when required, and meditation/prayer.” Last updated 11/30/03 Comments Claim:   The eRumor is a protest of             the choice of Dr. David Hager to lead the U.S. Food and Drug             Administration’s Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee.              It says he is a religious pro-life physician who refuses to             prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women and opposes the use of             RU-486, the pill that ends a pregnancy.   

Answer:
Dr. David Hager nominated for FDA panel.