Dutch Pediatricians Want to Euthanize Children

This article was published on Wesley Smith's website on June 19.

Wesley Smith

Wesley Smith

By Wesley Smith

There is no limit to the culture of death once it is fully off the leash. 

Dutch law allows euthanasia for children age 12 and over. But now a prominent pediatrician wants the age limits erased.From the AFP story

Terminally ill children in unbearable suffering should be given the right to die, the Dutch Paediatricians Association said on Friday, urging the suppression of the current 12-year age limit. 
“We feel that an arbitrary age limit such as 12 should be changed and that each child’s ability to ask to die should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis,” said Eduard Verhagen, paediatrics professor at Groningen University who is on the association’s ethics commission. 

Kill, kill, kill, kill, kill! 

And don’t think the “terminal illness” restriction would last two weeks. Dutch law does not require that people be dying to be euthanized. 

It should be noted that Verhagen–who co-authored the Groningen Protocol–commits infanticide. (The GP is a bureaucratic protocol under which doctors kill newborn babies born with disabilities and terminal illnesses.) 

Think that will never happen? It’s already the law in Belgium. 

As I said, there is no limit to the culture of death once it is fully off the leash.

Dutch court approves family assisted suicide

This article was originally published on May 13 by Wesley Smith on his blog.

Wesley Smith

Wesley Smith

By Wesley Smith

Any media story about Dutch euthanasia is generally accompanied by the blithe and false assurance of medicalized killing being governed by “strict guidelines.” What a joke, given that death doctors kill disabled babies in their cribs, the elderly “tired of life” and the mentally ill, along with the dying and disabled. 

One of the guidelines that has actually been enforced is the requirement that doctors do the deed and be present for the homicide/suicide.  

But euthanasia activists always want more. In recent years, there has been political agitation to allow families to help kill their relatives. And now a court has apparently okeyed the practice. From the New York Times story:

A Dutch appeals court has cleared a man of any criminal responsibility for helping his 99 ­year ­old mother take her own life — a case that aimed to create precedents for assisting suicide in a country where euthanasia already is legal under certain circumstances.  
Judges in Arnhem said Albert Heringa should not be prosecuted for helping his mother die in 2008. They said Wednesday he had to make a decision between obeying the law against assisting suicide and his “unwritten moral duty” to help his mother achieve her wish for “a painless, peaceful and dignified death.” 

Oh, and here’s the mandatory baloney media assurance about strict guidelines: 

While euthanasia has been legal in the Netherlands for years if carried out under strict conditions by a physician, assisted suicide by a friend or relative of the person who wants to die remains illegal.  

Media malpractice aside, this is precisely how doctor-administered death started in the Netherlands–with a court ruling allowing a doctor to disobey the law. 

As I always say: The culture of death is never satiated, it never says “enough.” 

Doctor Death Nightmare

Published on March 24.

By Deborah Rankin

Margaret Somerville

Margaret Somerville

law professor at McGill University says that a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada overturning the ban on assisted-suicide and euthanasia is a "nightmare" and "full of errors". Margaret Somerville, the Founding Director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill made these remarks recently to a rapt audience at a public forum organized by the Newman Centre for Catholic students and faculty.

She said that the SCC decision goes farther than simply striking down the ban against aiding someone to commit suicide, permitting euthanasia by physicians in certain circumstances, while cautioning that the ruling is unclear in this regard.

In physician assisted-suicide the doctor prescribes drugs that the patient takes, whereas in euthanasia the doctor administers a lethal injection - in either scenario, ostensibly at the patient's request. However, in jurisdictions where assisted-suicide has been legalized, there are multiple examples of abuse with people being euthanized without their consent.

This is especially true in the case of children and incompetent adults who can't give informed-consent: for example, the Groningen Protocol of the Netherlands permits so-called "voluntary euthanasia" of babies at the parents' request. Pro-euthanasia advocates refer to this gruesome practice as "post-birth abortion" while opponents say that it is really a form of "closet eugenics" - if the child is born with congenital defects the parents can request euthanasia on the pretext of preventing the child from suffering.

Link to the full article

Schuklenk promotes euthanasia for newborns with disabilities and infanticide

By Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Udo Schuklenk, who was the chair of the one-sided Royal Society of Canada: End of Life Decision Making panel, is now proselytizing his philosophy (or Peter Singer's philosophy) promoting euthanasia for newborns and infanticide. Schuklenk uses quality-of-life arguments to support his eugenic philosophy to encourage the killing of newborns with disabilities.

In an article published in The Journal of Thoracie and Cardiovascular Surgery, titled: Physicians can justifiably euthanize certain severely impaired neonates, Schuklenk argues that some lives are not worth living and that parents should have the right to decide to end the lives of newborns with disabilities. Schuklenk states:

A quality-of-life ethic requires us to focus on a neonate's current and future quality of life as relevant decision-making criteria. We would ask questions such as: Does this baby have capacity for development to an extent that will allow him or her to have a life and not merely be alive? If we reach the conclusion that it would not, we would have reason to conclude that his life is not worth living.

Link to the full article

Memorial to German euthanasia victims

By Wesley J Smith - published on Wesley Smith's blog on September 4, 2014.

It wasn’t “the Nazis” that caused the mass euthanasia deaths of disabled infants and adults. It was the eugenics ideology of the era that denied human exceptionalism.

We are heading in the same direction–although certainly not mass murder of the kind that happened in Germany circa 1939-1945.

But we too have accepted the idea that there is such a thing as an unlivable life. Indeed, in the Netherlands, babies born with serious or terminal disabilities are killed in their cribs by doctors.

In Belgium and the Netherlands, people with serious mental illnesses are euthanized–to widespread applause.

Read More: http://www.alexschadenberg.blogspot.ca/2014/09/memorial-to-german-euthanasia-victims.html