Cases Of Euthanasia

Legalising assisted suicide will put us on a slippery slope to euthanasia

The main argument in promoting physician-aided suicide (PAS) seems to be that each individual should “have the choice to die when and how we wish”.

But, in law, one man’s “freedom” is another person’s “restriction”. If we restrict the speed limit for safety, that suits many people who are willing to abide by that, for they see the sense in it; whereas others, who consider themselves as safe drivers, see it as an unnecessary limit to their freedom.

The same applies to our anti-smoking legislation. Our laws are there to protect the greater interests of the majority.

Unfortunately the very distressing and difficult cases are often highlighted by the media. This gives a distorted view of the issue, and it is not good to fashion laws based upon extreme cases.

The huge majority of people who die (and we all do so) accept the death-process as being “part of life”.

Please do not think I am playing down the distress and suffering that a minority experience; it is just that, to base legislation on these particular cases is not a good practice. The law is a very blunt instrument, and is there to protect the majority, not cater for everyone’s choice.

There is a “slippery slope”, and we certainly will go down it if we legislate for PAS. There are no “black and white” standards to go by on this issue; it will be based upon “this patient feels that their suffering is too much”, or “we would assess that this person’s suffering is too great”.

Witness the Netherlands’ experience, where involuntary euthanasia is now legally practised on children and infants (The Groningen Protocol).

That was certainly not their initial intention. The slippery slope is real, and my concern is for the weak, the helpless, and the elderly, in the future. Pressures will come upon them that will be intolerable.

From PAS, it is not such a big step to voluntary euthanasia, and from there, it is not such a big step to involuntary euthanasia.

Clinical judgment is not an exact science; not infrequently there are mis-diagnoses, and prognoses given that are incorrect.

In addition, patients with severely incapacitating or terminal illnesses often suffer from depression as a result of their illness or symptoms, leading them to wish for, or indeed ask for, a “way out”.

But, with good management of their symptoms and their depression, their whole outlook on life changes significantly, and their desire to “end it all” has passed.

TruthAlliance.net > News > Euthanasia Study Raises 'Chilling ...

By Jessica Ryen Doyle | Fox News | Jun. 15, 2011

Doctors are harvesting lungs from patients in Belgium who’ve been euthanized because the organs are in much better condition compared to someone who has died in an accident, according to a study published in the journal Applied Cardiopulmonary Pathophysiology.

The authors of the study, Initial Experience with Transplantation of Lungs Recovered From Donors, reported their experience with four recipients who received lungs between 2007 and 2009 from euthanized donors.

“Immediate graft function was excellent in all recipients and pulmonary function improved significantly early after transplant,” they said in the report.

So could this medical practice happen here in the U.S. someday?

Well, it’s not likely since euthanasia is not legal here in the United States , but one medical ethicist from Wake Forest University in North Carolina said it doesn’t seem that out of the ordinary in a country where this practice is legal.

“Insofar as euthanasia has been legalized in Belgium, it’s hard to see why they wouldn’t want to take organs for transplantation,” said Ana Iltis, director of the Center for Bioethics Health and Society at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. “People tend to respond with an ‘Ick,’ but that response should be about euthanasia. Once you accept that physicians are going to kill patients, it seems logical that they would harvest those organs for transplantation.”

Dr. Peter Saunders of the group, Care Not Killing, which is a U.K.-based alliance opposed to euthanasia, expressed to The Daily Telegraph that he is very concerned about what is unfolding in Belgium.

“Given that half of all euthanasia cases in Belgium are involuntary, it must be only a matter of time before the organs are taken from patients who are euthanized without their consent,” Saunders told The Telegraph. “The matter of fact way the retrieval process is described in the paper is particularly chilling and shows the degree of collaboration that is necessary between the euthanasia team and the transplant surgeons – prep them for theater next to the operating room, then kill them and wheel them in for organ retrieval. All in a day’s work in Brave New Belgium. Doctors there are now doing things that most doctors in other countries would find absolutely horrific.

Euthanasia and law in the Netherlands

Euthanasia in the Netherlands, the policy and practice of mercy killing

Euthanasia, choice and death

Euthanasia: National and European perspectives

The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia