"Because in Cyberspace, no one can hear you scream."
Monday, September 05, 2005
(SFGate.com) Researchers in the Netherlands, the first country to legalize euthanasia for terminally ill people, have found that doctors are helping hasten the deaths of sick children in a variety of ways, sometimes at the edges of what the law allows...
The new study looked at 64 deaths of ill children during a four-month period. Of those, 42 cases involved medical decisions that could hasten death.
Although technically legal according to Dutch law, the very fact that these doctors were hovering around the edges of what is regarded as ethical behavior should be considered "slightly alarming." Proponents of euthanasia for children argue that the purpose of this treatment is to end the suffering of the victim, but they often forget by ending a life they forgo any chance of the person either recovering or being restored whole, as science has yet to develop a future cure.
"You can have a child who appears about to die instead pull out of it and live a couple more years, whereas an elderly person wouldn't," [Stephen Connor, vice president of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization] said. His group opposes legalizing assisted suicide, but supports patients making decisions about their own deaths...
"Once you've transformed euthanasia into a medical treatment, there's no logical way you can say that it should not be available to children," said Rita Marker, executive director of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. "People who support euthanasia should do so with their eyes open. It will eventually be available to everyone."
The very fact that some are endorsing euthanasia for kids should reveal the person's regard for the weakest members of society. If a society no longer regards it's most fragile members, then a person's value is reduced merely to dollars and cents. Although some might consider this speculation, if euthanasia is adopted in the US, (something Oregon is quickly turning into a reality) then what prevents them from removing members of society whose cost of "up keep" exceeds what they contribute back?
Deutsch â¢ EspaÃ±ol â¢ FranÃ§ais â¢ Italiano â¢ Portugese â¢ æ¥æ¬èª â¢ íêµ â¢ æ±è¯
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By 9:05 PM EDT, at
Comment Policy: Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of this site or the authors, and are the legal responsibility of the original commenter. Intelligent opinions welcome. Comment here.
By Darnell Clayton â¢ 8:52 PM â¢ Email Post â¢ â¢
Enter your email address below to subscribe.
View Blog Stats
Plus 10,667 hits before August 12, 2005
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
Opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of anyone that I work with, for, or associate with in any manner.