The new Scotland Parliament bill to legalize assisted suicide–which I noted in an earlier post, permits disabled or dying teenagers access to “end of life assistance”–clearly includes active mercy killing. From the bill (no link, my emphasis):
1. Lawful to provide assistance under this Act(1) It is not a criminal offence or a delict for a person (a) to provide end of life assistance in accordance with this Act; or (b) to provide assistance, including assistance by participating in any step required by this Act, to enable another person to obtain or provide end of life assistance in accordance with this Act.
(2) In this Act “end of life assistance” means assistance, including the provision or administration of appropriate means, to enable a person to die with dignity and a minimum of distress….11. Requirements relating to the actual provision of assistance (1) The end of life assistance must, so far as reasonably practicable, be provided in accordance with the agreement between the requesting person and the designated practitioner.
Note that since the method of killing isn’t specified or limited, it would seem that any method agreed upon by the suicidal person and the killing actor would be legal, theoretically including being shot in the head, so long as it “allowed a person to die with dignity,” which is in the eye of the dying person, it would seem, and caused “a minimum of distress,” which a bullet to the head would provide. Most wouldn’t want to be shot, of course, but these days, who knows?
And it is very clear that the actual suicide assister/killer need not be the patient’s physician or, for that matter, even a health care practioner:
10 Agreement on provision of assistance (1) Where the second formal request is approved, and before end of life assistance can be provided, the requesting person and the designated practitioner must agree (a) that end of life assistance is to be provided; (b) who is to provide the end of life assistance; (c) on the place where that assistance is to be provided; and (d) on the means by which that assistance is to be provided.
While Secton 11 (6) requires the doctor to be present, he/she clearly need not do the deed.
So, in summary: Under the bill, qualified teenagers can be killed without regard to parental approval, doctors need to OK the euthanasia/assisted suicide but need not perform the act–demonstrating yet again, that euthanasia is not a medical act–and any swift method of killing is okay so long as it is done in private. Good grief!
January 21st, 2010 | 5:21 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, Wesley J. Smith. Wesley J. Smith said: Scottish Bill Would Allow Active Euthanasia by Non Doctor » Secondhand Smoke | A First Things Blog – http://shar.es/aTk0l [...]
January 21st, 2010 | 5:21 pm
[...] The bill also authorizes active euthanasia, and the killer need not be a doctor. More details over at Secondhand Smoke. Comments [...]
January 21st, 2010 | 5:51 pm
>>So, in summary: Under the bill, qualified teenagers can be killed without regard to parental approval, doctors need to OK the euthanasia/assisted suicide but need not perform the act–demonstrating yet again, that euthanasia is not a medical act–and any swift method of killing is okay so long as it is done in private. Good grief!<<
With a few spirits within me Wesley, I must say that "IT" is not these people's fault cause they don't know what they do but if you tell anyone that I told you this, I'll just deny "IT" as usual cause I don't want any alien gods on my tail again if you know what I mean! :)
My wife and I managed to raise five girls but I cheated a little cause I only took four short nervous brakedowns. Anyway kids are a lot smarter nowadays and to make a long story short, God forgive these alien god cells because they honestly believe that if they can convince these poor host humans that death is the best way out of their miserable situations we'll all come out the winner.
Between me and you sinner vic has told me that these lost souls will find themselves at square one again in the future looking for more host and to make another long story short, "IT" just can't be done with God's Permission.
Remember Doctors, Moms the word or is "IT" mums the word? Anyway, this comment will self destruct in sixty second but then again two thousand years is but a moment for these so called godly cells!
Go Figure! :(
Peace
January 21st, 2010 | 7:45 pm
[...] Scottish Bill Would Allow Active Euthanasia by Non Doctor … Tags: clearly-includes, disabled-or-dying, dying-teenagers, earlier-post, from-the-bill, legalize-assisted, life-assistance, permits-disabled, scotland-parliament, the-bill Blogging about Fiat: Fiat Punto Active Sport 1.2Hungary active mobile internet subscriptions grow 70pc to 715000 …Active Parking Assist Gains Ford 3RD Top Pop Sci 'What's New …Active X Problem – MapPoint ForumsCaught Him With A Corndog: Better Than Obamacare: Being Pro-activeFragland.net V4 :: EA Sports Active also for other consolesPublishers Lunch Deluxe: Amazon Launches "Active Content" App ProgramAtul Gawande's Simple Fix for Business Distractions – DailyFinanceHot Air » Blog Archive » Reid: Doc-fix? What doc-fix?Whale's Belly: Rubbish Daddy – Part 2 View the Contact Powered by Search [...]
January 22nd, 2010 | 2:11 am
This bill is alarming, but I question whether it would have much, if any, support. If this is just the proposal of one member of a newly created parliament then it may say more about the political and electoral system in Scotland than it does about support for this type of proposal. This could be the work of a crank who managed to get him or herself elected but who could be kicked out by his or her own party or defeated in the next election. I am just speculating here, but it could turn out that all sorts of goofy proposals are being introduced in the Scottish Parliament. How did you find out about this bill? Do you know if there is a particular organization behind it?
January 22nd, 2010 | 2:17 am
That remains to be seen, Peter S. But I was brought to Scotland a few months ago out of fear of this bill, and engaged in much advocacy against it. The polls indicate public support generally. And apparently the MSP who introduced has much sympathy because she has Parkinson’s. So, we must proceed as if it is likely to pass, and to all in our power to prevent that from happening.
January 22nd, 2010 | 3:06 am
Wesley: “Note that since the method of killing isn’t specified or limited, it would seem that any method agreed upon by the suicidal person and the killing actor would be legal, theoretically including being shot in the head, so long as it “allowed a person to die with dignity,” which is in the eye of the dying person, it would seem, and caused “a minimum of distress,” which a bullet to the head would provide.”
So dignity is just something in someone’s eye and an unreliable concept in moral matters, yet just a few days ago you were railing against an English medical ethicist who said that dignity was an insufficient ground for protecting human rights.
Consistency.
January 22nd, 2010 | 10:28 am
I don’t see active euthanasia mentioned anywhere in the excerpts you selected, so you may want to re-think the title of this piece. What it proposes is simply a larger number of choices than are available elsewhere, and decriminalizes the process of helping others to do what they’d like to do but are incapable of doing themselves. The operative word in all these matters is “agreement” and you fail to adequately address the requirement that there must be agreement between the subject and the facilitator beforehand. You are enlarging the concept of active euthanasia — which is commonly understood to be an act done without the subject’s knowledge and/or consent — to include assisted suicide. That is a false comparison; but then, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, distorting and redefining the meaning of language is one of the basic skills of the propagandist.
January 22nd, 2010 | 11:16 am
Dave: The term has different meaning. Saying that we should eschew human intrinsic dignity as the core value of bioethics is to deny human exceptionalism. That is different than one’s sense of personal dignity, which is materially affected by how others treat us and how we perceive we are viewed by others. Different concepts.
January 22nd, 2010 | 5:25 pm
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by CO2HOG: Scottish Bill Would Allow Active Euthanasia by Non Doctor http://bit.ly/64Lb1a...
January 23rd, 2010 | 2:52 pm
Isn’t this another one of those places where they make a big deal out of money? And they have less sunlight than is wise? I wish it were only that though. What about the young girl whose father prevailed in her being killed in hospital in Italy not too long ago, and it was debated at the government level instead of the proposition being rejected immediately and the whole country and its government having raised hell about it on the side of life?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact