I have said it until I am blue in the face and I will continue saying it: Once a society decides that killing is an acceptable answer to human suffering, that which is deemed “acceptable suffering” will continue to expand until just about any category of suicidal person will eventually qualify. The Netherlands shows again that it is true. Despite the most liberal euthanasia/assisted suicide culture in the world–the loose laws aren’t even really enforced–it is still not enough. Now, there is a call to help the elderly commit suicide who are “tired of life.” From the story:
A group of older Dutch academics and politicians have launched a petition in support of assisted suicide for the over-70s. They hope to attract over 40,000 signatures, enough to get the issue debated in parliament under citizens’ initiative legislation. Under Dutch law, euthanasia can only be practised if the patient is suffering ‘unbearable pain’. The doctor must be convinced the patient is making an informed choice and a second doctor must also give his or her opinion. But the new lobby group say people aged over 70 who are tired of life should also have the right to professional help in ending it. The group says the euthanasia would be carried out by specially trained nurses, psychologists or other professionals who would go through a careful process to make sure there is no pressure on the elderly person.
Please. Just read the work of Dr. Herbert Hendin and the pro euthanasia book by a Dutch nursing home doctor Dancing With Mr. D, and you know emotional coercion toward euthanasia happens now in the Netherlands–and nothing is done about it. And why restrict it to the over 70 set? Younger periods of life can get “tired of life,” too.
And get this for crassness:
And neurologist Dick Swaab said death should be straightforward. ‘ Throughout the animal kingdom, individuals are simply replaced, rather than patched up endlessly,’ the NRC quoted him as saying.
Talk about returning to the bad old days of social Darwinism!
This is the moral of the story: We are a logical species. Once we accept a premise or a principle, we take it to where it naturally leads. Hence, once the door is opened to assisted suicide, the license will continue to expand until you end up with far more than that for which you originally bargained.
February 11th, 2010 | 8:14 pm
[...] the Netherlands like Charles Woodson on a Detroit Lions wide-receiver. I can’t add much to his most recent post which highlights the slippery slope that comes with legalizing assisted suicide in a culture [...]
February 11th, 2010 | 9:08 pm
Wesley,
Another copy edit alert:
In the very last line of your statement the first “that” should read “than”.
At least you know somebody’s paying attention ;)
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 11th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Started book publicity today. Been up since 4:30. Thanks.
February 11th, 2010 | 10:14 pm
[...] Dutch Call for Suicide Availability for the Elderly [...]
February 11th, 2010 | 11:04 pm
I was recently telling a colleague, albeit for entirely different reasons, whenever somebody is trying really hard to sell me on how great something is for me, it makes me wonder what’s in it for them.
February 12th, 2010 | 4:01 pm
We see evidence that prehistoric humans–or hominids–cared for individuals, aged, injured, who couldn’t have cared for themselves. This is always pointed out as evidence of humanity, with admiration and awe. We are so much better off materially, yet we’ve progressed to the point that the aged and infirm are a burden. The Neanderthals would be ashamed of us.
February 12th, 2010 | 8:08 pm
Dick Swaab points out that individuals (in the animal kingdom) are replaced.
Yeah? So…. what’s your point, dude?
Animals don’t marry, balance check books, play the ukulele or repair computers, either. We’re a little different from seagulls and kangaroos, pal. If you want to live like them, go live WITH them. Leave me your iPhone, car, Rolex and CD collection because you won’t be needing them out in the wild.
Consider it a bolstering of your “ethics.”
February 14th, 2010 | 1:23 pm
Wesley:
You wrote: “We are a logical species. Once we accept a premise or a principle, we take it to where it naturally leads. Hence, once the door is opened to assisted suicide, the license will continue to expand until you end up with far more than that for which you originally bargained.”
I take it that “far more than that for which [we] originally bargained” refers to some potentially cataclysmic or otherwise undesirable result. Now, if your premise is correct, and we’re logical by nature, then one must ask why would any logical being even accept, let alone pursue, a course of action that will result in demonstrable harm?
ARE we a logical species? If we’re logical by nature it follows that we would never intentionally pursue a potentially self-destructive policy at all, let alone pursue it beyond a point at which we might lose control of it to our loss. IF we’re logical.
But considering such phenomena as drug abuse, the spread of AIDS, genocidal warfare and the number of fatal traffic accidents resulting from DUI, speeding, texting at the wheel and failure to use seat belts — to name only a few — one would think many of our species’ actions are demonstrably ILlogical, notwithstanding the survival imperative.
I may be wrong, of course, but experience leads one to question your premise about our species’ logic, and with it the concomitant idea of human exceptionalism.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact