SUBSCRIBER LOGIN






Search First Things

Advanced Search

RSS

Secondhand Smoke
Archives

Categories

Monthly


« Previous  |Home|  Next »         

Monday, December 12, 2011, 12:51 PM
Wesley J. Smith

Euthanasia is not just a lethal act, but a deadly ideological appetite–one that is never satiated.  Once killing is unleashed as a solution to suffering, activists will always want more.  Always.  As I have written before, they remind me of the man killing plant in Little Shop of Horrors, growing ever larger and constantly yelling, “Feed me!”

Latest of so many cases in point: Belgian activists have a petition out to open euthanasia to minors and to force all doctors to be complicit in killing by creating a duty to refer to a death doctor if they are not willing to personally euthanize.  Here is the Google translation of the petition, linked here in, I think, Flemish:

The Right to Euthanasia: Time for the Next Step. Euthanasia possible, even for those not aware, and who is a minor:

Through this petition we want the federal government, federal parliament seats and all democratic parties insist that the euthanasia during the next legislature will be expanded and refined. We ask the following enhancements:

• Since the advance [euthanasia request] is always revocable, is a time limit of five years obsolete. It is desirable to remove the time limit. The municipalities that the declarations of intent to register must already requires the parties to automatically notify the imminent expiration of the deadline.
• If the advance euthanasia was registered, its existence must be included on the chip of the electronic ID card.
A referral qualify for the duty doctor who refuses euthanasia.
• Assisted suicide should be enrolled in the law on euthanasia.
• It must be ensured that hospitals that work with public money, the application of the legislation is not in the way.

Furthermore, we urge the law to expand:

• In people with irreversible brain disease or dementia, who previously wrote a living will.
To minors within the current law, without prejudice to the definition of ‘euthanasia’ (the explicit and considered the request of the patient), and without an age limit to build.

“The next step,” that is the key.  Note, it isn’t the “final” step.  That’s because there never is a final step.

Culture of death, Wesley?  What culture of death?

5 Comments

    Lydia
    December 12th, 2011 | 4:48 pm

    And extended to people with dementia who have a “kill me” clause in their “living will.”

    Wonder what this part means: “It must be ensured that hospitals that work with public money, the application of the legislation is not in the way.” Translation’s a little rocky there, but I’d guess it means that all hospitals that receive public money must allow euthanasia on-site. What do you think, Wesley?

    Wesley J. Smith Reply:

    That would be my best guess.

    Victor
    December 12th, 2011 | 7:38 pm

    The Power of the almighty dollar in the wrong hands can be as scary as a shop of little horrors you say? :)

    Keep UP the good words and work of informing the public Wesley.

    Peace

    AuthenticBioethics
    December 13th, 2011 | 10:07 am

    Ah, the highway is broad and brightly lit now. Destination signs are clear and big.

    Then again, they have been for some time. http://authenticbioethics.blogspot.com/2011/03/gps-for-bioethics.html

    Where’s the next exit? U-Turn? That annoying, but once in a while reassuring voice, “Recalculating!”

    Recommended Reading – Tuesday, December 13th | The Seen and the Unseen
    December 13th, 2011 | 6:32 pm

    [...] a duty to refer to a death doctor if they are not willing to personally euthanize” (Click here for the rest of the [...]

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact