Sigh. I like it when prominent politicians criticize euthanasia. But I wish they would be more careful with their words because when they get the details wrong, it can do more harm than good. Such might have been the case with Rick Santorum in an interview with James Dobson. He told the truth about Dutch euthanasia but goofed with some of the details. It was up to me to set the record straight. From, “Santorum More Right Than Wrong About Dutch Euthanasia”published in the Daily Caller:
The Dutch like their euthanasia — but sure are sensitive when a prominent person describes the horrors that medicalized killing has unleashed. Latest example: Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum criticized Dutch euthanasia in an interview with James Dobson, stating in part:
Ten percent of all deaths, and half of those people are euthanized involuntarily, because they are old or sick. And so elderly people in the Netherlands don’t go into a hospital. They go to another country.
The Dutch media pounced, mocking Santorum for charging their doctors with “murdering” the elderly on “a grand scale.” Alas, he asked for it because he got the details wrong. When decrying the culture of death, one must be as accurate as possible. Otherwise, the fish wiggles off the hook
True, the elderly are not flocking to out-of-country hospitals. But the 10% number isn’t that far off the mark:
But realize, about 1/3 of the Dutch die suddenly, e.g. by sudden stroke, heart attack, or accident, without significant end-of-life medical intervention. Take those deaths away from the total count, and using the Dutch government’s estimate, the percentage of euthanasia deaths in cases involving end-of-life medical treatment rises to 3-4%.
But even that number is far too low. Repeated studies have shown that Dutch doctors fail to report at least 20% (or more) of actual euthanasia deaths, which means that hundreds of euthanasias aren’t included in the official statistical count. Moreover, about 1% of all Dutch deaths come as a result, to use Dutch parlance, of being “terminated without request or consent” — e.g. non-voluntary euthanasia. Such deaths are also not technically part of the official euthanasia count. That gets us up to about 6% of all deaths involving medical treatment at the time of death. Add in a few hundred assisted suicides each year where the patient takes the final death action rather than being lethally injected, and suddenly, Santorum’s 10% claim becomes far less problematic.
Wait, there’s more: Dutch doctors also kill patients by intentionally overdosing them with pain killers. I am not referring here to death caused as a side effect of legitimate pain control, but overdosing with the intent of causing death. The exact number of these deaths isn’t known, but the authoritative 1990 government study known as the Remmelink Report found that there were 8,100 deaths from intentional opioid overdose, of which 61% were done without the request or consent of patients. Now, add in, say, half of the nearly 10% of deaths that occur after Dutch doctors place patients into artificial comas and deny them food and water — that is, those cases in which palliative sedation is not medically necessary to control otherwise irremediable suffering — and we see that Santorum’s claim of a 10% euthanasia rate isn’t materially overstated at all.
I get into how the Dutch are moving steadily toward allowing the euthanasia/assisted suicides of the elderly “tired of life” and how the Dutch Medical Association advocates including non medical issues such as money and loneliness, in determining whether an older person is “suffering” sufficiently to be euthanized. I also describe how Dutch doctors are permitted ethically to help non euthanasia qualified patients to learn how to kill themselves. I discuss the infanticide in which some Dutch doctors engage and the mobile euthanasia clinics that are about to get rolling–all of which we have dealt with here at SHS. I conclude:
The Dutch media also mocked Santorum for claiming that thousands of Dutch citizens wear bracelets saying they don’t want to be euthanized. Fair is fair. Santorum was wrong. They don’t wear bracelets — they carry please-don’t-euthanize-me cards in their wallets or purses.
Enough. Rick Santorum is exactly right in his broader criticism that the Netherlands as leaping head-first off a vertical moral cliff. Maybe if Dutch reporters paid closer attention to what is happening under their very noses, they’d stop laughing at Santorum’s minor factual errors and start acting like journalists.
That would be a refreshing change in the USA about our own culture of death. One can always dream.
February 21st, 2012 | 10:41 pm
Yikes!
I can’t even keep up with all this. In fact I didn’t even want to know about this stuff.
Back in the day, I actually didn’t have too much of a problem with Dr Death (Jack Kervorkian) but since have developed a respect for life that even challenges my long held support for the death penalty.
At the point where doctors OD their patients w/o consent, thereis no doubt the line has been crossed from humane euthanasia to geriatricide.
May God forgive us.
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 6:51 am
@Jason Gillman,
Please don’t believe the story. It contains a grave number of inaccuracies.
The Remmelink is highly miss-cited all throughout the internet and this author clearly didn’t take the time to get his numbers from the actual report. The rest of the numbers he doesn’t provide sources for, I have no idea where they come from. Furthermore, the Remmelink report dates from 1991, euthanasia was legalized only ten years later. To use it to prove the introduction of euthanasia led to jumping of a moral cliff is just plain stupid.
And about the elderly, they do not carry ‘do not euthanize me’ cards or bracelets. The only thing that is true about this is that a Christian organization in the past has offered living wills in which people can state no active termination of life should be applied. However, nobody knows if anybody actually carries them with them. It appears more of a political statement against the (then) recent introduction of euthanasia. Moreover, you can get ‘do not resuscitate’ bracelets/dog-tags and cars because people who do not wish to be resuscitated out of severe states of for instance brain-trauma generally get this done despite indications they do not want this.
Pffff, I could go on and on, but I have to get back to work.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 9:58 am
You are wrong. They are called Life Passports. And I have looked at the actual Remmelink Report and the numbers I cited are in the statistical data. The article also links to stories about nearly everything I wrote. Embrace the darkness!
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:32 am
@Wesley J. Smith,
Sigh…. do you really want to challenge a Dutch person about the English translation of the word ‘Levenswensverklaring’? It’s NOT ‘Life Passport’. More importantly my point was not to provide you with the best translation of the word. My point was that there is no proof that thousands of seniors carry these (whatever you want call them).
Furthermore, the fact that you looked at the actual Remmelink report explains a lot. The actual report is in Dutch, and I think we have established you are not a master of the language. You might want to spend some time on the translations of the report and, importantly, also look at how Dutch terminology surrounding end-of-life care compares to American terminology. It, unfortunately, causes a lot of confusion.
So, please, do not pretend to be an expert on something you’re obviously not. You say Dutch reporters do not look at what’s right under their noses, my critique of your analysis would be that you do not seem to look beyond what’s under your nose.
Finally, if I as a Dutch person look at what’s right under my nose I have probably seen more of what happens surrounding end of life care in the Netherlands than you do. I have experienced from close by my grandmother, for instance, who died in the hospital, after being there for a long period time following a major brain hemorrhage. She did not recognize her own husband or children any more, was barely conscience (generally confused if she was), in pain, in diapers and cried all the time. In the picture you describe of The Netherlands she would have been euthanized on day one. In reality, in a country that is actually very conservative in administering drugs, all requests of family for extra painkillers, sedation etc (nobody asked to euthanize her) were denied, because of extremely small chances this could speed her death.
David Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:04 pm
@Wesley J. Smith, again, can you make the case that the Remmelink Report is accurate?
If it’s true that many people do not accept the Remmelink Report as accurate, you should start at square one.
Square one is to make sure the report you cite is accurate. Convince us the report is correct and accurate (ie, no self-citing, gains wide consensus, etc)
The readers are really putting it to you on this one.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Are you kidding? It was chaired by the Dutch Attorney General. It was the most thorough investigation of Dutch euthanasia ever undertaken, and it was done so by the Dutch government. If you doubt it, read my book Forced Exit, Mr. “Science is a Philosophy.”
February 22nd, 2012 | 8:55 am
I especially like the slightly dark humor at the end about bracelets vs. cards. Good job, Wesley.
February 22nd, 2012 | 10:28 am
I’m Dutch AND a reporter. The sentence about the citizens of The Netherlands carrying “please-don’t-euthanize-me cards in their wallets or purses”) is wrong. Such cards do not exist here. The folks briefing Congressman Santorum didn’t do their homework properly.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:15 am
Yes they do. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/adventures-in-old-age/201105/assisted-suicide-how-about-dutch-treat
“As the habit of killing catches on, the voluntary element is lost. Patients in Holland are having to carry cards saying: “Please, doctor, DON’T kill me.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1518583.stm
Maybe you should learn what is happening in your own country!
Branko Collin Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:22 am
@Wesley J. Smith, Non of the links you provide show a shred of evidence of what you claim. Both are columns by heavily prejudiced people.
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:34 am
@Wesley J. Smith,
Just because something is stated on the intern…….. ohhh never mind.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Not “the Internet,” the BBC and other mainstream media outlets. Open thy eyes!
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:01 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
Yes it’s on the BBC website (part of the internet), I did notice that…… my eyes are wide open.
However, it’s an OPINION piece by a doctor (did you notice the large quotes around it by any chance). It is NOT a BBC report on how things are in The Netherlands. It’s two people voicing their opinion. One of them wrongly stating people carry ‘don’t kill me’ cards.
It is true that you can buy the a ‘Levenswensverklaring’ at the protestant ‘Nederlandse patienten vereniging’ (Dutch patient organization).
Catholics have also ‘Ik geloof’ (I believe) cards to indicate they wanted to be treated as religious person, i.e. no euthanasia and such. However, by their own wording this was more about a statement then actually meant to be practical.
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:04 pm
@Pietje,
Woops that last line was meant to read:
Catholics have, with the introduction of legalized euthanasia, distributed ‘Ik geloof’………..
I accidentally deleted part of it.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:12 pm
No wonder so many Dutch appear not to know what is going on in their own country. Fact: To qualify for euthanasia repeated request is required. Fact. About 1% of deaths come from “termination without request or consent.” Fact: Some people, many religious but so what, carry do not euthanize me cards in case they are ever incompetent. Fact: If the guidelines were followed such cards would not be necessary because the default would be not to euthanize unless the doctor received repeated requests. Fact. Because opponents know that the guidelines are often ignored, they carry the cards. I don’t see how that can be disputed.
It cracks me up how pro euthanasia types ignore the facts. And when they can’t, they say, “So what?” Are you there yet, Pietje? Because, it seems to me that as a reporter, you should be exposing the non voluntary euthanasia deaths. But perhaps we have different views of journalism.
Thanks for commenting, by the way.
Pietje Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:01 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
This is getting truly ridiculous. Where to start?
First of all, I am not a reporter. No idea why you decided to make that up. :-S
Second of all, you still haven’t provided me any proof that there are cards that say do not euthanize me. None of the actual referred to papers/cards etc say that. They are simply cards indicating you want to be treated a certain way because of religion. May that include a patients desires surrounding end-of-life treatment, yes. Does the card say ‘Don’t euthanize me’? NO!!!! Do you have any proof that people carry this because guidelines are being ignored? NO!!!! Do people actually carry them in their wallet or were they ordered to make a statement ten years ago against the introduction of euthanasia? Figure it out.
Btw I have credible sources from a website (firstthings.com) that Americans have living wills stating they do not want to be Euthanized! See below.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:19 pm
Do 5utch doctors perform non voluntary E? Yes, without a doubt. Are cards issued for people to carry that say they don’t want E if brought to a hospital? Yes. Sorry I got you mixed up with other Dutch commenter on the reporter issue. But your country’s E policies are a horror, made worse by its popularity. Do doctors teach patients to commit suicide? Yes. Do doctors commit infanticide? Yes. And you worry about the wording of a card.
Pietje Reply:
February 24th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
I don’t worry about the wording of a card. I worry about sensationalizing arguments to make them more compelling. The way the concept is introduced leads to a mental picture of a card that states in salient red letter “please don’t euthanize me” that is carried solely for the purpose of fear of euthanasia. Say Santorum would have said: ‘Well in The Netherlands some elderly religious people carry cards in their wallet that, besides information such as: I would like a priest by my side if I am in a life threatening condition, can also state they do not want to be euthanized. Do you think the audience would have responded in the same way? I believe wording in reporting can be quite important.
I don’t know where the ‘teaching suicide point’ comes from or what it is suppose to prove. Suicide is considerably more common in the US than in The Netherlands. I am not in favour of doctors teaching people to commit suicide.
But going into such details is not what I’m interested in. You say our Euthanasia policies are a horror. With all your ‘knowledge’ of the numbers. Since the legalization of euthanasia in 2001. Have the number of cases gone up or down?
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 24th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
Why up, 13% in 2009. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/netherlands/7841696/Euthanasia-cases-in-Holland-rise-by-13-per-cent-in-a-year.html
And that doesn’t count the increase in terminal sedations, to nearly 10% from about 5%. I suspect doctors are doing that more often because active killing is stressful and they don’t have to be there when the patient dies. Palliative sedation, which does not intend to kill the patient, is only medically necessary with proper palliation, in about 3-5%–and that’s a generous figure. The dehydration deaths from terminal sedation are not counted in your E statistics. Neither are the hundreds of murders of people who have not asked for euthanasia.
And your legalization only changed the reporting requirements. Before that it was decriminalized IF the doctors followed the reporting and other guidelines–again, almost wholly unenforced. Formal legalization primarily changed the need for law enforcement review post killing. And now, with legalization, the cateogries of the killable are spreading like a cancer. I know that is provocative language, but the Dutch are engaged in a terribly destructive policy that could suck others in. Take Belgium, where euthanasia and organ harvesting are now coupled. I suspect that is also happening in Netherlands, but have seen to reports to that effect. I would be interested if you know.
Pietje Reply:
February 24th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
Ah sorry the general euthanasia figures I am aware of. Overall, since 2001, we have seen an increase. (Naturally you picked a year in which the increase was extremely high. ;-) ) However, this figure does not concern me.
I was really interested in all these other numbers you keep throwing around. Do you have a source for the increase from 5% to 10% in terminal sedations? Over what period of time is this?
Also, the logic to how our policies could suck others in eludes me somewhat? If it is as bad as you say it is, it should scare others of.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 24th, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Here’s one from a pro euthansia group citing studies of a few years ago when it had risen to 7.1%. http://www.worldrtd.net/news/study-signals-dutch-switch-drugs-euthanasia The last I saw was the percentage is now over 9%. Don’t have time to get that cite at the moment, but it exists.
It is hard to get the truth out about the Netherlands. I must say you Dutch are very sensitive about the subject and often deny what is clearly happening. So too many pro assisted suicide advocates who deny the “slippery slope.” But the spread of categories of those eligible, the lack of meaningful enforcement of the “guidelines” and the law, plus the other things I have pointed hour here are not alarmist. They are facts on the ground.
David Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:00 pm
@Wesley J. Smith, are patients REQUIRED to carry such cards?
Hmmm?
Few things are more authoritative than “Psychology Today”, that’s for sure.
If I walk around with a card saying “Aliens, do not abduct me”, does that mean there is a wave of alien abductions in my neighborhood? Does that mean my concerns are well-founded?
While your logic will possibly appeal to the Rick “Satan is coming after the US” Santorum crowd, rational and independent thinkers ignore such yellow journalism and fear tactics.
There are two Dutch people within 20 feet of me right now. One in the medical insurance field, the other in the medical field. Let me ask them…
nope, they’ve never heard of such a thing
I’m thinking at best just a few patients were carrying around homemade cards and this made for some great, emotional story-telling.
Do you really need to tell de Vreij to learn about his own country?
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Of course they are not required to carry such cards. Good grief. Trolling.
February 22nd, 2012 | 11:00 am
Shame on the Dutch. They are unworthy of the calling themselves Dutch after what the brave Dutch doctors did and went through during the reign of Nazism by refusing to participate in the final solution of killing off the vulnerable. What was once a crime against humanity is now accepted medicine in the Netherlands.
Good for Santorum pointing this out. I once interviewed Santorum for our old radio show. He is the real deal and knows what he’s talking about.
February 22nd, 2012 | 11:40 am
@Wesley: two links don’t prove you’re right…. I, for one, do NOT want to undergo euthanasia should I become terminally ill. There are no formalities to follow, as doctors are obliged by law to do their utmost keep me alive. And those cards you are referring to simply don’t exist. You don’t have to take my word for it, simply call any Dutch GP. They’re in the White Pages of the Netherlands. Meanwhile, here’s a link to the official Dutch government stance on euthanasia: http://www.government.nl/issues/euthanasia/euthanasia-assisted-suicide-and-non-resuscitation-on-request.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:39 pm
There are cards Dutch can carry that can state they want euthanasia in such circumstances, and that they don’t. The reason for carrying the “don’t” is because “termination without request or consent”–e.g. non voluntary euthanasia–is a reality. According to most studies, about 1% of all deaths. That is murder under Dutch law, but rarely prosecuted and if a guilty verdict, generally a two week or so suspended sentence.
February 22nd, 2012 | 11:54 am
The first page of my living will has in huge bold letters “DO NOT EUTHANIZE ME”. And I live in the USA but I know what is coming.
February 22nd, 2012 | 1:33 pm
It is not surprising that the Dutch don’t know all that’s going on in their own country. It is the same all over the world, like here in the USA. There is so much going on behind the scenes and right under our noses AND right over our heads, but the majority don’t want to see, don’t want to know, don’t want to do anything as it will upset their view of reality. Too many won’t take off their rose colored glasses to see the ugly truth, as they would be accountable for what they know. They don’t want to feel guilt, recognize sin when the see it, and above all they must protect themselves. God bless all who stand up for truth and justice.
February 22nd, 2012 | 4:55 pm
I googled this site after i watched the Santorum video on youtube. His claims are so absurd that most Dutch people only have to laugh about it.
I feel pitty for Santorum for stating outright lies about the Netherlands on public television because that´s pretty embarasing for a presidential candidate. But i’ts also obvious he has no clue about what he’s talking about, probably someone in his campaign team did’nt do his homework.
But i really feel a pity for the author of this article. Mister Smith, please don’t think you are an expert on this subject because you’ve read some links on the internet that back up you’re absurd idea’s about euthanasia in the Netherlands. You try hard to make your ´it´s almost as bad Santorum describes it´ case but there´s absolutely zero proof to back it up.
I think it’s always healthy to have a debate about an important topic as ´should euthanasia under certain circumstances be legal´. But you have to start this debate by having your facts straight about the Netherlands.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Friso: I know of what I speak, er write, even if you don’t. Read my book FORCED EXIT. Read my book CULTURE OF DEATH. Read Dr. Herbert Hendin’s SEDUCED BY DEATH. Read the awful Dutch nursing home doctor, Burt Keizer’s horrifying account of euthanizing the elderly in his book DANCING WITH MR. D.
Infanticide under the Gronningen Protocol? True or false?
Hundreds of “termination without request or consent” canses each year. True of false?
Killing the elderly who want to die with symptoms of age or tired of life. True or false?
Killing the mentally ill who want to die. True or false?
Engaging in terminal sedation when not required by untreatable symptoms: True or false?
Friso Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 6:26 pm
@Wesley J. Smith, I am only interested in hard evidence, mr Smith. If your books you are refering to have scientific evidence or laws or texts from official goverment policy to back up your claims i am happy to read it. But if they are based just like this article on links to an opinion piece on a BBC website, a enquiry from 1991 when euthanasia was not legal in Holland and an obscure article in psychology today i am afraid i have to pass.
Yes, there excists a Groningen protocol. Don´t understand what point you wanna make with that. Here´s an interesting article wich might be helpfull to it understand http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp058026 (and this the kind of evidence i look for from you mr Smith)
Please visit the Netherlands, go talk with the docters, the terminally ill, the lawmakers, the judiciary, the scientific medical community, even the Christian community and political leaders that are opponents of euthanasia. I doubt you will find many opponents of euthanasia in the Netherlands that agree on your facts or i can better say claims! Then you can truly can call yourself an expert!
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 6:36 pm
I did visit the Netherlands. I did visit with both anti and pro euthanasia doctors and lawyers, for example attorney Eugene Soturius who represented Dr. Chabot in the case in which he assisted the suicide of a grieving mother.
Gronningen Protocol is designed as a bureaucratic check list for committing infanticide by doctors who admit doing it. That is murder under Dutch law. Unenforced in this case. So you admit that is true. Lancet says 8% of all infants who die are killed by doctors. I assume you admit that is true.
What about termination without request or consent? True or false?
What about euthanizing the mentally ill who ask to be killed? True or false?
What about mobile euthanasia clinics about to roll if doctors say no? True or false?
What about doctors teaching non qualified patients how to commit suicide, sometimes called “autoeuthansia?,” which said practice was approved in the recent KNMG ehtical guidelines? True or false?
Once you respond to those next questions, we can go further.
Friso Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 8:23 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
You keep coming up bringing new claims into this discussion which i have to acknowledge or falsify, which is fine by me, but it would be nice if you sometimes also can explain to me why you think the facts in you´re original article are right because they are obviously not based on hard evidence. That was the reason i reacted on your article in the first place. My fellow Dutchmen already explained that the namecard ´Dont euthanize me´ claim is a fairytale for example and you know that claim is a very bold claim to make! But I applaud you for having visited the Netherlands, but i am also suprised that someone that took this effort still can have such a deluded image of the Dutch euthanasia system. When i read you´re articles on this website i get the feeling i live in nazi Germany!
And about the Lancet, thats 8% is true but fellow readers, please read the enquiry because mr Smith makes it sound like Dutch docters are killing babies at random here. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2897%2902315-5/abstract I think Holland´s biggest problem is we are very honest about these numbers. I doubt these figures are different in the US (but docter´s in your country will be less honest about these figures because it´s obvious they are treated as criminals if they want to end the life of an infant that is suffering and has no chance of survival).
But to answer your questions
What about termination without request or consent? In the case of infants that can happen as we discussed. In the case of adults it can happen but it´s not official policy so the docter can be prosecuted.
What about euthanizing the mentally ill who ask to be killed?
Is allowed, and for the record, we are not talking about mentally ill that can not express their will but people that have for example terrible longduring depressions. But as you can read in this article it seldom is allowed by docters (2 cases in 2008!). http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/euthanasia-still-taboo-mental-patients-even-netherlands
So maybe it´s not your intention, but you make it sound like we euthanize mentally ill people like they did in Nazi Germany over here. Please give some context to your readers for every claim about Dutch practices.
True or false?
What about mobile euthanasia clinics about to roll if doctors say no? True or false?
Their are plannes for that but that´s only a proposal from a pro euthanasia organisation , but again you seem on purpose want to evoke the scary Nazi past with your comment, please give some context to your readers. Docters are not obliged to euthanize a patient in the Netherlands, they can for example say no on principle. In that case the idea is patients have with mobile teams another way to judge their case. Dutch rules about euthanasia still applies, a independent docter and commision is required, etc etc.
What about doctors teaching non qualified patients how to commit suicide, sometimes called “autoeuthansia?,” which said practice was approved in the recent KNMG ehtical guidelines? True or false?
True
I don´t know exactly what point you´re trying to make by asking me all these kind of questions. It´s obvious that if you´re talking about docters killing people in the Netherlands, we will never going to agree on the subject of euthanasia. I totally respect people that are against it. But it saddens me that someone that even visited the Netherlands gives such a distorted picture about my country and for me it´s now clear were people like Santorum get their distorted information from.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Here’s my point. You claimed I didn’t know what I was talking about and now we see, from your own computer, that my article was entirely valid.
1. I wrote that Santorum was wrong about elderly people leaving the country for hospitalization. We agree, I assume.
2. I wrote that if you took into account all of the many ways in which Dutch doctors intentionally kill (make life end by direct action) patients, the 10% assertion is not that far off. I think I am right, but that is somewhat debatable.
3. I said Dutch doctors commit non voluntary euthanasia. You agree.
4. I said Dutch doctors teach patients how to commit suicide. You agree.
5. I said doctors commit infanticide. You agree
6. I said that the mentally ill are euthanized, and I never said against their will. You agree.
7. I said that there will soon be mobile euthanasia clinics. You agree.
8. I said that some people carry cards stating they don’t want to be euthanized. We still have some disagreement about that, although I think I showed it was true. Just for the edification of my readers, I have taken steps to obtain one and a translation. When I receive it, I will post what it states.
You said I should travel to the Netherlands to see for myself. I did.
So, all in all, I clearly do know what I am talking about. Moreover, your main objection now seems to be that you don’t like how I describe it. But I don’t sugar coat it with passive prose and hand wringing. I use entirely descriptive and accurate words. If you don’t like the way it sounds, perhaps that is because it is so wrong. I don’t expect to change Dutch minds. One of the great horrors in all of this for me is that so many of you think that what is happening is just fine. It is a real warning to the rest of the world. I hope to help others not follow the horrible Dutch example.
Finally, I don’t throw Nazis around. But since you brought it up, the first German infanticide–of Baby Knauer–actually sounds just like a Dutch infantide, if you take away the use of pejoratives to describe disabled babies. This is from my book, Forced Exit:
In late 1938, the opportunity arrived via a letter from the father of “Baby Knauer,” an infant born blind with a leg and part of an arm missing. The boy’s distraught parents, accepting the general value system of their time, were deeply ashamed to have brought a useless eater into the world. And, seeing the killing of their son as the solution to their problems, they wrote Hitler requesting permission to have their child “put to sleep.”
Hitler was quite interested in the case and sent one of his personal physicians, Karl Rudolph Brandt, to investigate. Brandt’s instructions from his Führer were to verify the facts of the baby’s condition and, if fount to be true, to assure the child’s doctors and his parents that if he was killed, no one would face punishment or liability. Brandt was then to witness the euthanasia and report back to Hitler. The doctors in the case who met with Brandt agreed that there was “no justification for keeping the child alive, and Baby Knauer soon became one of the first victims of the Holocaust.
The citea are: Burleigh, Death and Deliverance, pp. 95-96; Lifton, Nazi Doctors, pp. 50-51; Gallagher, By Trust Betrayed, pp. 95-96.
Friso Reply:
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:30 pm
@Wesley J. Smith,
I am sure we can agree on a lot of things mr Smith, as long as they are based on facts. And i keep coming back to your article which in no way is a good defence of Santorum´s argument altough you like readers to believe that (you still haven´t explained why you think the articles you are refering too are credible sources btw) . The end of your article is even saying ´Santorum’s minor factual errors´
This statement is i think the main problem in your article mr Smith. These are not minor factual errors. Santorum is portraying the Netherlands as a place were people are afraid to go the hospital were they are involuntary euthanized because of budget problems and you say he´s almost right except of some minor details? Even you with your anti euthanasia stance must admit that´s entirely not the case! How can you call that minor details? That´s just plain wrong because i refused to believe you are being dishonest in this case. It+s seems you really believe this. You´re talking about not sugarcoating things, but´s thats exactly what you´re doing with Santorum´s factual errors.
It´s a big difference if you live in a country were elderly people feel euthanasia is misused by the government-docters to kill you or you live in a country were euthanasia is perceived by the public as a human way to end suffering. Which ofcourse also has it´s problems, most Dutchmen don´t think it´s perfect, but on the whole we believe it´s better than the alternative we had before legalization.
10% number is not debatable in my opinion, but if you spin the numbers long enough and do some magic with them i am sure you will get your 10%. I don´t even were to start with your strange calculation! Are people dying of heart failure not legitimate dead in your statistics?
I can assure you the name card is also bogus. If that would be common practice, believe me, Dutch people would know! And don´t forget you´re defending Santorum with his ridiculous claim about bracelets, his argument was that people used them because they were affraid. We already ackknowledged i hope, people in the Netherlands are not affraid that they get involuntary euthanized.
Last outrageous claim from Santorum to make his fearmongering even worse, it´s because of budget problems that people get involuntary euthanized.
Oh, mr Smith, you call that minor details?
Last comment, it´s easy to make your claims about Dutch practices without giving any context. I am sure you will scare a lot of people with that. You´re smart man so you must know that if you refering to mobile euthanasia clinics that will give people the chills. That it in fact deals with docters giving a second opinion on euthanasia which is not really the same, i guess is not your responsibilty to explain. And i can go on with every issue you have with Dutch law and practises. I feel sorry for you that you can´t make your argument, while still giving your readers context about these issues. Because i am sure that a lot of them will think differently if they know the background. But i guess that´s not in your interest…
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 23rd, 2012 at 12:05 am
I did not notice where S said E in the Netherlands is about money. It is not. It would be here in USA, as Dr. Admiraal so correctly noted.
February 22nd, 2012 | 5:34 pm
I just love how people on here read the links you provide and then say:”well, two links don’t prove you’re right.” Even if all your links came from the prime ministers office of their country, they would still try to make you look like a charlatan. Being ideologically baked is a bad idea, guys.
February 22nd, 2012 | 6:47 pm
Perhaps this should be worked out on Wikipedia. There is a “Euthanasia in the Netherlands” article already began there and people will correct (hopefully) any incorrect data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia_in_the_Netherlands
One thing is for sure; the Nazi’s are winning without firing a shot. Here in The US of A we have quietly nearly eliminated people with the chracteristics of Down’s syndrome. This makes me wonder if ADHD is next.
February 22nd, 2012 | 9:43 pm
One thing is for sure; the Nazi’s are winning without firing a shot. Here in The US of A we have quietly nearly eliminated people with the chracteristics of Down’s syndrome. This makes me wonder if ADHD is next.
No, autism is next.
They are already working on it.
February 22nd, 2012 | 10:07 pm
Thank you Wesley!
February 23rd, 2012 | 3:24 pm
Thanks Pietje, Friso en Dhr. de Vreij for attempting to show the rest of the world that Dutch or a percentage of it are blatant liars.
I’ve also checked the 1991 Remmelink report based on events in the 80′s and those are very loosely connected on what Santorum said and vulnerable for interpretation.
But i think the man is now punished enough for stating the Dutch Euthnasia policy so loudly and it WILL hurt him in his elections.
Best Regards,
Youri
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 23rd, 2012 at 3:37 pm
Rotterdam:
Infanticide openly practiced in the Netherlands. True or False?
Non voluntary euthanasia, hundreds per year. True or False?
Euthanasia for mental illness: True or false?
Euthanasia coming for the elderly: True or False?
Doctors teaching patients how to commit suicide: True or false?
The Netherland is developing a pro suicide culture. No lie!
February 23rd, 2012 | 8:04 pm
You can have it the easy way or the hard way, but okay, I’ll give you your approach your way and we’ll see where we come
Infanticide openly practiced in the Netherlands. True or False?
True (You didnt ask in what cases, so I wont answer either)
Non voluntary euthanasia, hundreds per year. True or False? False, Everything besides voluntarily euthanasia is a crime in the Dutch law and in the case you call it it’s murder 1
Euthanasia for mental illness: True or false? False, any request for euthanasia is voluntary, involuntary euthanasia will be charged with a murder crime.
Euthanasia coming for the elderly: True or False?
Dont know, I can’t look in the future, but highly unlikely anyway.
Doctors teaching patients how to commit suicide: True or false?
False, the doctors are learned by nature on how to heal not how to kill.
So opinionating is fine by me, but please do not throw the facts like almost all inhabitants of the Netherlands are straight out killers.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 23rd, 2012 at 9:48 pm
They may call it murder, but they don’t enforce it as murder. IF there is a prosecution, there is usually a 2 week suspended sentence, and even then the KNMG has fits. The infanticide is murder too, yet open murderers publish the Groningen Protocol–for terminally ill and seriously disabled baby murders–and nothing is done. So much for the law and the “guidelines” in the Netherlands.
You again don’t know what you are talking about in your own country. The euthanasia of an elderly woman whose primary complaint was macular degeneration and fear of dependency was approved. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2012/02/22/euthanizing-the-elderly-with-macular-degeneration-in-the-netherlands/ Note the review committee said that medical conditions need not be “serious” for euthanasia.
Also, KNMG wants to include loneliness, financial issues and other non medical matters for euthanizing elderly. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2011/10/18/dutch-docs-to-expand-definition-of-suffering-for-euthanasia-to-include-loneliness-and-finances/
Doctors do teach patients how to commit suicide, as approved by KNMG. From one of my blog entries quoting the KNMG ethics report:
It is also worth noting that if a patient does not qualify for euthanasia, according to the KMNG position paper, a doctor may refer him/her to how-to-commit-suicide literature:
There is no punishment for physicians and other persons if they provide information about suicide. Physicians are also legally permitted to refer patients to information that is available on the Internet or to publications sold by book vendors, or provide these on loan, and to discuss this information with patients. (30, 31) In fact, it is the physician’s professional responsibility to engage the patient in discussion if the latter voices an intention to stockpile drugs with a view to using them to end his life. The physician can, but is not obligated to, refer the patient to available resources and experts, including spiritual care providers such as a pastor, minister or humanistic counsellor.
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2011/09/08/medical-conscience-all-dutch-doctors-must-be-complicit-in-euthanasia-killing/
Read this blog. You’ll learn what apparently your own media isn’t telling you. And I provide links to the sources.
February 23rd, 2012 | 8:08 pm
went wrong somewhere…..
Euthanasia for mental illness: True or false? False,
any request for euthanasia must been given in a good mental condition and a second opinion of another independent doctor is required.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 23rd, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Either you don’t know what is going on in your own country, or you redefined mental illness so you could say, “false.” In fact, the very mentally ill are euthanized, for example, deep depression. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2012/02/22/euthanizing-the-mentally-ill-in-the-netherlands/ The usual pro euthanasia sophistry. Shame!
February 24th, 2012 | 2:15 pm
Guys – why so upset – the Dutch are only marginally close to the US – you guys really have to catch up. In America over 45,000 deaths a year can be attributed to lack of health care. Now – this is really a good system because it allows you to kill off the poor rather than being worried about compassion and care for those who are in horrible pain. Better yet – health problems are the number 1 cause of bankruptcy in the US – and what does that leave you? Yes – being poor! No health care. You Dutch – mr. Rotterdam – really do need to learn a thing or two. Killing from greed – OK! Assisting someone in a decision of their own free will from compassion within a medically sound framework – now that is just so wrong.
February 25th, 2012 | 12:24 am
The right wing conservative movement in the United States makes the rest of the world laugh.
Rick says that elderly people are afraid to go to the hospital in the Netherlands and go abroad because they’re afraid they get euthanized in Holland. Hahahahaha! Do you really think that’s true? Please come up with some of these people saying that, because I’m not sure who they are.
If Rick’s going to be your president then I feel sad for you and pity your country.
I know what I’m talking about because I lived there for three years. I prefer not to come back. Not only because of the bad healthcare system.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 1:34 am
As I wrote, he was wrong about that but considering the cowardly way y’all treated Ayaan Hirsi Ali, you have zero to be smug about. Oh yes, and your doctors are allowed to kill babies in their cribs.
February 25th, 2012 | 4:04 am
People who vent this kind of nonsense always seem to follow the same pattern: state a ‘fact’, then afterwards grab any shred of ‘evidence’ that supports it (even if it is just a questionable opinion piece or an outdated report of more than 20 years old), and filtering out every fact that denies it. Such people with blocked minds can’t be helped and neither can the people who believe them, so why bother? I trust there are sufficient sensible voters in the US to keep mr Santorum out of office. This whole story should work against him.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact