Has Belgium gone mad?

homer911

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/council.of.europe.says.no.to.belgian.child.euthanasia.law/35750.htm

How can a child be judged capable of making a decision like this?

Manach

Offhand and playing devil's advocate, it would be that children in such cases have a greater maturity, and as per similar rules that are present in common law countries, then they can consent to the same mode of procedures as an adult which have the right to undergo euthanasia. Failure to facilitate would be, from what I've read, be a de facto breach of their rights.

homer911

I would see this as very much "opening the flood gates" in terms of child "empowerment" and all its consequences. If a child is mature enough for them to decide to be euthanised/commit suicide with the full knowledge and consent of the state, is a child say mature enough to have sex? At what age? if so, then there is no protection for them in law from paedophiles. Wasn't Belgium the location for some mass child abductor/abuser a few years ago?

Many Christian churches recognise that children need to reach an age of discernment before being held responsible for their sins.

Rough Sleeper

homer911 wrote: »

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/council.of.europe.says.no.to.belgian.child.euthanasia.law/35750.htm

How can a child be judged capable of making a decision like this?

Through assessment by a psychologist or medical practitioner, as you'd know if you'd read a factual article rather than an an opinion piece on the subject. Parental request must also be acquired, so I'd imagine any child who is approved for this must be living a torturous existence.

El_Duderino 09

homer911 wrote: »

I would see this as very much "opening the flood gates" in terms of child "empowerment" and all its consequences. If a child is mature enough for them to decide to be euthanised/commit suicide with the full knowledge and consent of the state, is a child say mature enough to have sex? At what age? if so, then there is no protection for them in law from paedophiles. Wasn't Belgium the location for some mass child abductor/abuser a few years ago?

Many Christian churches recognise that children need to reach an age of discernment before being held responsible for their sins.

If the child is Christian and takes their religion seriously then they probably wouldn't do it anyway.

How did you go from Euthanasia in the case of a terminally ill child to pedophilia? Couldn't they just bring in this law without an accompanying law removing the prohibition on sexual predation from the books? It strikes me they will just leave the current laws on pedophilia alone. Wouldn't you agree?

Ivaniayo

I am wondering how they square the issue that although a child is deemed not old enough to consent to any sexual relations, they are deemed old enough to consent to their own killing ?

I don't care if the odds are a million to one against me, I am the type of person who will fight to the end, no matter what the odds against me.
Pain killers were invented for a reason.

What a mad world we live in, where lies have become the truth and the truth is deemed lies.

flemishgael

As a Belgian I agree that Belgium has gone mad. We've gone so liberal and politically correct that you can't even say out loud anymore that euthanasia isn't a solution. There are cases when it is but by now it has become an easy way out. In my opinion euthanasia should only be allowed for terminal patients that are beyond any help, safe and sound of mind and are making a well thought out decision. They also need to be adults in my opinion. How can a child make that decision?

flemishgael

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If the child is Christian and takes their religion seriously then they probably wouldn't do it anyway.

How did you go from Euthanasia in the case of a terminally ill child to pedophilia? Couldn't they just bring in this law without an accompanying law removing the prohibition on sexual predation from the books? It strikes me they will just leave the current laws on pedophilia alone. Wouldn't you agree?

Christianity has become a minority religion in Belgium.
Most people still enter Catholic when asked about their religion but church attendance has dropped dramatically. Most people now see catholicism as their ethnicity, not as their religion.

Rough Sleeper

Ivaniayo wrote: »

I am wondering how they square the issue that although a child is deemed not old enough to consent to any sexual relations, they are deemed old enough to consent to their own killing ?

The child's permission alone is not enough for euthanasia to be authorised; as has been said already, a qualified professional must first assess the child, and the parents must also give their approval. The child's consent basically amounts to them saying the are suffering so badly that they cannot take it any more. Which I think, personally, is a call anyone can make if they know death is impending in any case. The law states that a child must have to be facing "unbearable physical suffering" and make repeated requests to die - no passing fancy of youth, by the sounds of it.

It's also worth bearing in mind that "child" in this case refers to anyone under the age of 18. While teenagers may be children in the eyes of the law, they are not children in any practical sense of the term. My hunch tells me that if this law is applied, it will be mostly if not exclusively to people nearer to the age of majority.

I don't care if the odds are a million to one against me, I am the type of person who will fight to the end, no matter what the odds against me.
Pain killers were invented for a reason.

"I" being the operative word here. If you lived in Belgium, no one would force you to die if it wasn't your will. It's still the patient's call (as well as the qualified professional's and the parents').

Painkillers tend to be good at their purpose but they are not perfect. My aunty as a palliative consultant in a hospice and she still gets cases where, despite the staff's best efforts, there is nothing that can be done to stop the suffering. CJD was notorious for it IIRC, but it can happen in other cases. The patient lives out their days in a hell on earth and, after 30 year on the job, she still finds it very distressing.

I know part of some Christian's objection to assisted suicide is the idea that God has a plan for us all and it's not up to us to prevent these plans from reaching fruition. But it's pretty hard to see how lying in a bed so doped up on opiates that you don't know what's going on can influence the world in any particularly positive way.

Manach

From what I recall on the concept of medical evidence by a Prof. McKeown,
the practice of euthansia once it becomes common, undermines the care-giving ethos of the instituation/profession. So where for instance the involutivity of life principle held sway (as opposed to say vitalism), then there would be change to include euthansia as an alternative, ie saying that the patient's qualify of life is what matters most and not the inherent dignity in all life. As well, given the expenses of end of life care, this could be an underlying push factor.

spank_inferno

As said, a devout Christian child if terminally ill would probably not avail of the option anyway.

Morbert

I think this is the kind of scenario that has a grotesque outcome regardless of your principles.

A doctor administering lethal "medicine" to deliberately kill a child is grotesque, but so is maintaining the physical and mental agony of the child until their inevitable death.

El_Duderino 09

Ivaniayo wrote: »

I am wondering how they square the issue that although a child is deemed not old enough to consent to any sexual relations, they are deemed old enough to consent to their own killing ?

I don't care if the odds are a million to one against me, I am the type of person who will fight to the end, no matter what the odds against me.
Pain killers were invented for a reason.

What a mad world we live in, where lies have become the truth and the truth is deemed lies.

I'm not sure you understand the new law. It's not mandatory killing of terminally ill children. You would still be encouraged to fight to the end as is in keeping with the type of person you are.

If you employ your powers of empathy you might see that this gives choice to those who are less inclined to bet on the one in a million chance of painful recovery and accept the 999,999:1 chance of painful death. This law enables them to choose to face death on their own terms.

You would be free to do exactly what you were going to do anyway. It gives choice to the rest.

Maybe I'm missing you're point but it seems to me that you would not be affected at all by this law

robp

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand the new law. It's not mandatory killing of terminally ill children. You would still be encouraged to fight to the end as is in keeping with the type of person you are.

If you employ your powers of empathy you might see that this gives choice to those who are less inclined to bet on the one in a million chance of painful recovery and accept the 999,999:1 chance of painful death. This law enables them to choose to face death on their own terms.

You would be free to do exactly what you were going to do anyway. It gives choice to the rest.

Maybe I'm missing you're point but it seems to me that you would not be affected at all by this law

I see this position expressed quite often and it betrays ignorance of how far down the road euthanasia has reached in parts of continental Europe. Involuntary euthanasia of children although (is not formally legalised) is tolerated in the Netherlands via the Groningen Protocol. Amongst adults in Belgium there is evidence that a major portion of those who are euthanasia are never given a choice. This is not slippery slope fear mongering. We have figures about this.

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

Through assessment by a psychologist or medical practitioner, as you'd know if you'd read a factual article rather than an an opinion piece on the subject. Parental request must also be acquired, so I'd imagine any child who is approved for this must be living a torturous existence.

The same could be said of the all the teenagers who kill themselves every year in Ireland. Its still grossly wrong. If you want to die, by definition you are mentally ill and your sense of judgement is undermined. There is no such thing as a Dignitas patient who is not depressed. Indeed Dignitas would see the availability of euthanasia for healthy people as one of its goals.

El_Duderino 09

robp wrote: »

I see this position expressed quite often and it betrays ignorance of how far down the road euthanasia has reached in parts of continental Europe. Involuntary euthanasia of children although (is not formally legalised) is tolerated in the Netherlands via the Groningen Protocol. Amongst adults in Belgium there is evidence that a major portion of those who are euthanasia are never given a choice. This is not slippery slope fear mongering. We have figures about this.



The same could be said of the all the teenagers who kill themselves every year in Ireland. Its still grossly wrong. If you want to die, by definition you are mentally ill and your sense of judgement is undermined. There is no such thing as a Dignitas patient who is not depressed. Indeed Dignitas would see euthanasia for healthy people as one of its goals.

To be fair I don't have much experience with the Dutch system.

Whey you say above that "we have figures" about how the law is used/abused. Who is 'we' and what do the figures say?

robp

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

To be fair I don't have much experience with the Dutch system.

Whey you say above that "we have figures" about how the law is used/abused. Who is 'we' and what do the figures say?

When I say we I refer to the public domain. Any info in the public domain. The figures give numbers effected. Around 22 children in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2005 via the Groningen Protocol. A 1990 study revealed that in 0.8% of all deaths, more than 1000 cases in the Netherlands each year, physicians admitted they had actively caused death without the explicit consent of the patient.

An illustration given by the attorney for the Dutch Voluntary Euthanasia Society of why it was often necessary for physicians to end the lives of competent patients without their consent, was the case of a nun whose physician ended her life a few days before she would have died because she was in excruciating pain but her religious convictions did not permit her to ask for death

catallus

To say they have "gone mad" is emotional language.

They are simply shoring up the logical end-theory of the legalisation of suicide.

Without any moral guidance, the elites in that country are doing what people do best; take the easy way out and just legalise state-sponsored killing for those poor souls who have capitulated to despair and to hell with the consequences; the benefits obviously outweigh other considerations; the elderly in any country must cost billions, if not trillions a year to maintain, what with pensions and care-homes; voluntary death for those who can still communicate and compulsory killing for those who cannot. It becomes slightly iffy with children, but then, again without moral guidance, it is easy to accept that death is an option.

El_Duderino 09

robp wrote: »

When I say we I refer to the public domain. Any info in the public domain. The figures give numbers effected. Around 22 children in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2005 via the Groningen Protocol. A 1990 study revealed that in 0.8% of all deaths, more than 1000 cases in the Netherlands each year, physicians admitted they had actively caused death without the explicit consent of the patient.

Yeah the 22 figure is a bit without context. 22 in 8 years is less than 3 per year. Doesn't sound like a programme out of control to me. But like I say it's without context. How many applied to use the programme in that space of time? Or are there issues of consent in those cases?

The use of morphine would surely constitute aiding death in patients. It's already done to help people on their way now but the primary purpose is to control pain so we don't tend to acknowledge the secondary effect of speeding death.

Is that what the 0.8% were admitting to? Or was it more sinister than that?

robp

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah the 22 figure is a bit without context. 22 in 8 years is less than 3 per year. Doesn't sound like a programme out of control to me. But like I say it's without context. How many applied to use the programme in that space of time? Or are there issues of consent in those cases?

The use of morphine would surely constitute aiding death in patients. It's already done to help people on their way now but the primary purpose is to control pain so we don't tend to acknowledge the secondary effect of speeding death.

Is that what the 0.8% were admitting to? Or was it more sinister than that?

Well personally I don't see how something's frequency relates to its morality. Rape does not become more evil if it is becomes more widespread. The proliferation of late abortions eliminates most undesirable children before their born. Most cases of this post birth abortion are younger infants with major disabilities but not necessarily terminally ill. Many would live long lives otherwise. I have no information how this is arranged.

The 0.8% figure relates to all deaths in the Netherlands, so its quite different statistics to the 22 cases. Yes approximately 1% of all deaths in the Netherlands are involuntary euthanasia. This is absolutely illegal but seems to go on without prosecution.

El_Duderino 09

robp wrote: »

Well personally I don't see how something's frequency relates to its morality. Rape does not become more evil if it is becomes more widespread. The proliferation of late abortions eliminates most undesirable children before their born. Most cases of this post birth abortion are younger infants with major disabilities but not necessarily terminally ill. Many would live long lives otherwise. I have no information how this is arranged.

The 0.8% figure relates to all deaths in the Netherlands, so its quite different statistics to the 22 cases. Yes approximately 1% of all deaths in the Netherlands are involuntary euthanasia. This is absolutely illegal but seems to go on without prosecution.

The question I'm asking about the 0.8% was whether it related to the way we use morphine for it's double effect. We are decidedly dishonest in ignoring the fact that it hastens death in this country. I wonder if they are more honest about it's effect there and is that what they are referring to?

I take your point about not being worse due to frequency so I'm confused. If you disagree with it in principal regardless of it's implementation then why quote the frequency? If euthanasia is happening illegally in Holland, what has that got to do with a law which would regulate the practice properly in Belgium?

Linking euthanasia to abortion is nonsense.

robp

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The question I'm asking about the 0.8% was whether it related to the way we use morphine for it's double effect. We are decidedly dishonest in ignoring the fact that it hastens death in this country. I wonder if they are more honest about it's effect there and is that what they are referring to?

Its a question of intention. I have no doubt some assisted suicide occurs in this country but I would argue is far rarer here due to it being a taboo. If you know any doctors who used morphine to intentionally end life you are morally compelled to report it.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I take your point about not being worse due to frequency so I'm confused. If you disagree with it in principal regardless of it's implementation then why quote the frequency?

Only by seeing the numbers can we know that it actually happens. Presenting the figures also cuts through the false exceptional cases argument.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Linking euthanasia to abortion is nonsense.

Late abortion allows disabled babies to be weeded out. Post birth abortion allows further undesirable children to be removed. In many countries most disabled/problem babies are routinely aborted (Down syndrome, spina bifada, being a girl). Even pro choice people acknowledge this.

lazybones32

homer911 wrote: »

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/council.of.europe.says.no.to.belgian.child.euthanasia.law/35750.htm

How can a child be judged capable of making a decision like this?

Taken from a purely objective viewpoint, it may seem like a good thing but the reality differs.
The British Medical Journal printed a paper a few years ago stating that half of the Belgian Nurses involved in Euthanasia, admitted to administering the lethal dosage without express consent from the patient. I can't remember if the patients were assessed and since I left College, I have no access to such databanks.
I don't consider it to be a process that will increase child suicide (very similar in essence) but the legal precedent is a troubling development.

MrPudding

robp wrote: »

Its a question of intention. I have no doubt some assisted suicide occurs in this country but I would argue is far rarer here due to it being a taboo. If you know any doctors who used morphine to intentionally end life you are morally compelled to report it.

Morally compelled to report a crime?

Mod - snipped. Take it to the relevant megathread.