Scores of depressed patients euthanised in Belgium

The following is a re-post of an article on MercatorNet by by Xavier Symons | 29 Aug 2015 |.  The article highlights the dangers inherent in any move to decriminalise New Zealand’s laws relating to Euthanasia.

A new study claims that vague terminology in Belgium’s assisted dying guidelines is allowing scores of psychiatric patients to be euthanized.

The worrying findings, published recently in the British Medical Journal Open, are based on a sample of 100 psychiatric patients in Belgium who requested euthanasia in the period 2007-2011.

Researchers found that most of the patients participating in the study had more than one diagnosed mental illness, with depression being the most common (59 patients) followed by split-personality disorder (50 patients).

Out of the 100 patients involved in the review, 48 had their euthanasia requests granted, and 35 carried it out. Among those remaining, 6 committed suicide, one died by palliative sedation, and one by anorexia.

The researchers are not disturbed by the thought of depressed patients being euthanized, but rather say the most pressing concern is to ensure individuals are compos mentis (of a sound mind):

[Read more…]

Assisted dying is the equivalent of a zero-hours contract with life

We have an aging population. Globally, the number of over-65’s will triple by 2050The following is a re-post of an article in the UK’s The Guardian and is by Giles Fraser first posted on 28th August 2015

Politicians may have inadvertently stumbled upon a radical new way to address spiralling NHS costs. It’s called assisted dying, and it’s back before the House of Commons again next month. Though, in fact, it’s not a new way at all. Euripides had the same idea 500 years before the birth of Christ: “I hate the men who would prolong their lives / By foods and drinks and charms of magic art / Perverting nature’s course to keep off death / They ought, when they no longer serve the land / To quit this life, and clear the way for youth.”

We have an aging population. Globally, the number of over-65s will triple by 2050. Currently there are four people of working age supporting each pensioner in Britain. By 2050 that dependency ratio will be two to one. As the number of elderly people rapidly expands, so a far greater burden of care will fall on the young. Taxes will rise to meet the demand of pensions and NHS costs. Conflicts over intergenerational fairness will intensify.

No politician will ever come out and say that those who “no longer serve the land” should choose suicide. No, assisted dying, its current proponents insist, must only ever be a personal choice in a very specific set of circumstances. But let us not pretend that this “personal choice” is unaffected by wider economic realities. For as a rapidly expanding elderly population makes increasing demands on healthcare, so the pressure to ration “expensive” treatments will grow – with what counts as expensive being continually recalculated downwards. And here the wider pressure – cultural, social, economic – will inevitably press towards a greater take-up of the suicide option. Yes, it will be a “personal choice”. But it will be a “personal choice” in the same way poorer people have a choice in supermarkets – a choice with few options.

[Read more…]

Health Select Committee Sets Terms of Reference for Petition Seeking the Killing of the Weak by the Strong

Right to Life welcomes the announcement by the Parliamentary Health Select Committee, of the terms of reference for its public consultation on the petition of the Hon Marion Street.

The petition reads; “That the House of Representatives investigate fully public attitudes towards the introduction of legislation which would permit medically-assisted dying in the event of a terminal illness or an irreversible condition which makes life unbearable.”

Now is the time to speak up in defence of the lives of the vulnerable in our community, the aged, the disabled and the seriously ill. We must banish from our land a culture of death which comes disguised as an angel of mercy and compassion. We must not deceived by alluring and beguiling language that disguises the murder of the innocent and defenceless by calling it medically-assisted dying. Right to Life asks the members of the Select Committee to be aware of the reality of what they are being asked to consider in this deceptive petition; nothing less than doctors being allowed to kill their patients or to assist their patients in killing themselves There is no place for this ethos in our community.

[Read more…]

David Seymour MP Shows His Inexperience and Lack of Social Judgment

David Seymour MP declared his intention in June 2015 to draft a bill that would allow doctors to kill their patients or assist in their suicide. This proposed bill is intrinsically evil, as it would promote a culture of death and undermine the common good. It is disappointing that this new MP who has excellent qualifications and the potential to make a major contribution to Parliament and to our nation should for the most worthy of intentions become an advocate for legislation that will change the way we treat the disabled, the elderly and the seriously ill. In so doing he shows he has a total lack of understanding of the importance of preserving our laws which protect human life and the dangers that would ensue if those laws are tampered with.

Right to Life makes no apology for opposing this proposed bill which though couched in terms of compassion is actually a very real evil and is a threat to the lives of every New Zealander, especially the lives of the vulnerable members of our community.

Benjamin Franklin, the famous American statesman said that the care of the life and happiness of citizens was the first and only duty of good government and not to preside over their destruction. It is a non negotiable principle that those who are elected to govern pursue and faithfully uphold the common good. Parliament has no authority to consider and debate legislation that allows the strong to kill the weak. A right to die would quickly become a duty to die.

[Read more…]

“Shut Up, Bigot!”: The Intolerance of Tolerance

We can reject beliefs without rejecting people.

The following article is a re-post from the MercatorNet.com website and is by Ben R. Crenshaw published on  Aug 20 2015

America is in the midst of a raging national debate on issues surrounding sexuality and gender. If you dare to suggest that gender is determined by sex and is immutable, that same-sex sex acts are immoral, or that marriage is a permanent, exclusive union of husband and wife, then you will be called an intolerant bigot, hater, and homophobe.

Where does the charge of bigotry come from? Is it just a passing fad, a political and social tool for power and control, or do its roots go deeper?

Bigotry is defined as “intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.” Notice that bigotry is not intolerance toward the opinions or beliefs of persons other than yourself, but intolerance of the other person. Bigotry is not simply disagreeing with what someone else believes; it is an unwillingness to tolerate or accept the person who holds those beliefs.

A little reflection on this definition will reveal that the vast majority of bigotry accusations populating the internet and in public discourse are not legitimate ones. On the contrary, they are the consequence of a mistaken view of tolerance that is itself a product of a warped postmodern epistemology.

[Read more…]

The Cost to Those Who Dare Defend Human Rights – Justice Denied

justice Media Release August 20th 2015

Justice Denied

Right to Life  believes that the community should be aware that there is a price to pay for defending human rights. Right to Life has recently forwarded the sum of $72,500.43 to the Crown Law office in full and final settlement of court costs awarded by the Supreme Court for previous hearings in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

We find it difficult to understand that although no costs (or any other payment) was sought in the Waihopai case, where very much greater sums were in issue. The Crown at the bequest of the Abortion Supervisory Committee, has now decided to pursue costs. Right to Life believes this was a case in which there was significant public interest and it is clear from the Supreme Court’s judgment that our action brought needed clarity into the law. The message is that if you dare to seek  justice for the unborn then be prepared to face the full force of the State.

It should not have been necessary for Right to Life, with the generous financial support of its members, to have to proceed to the Courts to plead for justice for our unborn with legal recognition of the unborn child as a human being endowed with an inalienable right to life.  It was a great injustice to witness the learned Crown counsel, who should have been advocates for the unborn, eloquently make their case in the Courts that the unborn child was not a human being until it was born. This denial of rights is a legal fiction that has allowed the war on women and the murder of the unborn to continue unabated for decades.  How long is our nation going to remain silent in the face of this monumental injustice? When is the government going to recognise the unborn as members of our community and provide legal protection for their right to life?

[Read more…]

Amnesty International Proclaims ‘Men Buying Sex is a Human Right’

 amnestMedia Release Tuesday August 11th

Amnesty International Proclaims Prostitution a Human Right and Supports Men Buying Sex as a Human Right.

Right to Life is disconcerted that Amnesty International, supports as a human right, the right of women and men to engage in prostitution and pornography. This new policy which was influenced by the multi-billion dollar commercial sex industry  promotes prostitution as being a right to choose.  To choose what though? By Amnesty’s definition sex work means that sex workers who are engaging in commercial sex,  have consented to do so.  Simply nonsense. This definition fails to take into account the dire economic need, the childhood sexual abuse, the brutal coercion employed by pimps, the drug and alcohol addiction of vulnerable and wounded women that is exploited by the sex industry.

Shame on Amnesty International for refusing to protect the human rights of these women. Our community will never ever forget your callous betrayal of the most vulnerable women in our community.

This despicable policy was adopted by 500 delegates from 80 countries at the Conference in Dublin this week. The discussion document infers that criminalizing a prostitute’s client is an attack against both privacy and an individual’s free choice. This document also states that the access to prostituted women is a fundamental human right. This policy of Amnesty International means that under the guise of protecting human rights it would actually be actively lobbying worldwide against the human rights of women, by seeking the decriminalisation of prostitution and acceptance of pornography.

Prostitution and pornography are violence against women and a violation of their human rights, it is a form of slavery.

[Read more…]

Complaint to Health & Disability Commissioner Against ASC

http://i0.wp.com/abortionwiki.org/images/thumb/0/0b/Dame_Linda_Holloway.png/180px-Dame_Linda_Holloway.png?resize=314%2C415

Dame Linda Holloway, Chairperson Abortion Supervisory Committee

Right to Life has made a complaint to the Health and Disability Commissioner against the  Abortion Supervisory Committee (ASC) alleging that the Committee is not acting in the best interest of women by withholding vital information from them. Have we forgotten the Cartwright Enquiry and its finding that women were not treated with respect? Right to Life alleges that the ASC is in breach of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers Rights that are included in the Health and Disability Act 2000. Right six states; You have a right to an explanation of your options and to be fully informed. Right seven states; You have a right to give an informed consent.

The Abortion Supervisory Committee [ASC] has decided to withhold information from women that could save the life of their unborn child. The drug Utrogestan if taken within two days of taking Mifepristone RU 486 for a medical abortion and prior to taking the prostaglandin Misoprostol has a 59 per cent chance of saving the life of the unborn child. At present women are told that once they have taken the Mifepristone, the abortion has commenced and they cannot stop the abortion. This is simply not true.

[Read more…]

Pro-Life Advocate Garth George

Right to Life would like to pay tribute to journalist Garth George who died at Rotorua Hospital on Sunday July 27, 2015, after a long battle with cancer aged 75 years. Garth had a career in journalism spanning some five decades.  In his last years he was an opinion piece editor at the New Zealand Herald and at the Rotorua Daily Post.

Garth George held strong Christian beliefs and was a strong advocate for the rights of the underdog, particularly the unborn. He stood up against the prevailing current of opinion that regards our precious unborn as not meriting basic human rights including the right to life.. He stood firmly against the tide of liberalism that has been so damaging to New Zealand society and wrote on the dangers of Same Sex Marriage. He supported  the traditional family and criticised the way in which feminism has been captured by liberal elements which have perverted it’s original aims.

Right to Life honours him as a tireless worker for the cause of the weak and those who can not fight for themselves.

Rest in Peace Garth.

CEDAW Convention Articles Being Abused to Promote Abortion as a Human Right

Mrs Amy Adams,

Minister of Justice,

Dear Mrs Adams

Convention for the Elimination of All Discrimination against Women

Thank you for your letter of 28 May 2015. You advise that the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion supported the right of a woman or girl under the age of 16 to terminate the life of her child in the womb without the knowledge or consent of parents or guardian. We were aware of this unfortunate recommendation. You also state that Commission’s conclusions are also supported by Articles 12 and 16 [1][e] of the United Nations CEDAW Convention.  Right to Life  totally supports this important Convention that was adopted by the General Assembly by resolution 34/180 of 18 December 1979, it was signed by New Zealand on 17 July 1980.

Right to Life is concerned that you are using the Convention to oppose parental notification.

When the General Assembly adopted the Convention it was not its intention to include the killing of the unborn child as part of family planning, nor was it the intention of the New Zealand government when it approved the Convention.

[Read more…]