The doctor drugged the patient’s coffee before administering a lethal injection
The following is a re-post from the National Right to Life and is by by Wesley J. Smith a a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism.
Euthanasia advocates tout medicalized killing as being about autonomy.
But it eventually becomes about making sure certain categories of people become dead. Thus, in the Netherlands, some patients have been euthanized who have never asked for it, a killing procedure known as “termination without request or consent.”
Here’s another case in point. A woman signed an advance directive to be killed “at the right time” due to Alzheimer’s. But when the decision to kill her was made, she fought the lethal jab, so the death doctor had the family hold the struggling woman down so she could finish the homicide.
Despite this blatant imposing of death, the doctor was cleared of wrongdoing by euthanasia authorities. From The Telegraph story:
A Dutch woman doctor who asked an elderly patient’s family to hold her down while she administered a fatal drug dose has been cleared under Holland’s euthanasia laws. Mailonline reported that the patient fought desperately in an attempt not to be killed. Jacob Kohnstamm, chairman of the Regional Review Committee, which considered the case, said: “I am convinced that the doctor acted in good faith, and we would like to see more clarity on how such cases are handled in the future.”
Other “such cases?” For the Dutch, “good faith” justifies all manner of evil.
W. J. Smith has published hundreds of articles and opinion columns on issues such as the importance of being human (human exceptionalism), assisted suicide, bioethics, the morality of human cloning, the dangers of the animal-rights movement, anti-humanism within radical environmentalist advocacy, legal ethics, medical ethics, and public affairs. His writing has appeared nationally and internationally in Newsweek, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Forbes, the Weekly Standard, National Review, The Age (Australia), The Telegraph (United Kingdom), Western Journal of Medicine, and the American Journal of Bioethics. He has also been published in regional publications throughout the U.S. and internationally in newspapers in the U.K., Italy, Australia, and Canada.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/author/wesley-j-smithhttp://www.nationalreview.com/author/wesley-j-smith
– Wesley Smith is again making blunt remarks about an issue he is just simply ‘against’,
– the core of the Dutch law is NOT autonomy, but charity
– termination of life (by a doctor) without request is NOT euthanasia, it is as criminal in NL as in other countries, where it also happens
– the doctor is NOT cleared: he is reported to the authorities as having performed the euthanasia NOT in accordance with the due care criteria
– the patient did NOT “fight desperately” but reacted by retracting her arm when it was hold for the injection
– President Jacob Kohnstamm of the Review Committees indeed did not presupposed ill intent, but still wants the court to assess the case; no justification by “good faith”
Thank you for your comments Dr Jonquiere.
At the outset whenever a doctor or any other person gives a lethal injection to another person it is homicide and a violation of the victims human rights. It is never right to kill another person. You suggest that the core of the Dutch euthanasia law is not autonomy but charity. This is a frightening concept because when considering it confers on a doctor motivated by charity the right to kill a patient with dementia or Alzheimer’s at a time that he or she considers that this a charitable or compassionate course of action to take.
Due to the mental state of the patient the patient is unable to give consent to his being killed. In effect the patient is at the mercy of the doctor who is empowered to kill the patient when he or she considers it appropriate.
In the case in question the doctor apparently ignored the written wish of the patient that she would decide when she wished to be killed. There is no record of any attempt being made by the doctor to seek the current wishes of the patient. The doctor was devious in attempting to drug the patient by placing medication in her coffee.
In my opinion the doctor acted in bad faith by proceeding to have the patient held down by family members while she proceeded to give the patient a lethal injection.
I am aware that the Review Committee believed that the doctor acted in good faith and feigning concern have referred the case to the Courts for approval. Since 2002 when the Dutch Parliament passed the euthanasia legislation I am not aware of even one doctor being censured for bad faith.
The cost to the nation of caring for patients in a dementia unit is very high. With an increasingly elderly population with an increase in dementia, I fear that it will become acceptable in the Dutch community to ration health care by disposing of the elderly with dementia who will be seen as having completed their lives and are now a disposable burden on the community. The right to die will then be a duty to die.
Like the Nazi T4 euthanasia programme it all started with small beginnings. I hope and pray that Holland will stop this insanity before it is too late.
Right to Life Admin
So much for ‘informed consent’ in this context- or any consent whatsoever, it would seem!