Euthanizing children

[tim_duncan2000]

The Groningen Protocol, as the hospital's guidelines have come to be known, would create a legal framework for permitting doctors to actively end the life of newborns deemed to be in similar pain from incurable disease or extreme deformities.

The guideline says euthanasia is acceptable when the child's medical team and independent doctors agree the pain cannot be eased and there is no prospect for improvement, and when parents think it's best.

Examples include extremely premature births, where children suffer brain damage from bleeding and convulsions; and diseases where a child could only survive on life support for the rest of its life, such as severe cases of spina bifida and epidermosis bullosa, a rare blistering illness.

The hospital revealed last month it carried out four such mercy killings in 2003, and reported all cases to government prosecutors. There have been no legal proceedings against the hospital or the doctors.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...30/ap_on_re_eu/netherlands_child_euthanasia_3

Who are they to decide whether a child lives or dies? How do they decide which medical conditions are bad enough?

I don't think this crap should ever be allowed. I often don't like slippery slope arguments because they are often fallacies, but where would it end? Would they do this to children with various disabilities (blindness, Down's syndrome, etc)? I just don't see how anyone can justify this.

 

[dmp]

Who are they to decide whether a child lives or dies? How do they decide which medical conditions are bad enough?

I don't think this crap should ever be allowed. I often don't like slippery slope arguments because they are often fallacies, but where would it end? Would they do this to children with various disabilities (blindness, Down's syndrome, etc)? I just don't see how anyone can justify this.

hmm...if Mothers can decide, w/o consent of the father, to kill their fetus, this type of thing shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

[manu1959]

there are babies born with their brains outside their head....

the question in this case, if this was allowed would be:

a. let them die
b. help the die with less pain
c. do everything possible to try and save them (these babies always die)

 

[Mr. P]

Years ago, I never saw the rational in a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order either...
I thought it appalling, until I learned more about the reasons for it. Once I understood all involved it made total sense.

I think this will too....

 

[tim_duncan2000]

It gets worse:

As the Dutch experience demonstrates, euthanasia does not remain limited to competent, terminally ill adults who choose to end their own lives. Furthermore, guidelines have proven to be no protection for Holland’s disabled, depressed or elderly citizens. In fact, involuntary euthanasia has become so prevalent that many Dutch citizens carry “Life Passports,” cards that state they do not want so-called “physician aid-in-dying” if they are hospitalized.

You would think that, if anything, you would have to have a "life passport" telling them that you do want "physician aid-in-dying". But it sounds like under their system, they assume you want to die unless told otherwise, which makes no sense. They should start with the assumption that the person wants to live. That way, if they are wrong, they can correct it. On the other hand, if they are wrong under the system in place and the person dies, there is no way to correct it because it will be too late.

People need to think about that when they say that they will have rules and regulations and that will stop this.