Slippery Slope Gets Even More Slippery...

An elderly woman was euthanized within hours of her husband claiming she changed her mind after insisting she wanted to live. 

Canada's Medical Assistance in Dying laws allow patients to request a painless death if an assessor agrees their terminal condition meets certain requirements. 

Patients often wait weeks, but it can happen the same day the application is lodged if judged to be medically urgent by a MAiD provider.

Yet another time when what those pushing a proposal say will never happen happens...

'Many members brought forward concerns of possible external coercion arising from the caregiver's experience of burnout and lack of access to palliative care in an in-patient or hospice setting,' the report noted. Members were also concerned that Mrs B's spouse was the main person advocating and navigating access to MAiD, and there was little documentation that she actually asked for it herself.

In a just world, cases like these would bring to a screeching halt any other such schemes being pushed around the world. But ithey won't, will they, Reader?  

This Slope Is Getting Awfully Slippery...

Parents in the Netherlands can now euthanise their terminally ill children aged 12 and under plans to widen the countries existing end of life laws.

Good grief! 

The rules would apply to an estimated five to 10 children per year, who suffer unbearably from their disease, have no hope of improvement and for whom palliative care cannot bring relief, the government have said.

'The end of life for this group is the only reasonable alternative to the child's unbearable and hopeless suffering,' the government said in a statement.

Well, no doubt it'll be strictly regulated and only the most severe and hopeless cases wi... 

It comes nearly four years after 17-year-old Noa Pothoven was legally allowed to die at home after medics allowed her to refuse food and drink.

The Dutch teen from Arnhem felt that life had become unbearable and she could no longer carry on after she was attacked and sexually assaulted on three separate occasions, beginning when she was just 11 years old.

Oh. 

But There Will Be All These Checks And Balances, They Promised...

Three doctors who certified a woman as autistic so that she could die by euthanasia are set to go on trial in Belgium.

The sisters of Tine Nys told investigators that her suffering was caused instead by a broken heart after a failed relationship, and that she had falsely claimed to be autistic to two doctors and a psychiatrist.

She had told them her suffering was 'unbearable and incurable' so that she could qualify for euthanasia under Belgian law.

There seems to be a fair few cases like this coming to light now.

But those of us who warned of the potential consequences and pitfalls were pooh-poohed as always.

"Slippery Slope? Don't Be Silly..."

The guidelines say consultants or GPs should be allowed to remove tubes giving food and water to those who cannot feed themselves – even if they could otherwise live for years.

The British Medical Association proposals mean patients who could otherwise have survived for years may have their lives ended by the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration tubes.

Gosh! Who could have predicted this? Apart from, or course, anyone who'd seen similar mission creep.

Last month, Supreme Court justices endorsed the right of doctors to remove 'clinically-assisted artificial nutrition and hydration' on their own authority with the agreement of a patient's family.

Note that. It'll become important later.

The draft proposals being circulated by the BMA say doctors should be able to end the lives not only of patients close to death or in deep comas – in vegetative or minimally conscious states – but of those suffering from much more common degenerative conditions, including advanced dementia.

"Hey, look, while we're here..."

Decisions on removing nutrition and hydration tubes should be taken by consultants for hospital patients, or GPs for those in nursing or residential homes or living in their own homes.

However, families or friends should be consulted, usually through 'best interests meetings' set up to decide whether it would be better for a patient to live or die.

 Note that 'consultation' there. It's not 'with the agreement of the patient's family', is it?

Dr Peter Saunders, of the group Care Not Killing, said: 'This is a recipe for euthanasia by stealth, but all in the name of autonomy and best interests – the very worst kind of doctor paternalism justified on the grounds that the patient would have wanted it.

'There are conceivably tens of thousands of patients in England and Wales who are vulnerable to the use and abuse of this guidance.

'It will be almost impossible to work out what has happened in a given case and there are no legal mechanisms in place for bringing abusers to justice.'

Well, quite! There seem to be no mechanism for bringing to justice the criminal doctors, after all....

Because Islam Isn't The Only Death Cult...

‘His end was so peaceful,’ recalls his daughter Bregje, 37, a writer. ‘Once my father had decided on euthanasia, he was relieved. He was looking forward to the date he would die. In the last few days he was able to say goodbye to his family, his friends, to talk about old times.’

Andre was not a campaigner or activist for mercy killings. But he knew that, in his home country, he could seize the option which the law gave him and choose to die if he wished.

Hurrah! Right?

If campaigners have their way, the law will be changed here, too, to allow those who wish to end their life to do so at a time of their choosing. For opponents of euthanasia, this raises grave moral questions, as well as concerns that unscrupulous relatives might take advantage of elderly family members — whose estates they might covet — by encouraging them to end their lives.

Oh, pft! These people are just standing in the way of choice!

Even physically healthy people suffering from depression have been killed by doctors under Holland’s right-to-die laws.

And a 54-year-old woman with personality and eating disorders is reported to have received lethal injections at a ‘Life End’ clinic in Amsterdam. Indeed, according to Holland’s health minister, several right-to-die deaths have involved psychiatric patients.

Hmmm...

Shockingly, in Holland I also spoke to the family of a 47-year-old woman with tinnitus, a persistent ringing in the ears, who ended her life last March with the help of an ‘Life End’ clinic.

Gaby Olthuis, a divorcee, was a brilliant clarinet player, but said she suffered ‘24-hour noise’ in her head, ‘like a train screeching or someone scratching their nails on a chalk board’. She explained: ‘I look healthy from the outside, but inside I am being tortured.’

To end her suffering, she was given a lethal potion to drink by one of the clinic’s doctors at her home. Shockingly, she left behind two teenagers, a boy of 13 and girl of 15.

OK, still keen on euthanasia?

Because I was in favour. Who can argue with allowing this for people like Andre? But in today's climate of selfish insistence on 'rights' and disregard of responsibilities, can we really prevent people like Gaby from taking up the option?

And remember - the people cheering this would be the first to screech 'hate speech!' if you suggested mentally-ill killers be put down like mad dogs....