Letter to the BMJ about dutch infanticide...
I would have written one to the NYTimes but they would never publish it, and their forum is full of profanities...
One great step for....whom?
NANCY K REYES,
Gapan City Philippines 3105
Send response to journal:
Re: One great step for....whom?
The protocols are described as being a great step forward...because... "The protocol, which the Groningen doctors agreed with the public prosecution service, enables doctors to report their actions without being prosecuted."
Translation: It permits doctors to kill and not worry about being prosecuted.
"Its requirements include a clear diagnosis and prognosis; that the newborn baby must be suffering hopelessly and unbearably with no prospect for future treatment; that both parents must give their informed consent; that the decision must be confirmed by a second independent doctor; and that the death and treatment must be reported to the local coroner."
Translation: Well, we can treat Spina bifida patients, but we will ignore the fact. The prognosis of Spina bifida does not depend on the size or the height of the meningomyelocoel, but we will ignore that. And the presence of hydrocephalus does not correlate with IQ, but we will ignore that...the "second indpendent doctor" will not be independent, but a physician friendly to killing, so we will ignore that part, and "the treatment" will be reported to the local coroner...but since less than 30 percent of adult euthanasia is being reported, we will ignore that also.
Indeed, there are many adults who had such disabilities treated, and are alive today thanks to treatment. Were their opinions sought on whether they thought they should be dead instead of alive? Or are these decisions based not on the idea of suffering of the child, but on the idea that caring for such a child would inconvenience the parents? Inquiring minds want to know...
Last week, I was watching a Tellie show on evolution...there was a fossil of Homo erectus found that had evidence of an injury that had healed, implying that someone had to care and feed for the injured person...the narrator remarked that this showed a major indication of evolution, since it showed compassion...
Caring for the sick and crippled and retarded is not "logical". It costs money. It keeps people from doing more important things. But the retarded teach us the lessons of courage, compassion and faith.
And despite the claim of Eduard Verhagen, who told the BMJ at the time, "It is time to be honest; all over the world doctors end lives discreetly, out of compassion", the dirty little secret is that human beings, since the time of homo erectus, have NOT always ended lives, but much more often we see those "meaninless" people assisted in their daily living: helped, cared for, and loved....and that it is such compassion that make us fully human.
Competing interests: None declared