It was for the group that published this:
![](http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm9/wagglebee/euthanasia.jpg?t=1221694000%22";)
“This person suffering from hereditary defects
costs the people 60,000 Reichmarks during his lifetime.
People, that is your money. Read ‘New People’.”
Posted on 05/23/2010 10:11:46 AM PDT by wagglebee
Revisionist history has been released to an impressionable public in the HBO Movie “You Don’t Know Jack.” Contrary to Al Pacino’s portrayal of Jack Kevorkian that makes him the compassionate defender of patients’ rights, physician-assisted suicide enters a world of potential mixed motives and moral chaos.
By any standard, assisted suicide (or active euthanasia) is quite different from simply allowing nature to take its unimpeded course. It is popularly called “mercy killing.” Both morally and practically, this is easily distinguishable from simply permitting the death of a hopelessly ill woman or man (i.e., passive euthanasia). It should be opposed by ethically sensitive people.
Physician-assisted suicide is in direct conflict with our tradition of upholding the sanctity of human life. Whether preserved in the Ten Commandments or the Hippocratic Oath, that tradition says we are to affirm, nurture and give aid to people in pain.
For active euthanasia and assisted suicide will communicate the message that persons who are terminally ill have a duty to get out of the way of the living.
For example, suppose a cancer patient for whom treatment has been ineffective tells his or her family, “I know I’m a terrible burden to you, and I wonder if I shouldn’t just end my own life!”
I can imagine two responses.
“What do you mean!” says one family. “You are central to our lives. We love you, and you could never be a burden to us!” That answer communicates a relationship that inspires a will to live for the patient.
“Perhaps we should think about that,” replies another family member. “You might suffer toward the end, and we’re not really rich enough to hire nurses so you can be cared for while we stay at our jobs.” With such openness to the idea of dying, what feelings are likely to go through the mind of that patient?
Studies show that treatment for depression moves the vast majority of sufferers to think of active euthanasia as unacceptable for themselves. The alternative to making suicide easier and more acceptable is effective palliative care — which includes treatment for depression as well as degenerative disease or injury — and loving concern from family and friends.
In the Netherlands, where active euthanasia by medical personnel has been practiced for some time now, the issue quickly ceased to be assistance to persons requesting it and initiated debates over euthanizing some who had not.
“I don’t care about the law,” Kevorkian once said. “I have never cared about anything but the welfare of the patient in front of me.” What a strange claim from a pathologist who has no experience in the clinical treatment of patients! But most of us do care about the law. We care about law grounded in serious ethical reflection that affirms human worth in ways that affirm people rather than eliminate them when they need us most. Our call is not to become gentle executioners. Instead, it is to provide effective and morally responsible care to the suffering.
Rubel Shelly is president of Rochester College and professor of philosophy and religion at the college.
That is such a disturbing story. I keep returning to it, against my will.
I’m very sorry. Thank you for sharing your story.
My dad was ‘terminated” in a Canadian hospice . I knew what they were doing and tried to stop it..but I was too late
I’m sorry to hear that you’re an RN. At which hospital do you work? I’d prefer to avoid it.
Why is that, because you would prefer an incompetent nurse that agrees with your hypocritical BS politics? Fine with me.
I'm curious, what is your methodology for declaring nurses who believe in unnecessary rationing "competent" and nurses who are pro-life "incompetent"?
I don't know about anyone else, but I would far rather be under the care of an incompetent person who wanted me to live than a "competent" person who would kill me the moment a death panel decreed that I was no longer useful.
Is an arrogant disrespect for human life a measure of competency?
It was for the group that published this:
There’s a new document called, “Will to Live,” which is NOT the same as a Living Will. It gives the patient a chance to give CLEAR instructions about not wanting to be starved or dehydrated to death, and other choices. There is one for each state. You’ll find it on:
http://www.nrlc.org/euthanasia/willtolive/docs/new%20york.rev0309.pdf
This thread is about a bunch of whining hypocrites with very little knowledge of the healthcare system arguing about things that they don't understand, hypocrites who think that turning off a ventilator or withholding dialysis or IV fluids on terminally ill patients is assisted suicide. You trying to argue about this with me would be like me trying to argue about black holes with Stephen Hawking. It's just a waste of time. good day.
I’m with you on this one.
God said, *Thou shalt not murder*.
If you participate in killing someone, no matter how you try to disguise it with semantics, you are guilty of murder.
Talk to Him about it and see if He’ll accpet your reasoning.
How ironic that you use Hawking in your argument.
I sure wouldn’t want to be in your shoes on Judgment Day.....
“arrogant disrespect for human life”? I never said anything to lead you to such a conclusion. You’re a clueless blabbering child arguing about things that you don’t understand. go away.
I’m not as easily dismissed as one of your patients.
You couldn't possibly be more wrong.
hypocrites who think that turning off a ventilator or withholding dialysis or IV fluids on terminally ill patients is assisted suicide.
NOBODY on this thread has suggested that turning off a ventilator is wrong if the patient is okay with it.
YOU are the one who introduced the absurd idea that there was a shortage of ventilators, only to backpeddle when asked for specifics. You have tried to portray yourself as some sort of expert, but NOTHING you have posted indicates that you actually know what you are talking about.
As far as removing an IV to dehydrate a person to death, you're right that's not assisted suicide, it's MURDER.
You trying to argue about this with me would be like me trying to argue about black holes with Stephen Hawking.
Talk about irony, people like you would have killed Stephen Hawking decades ago.
You're deliberately muddying the waters here, Nurse Ratched. There's a world of difference between withdrawing dialysis or stopping a vent when its futile, and dehydrating a patient to death.
Yet you seem to lump them together, which tells us everything we need to know.
(By the way, I have plenty of knowledge of the healthcare system, and I've sat on several hospital medical ethics committees. So you can dispense with the patronizing arrogant BS.)
is it murder to disconnect someone from a machine that keeps them alive even if God would have taken them long ago had men not placed the person on the machine in the first place? Who are you to determine Gods will in this matter anyways?
That's how the culture of death loves to do it. In their minds there is no difference between removing a ventilator and a lethal injection of potassium chloride.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.