the first country in the world to legalise euthanasia.

[KillerMuffin]

Damn Rueters has allota verbosity in its URLs

Here's the link:

http://www.reuters.com/news_article...S/World/OUKWD-HEALTH-DUTCH-EUTHANASIA_TXT.XML

Oh my freaking gawd that's a lotta words.

Some selected text:

Protests as Dutch back mercy killings

Last updated: 28 Nov 2000 16:52 GMT (Reuters)



By Eric Onstad

THE HAGUE (Reuters) - The Netherlands, which has turned a blind eye to so-called mercy killings for decades, has taken a decisive step toward being the first country in the world to legalise euthanasia.

The lower chamber of parliament voted 104 to 40 to approve a bill allowing doctors to help patients die under strict conditions.

The law is expected to be put to a vote in the upper chamber next year. Approval there is seen as a formality.

Australia's Northern Territory legalised medically assisted suicide for terminally ill patients in 1996, but repealed the law the following year.

Supporters of the Dutch bill, including many doctors, say it champions patients' rights and brings a long-standing practice into the open. But the vote in parliament touched off a storm of protest.

"Again, we are faced with a law of the state which opposes the natural law of human conscience," Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls told Reuters.

Opponents in the Netherlands, including small Calvinist opposition parties, say they fear the proposed law could be abused. Some drew parallels with Nazi Germany.

"The same line of reasoning is being used as in Germany in 1935...In the Netherlands, your life is no longer safe," said Bert Dorenbos of the Scream for Life group.

"If doctors are not hesitating to kill people then they will not hesitate to withdraw medical treatment from people they do not like," he added.


There is more of course.


Discussions? Thoughts? Errata?

 

[Myrrdin]

Euthanasia happens, but...

It's about time governments put some guidelines down as to what the allowable procedures should be in the case of euthanasia. Instead of turning a blind eye and leaving it up to doctors.

In the end stages of terminal cancers, morphine the drug used to ease pain, can also be used to finally end the suffering. Albeit in a higher dose. Thats deemed acceptable. The patients notes show that they were already been treated with that drug, so there's no loose ends for someone to complain about.

In the last couple of years several elderly relatives either through illness or just sheer old age have been taken into hospital for their final days. Drips fed in one end, catheters out the other, propped up in bed , waiting for nature to take it's course. They knew the way they would be leaving, so did their families. Yet they have to suffer the indignity of being helpless in a strange place, away fom their loved ones, slowly decaying, while their families live in fear of every phone call. Quality of life is'nt measured just in the total number of days we live.

Seems ironic, when we are supposed to be a nation of animal lovers, that anyone just leaving a pet that was suffering with old age or an incurable illness to die a lingering death would be prosecuted , fined or even imprisoned yet it seems acceptable to do it to a fellow human being.

Of course the pro-lifers will object. But to them even a single cell is a life that should be protected at all costs. There must be some better definition of a life, that takes into account dignity, suffering and ability to enjoy your surroundings. Didn't Sparky call it the drool factor?

 

[CreamyLady]

As usual, I have some conflicting thoughts on the subject.

I believe it was Sir Thomas Browne who said something along the lines of, "The struggle to come into this world is as nothing to the struggle to leave it." Death can be a messy, protracted business, and the physical processes of death are unpleasant for the dying, the caretakers, and the waiting family.

So, I can understand the idea behind preventing needless suffering. There is a certain grace attendant on those who know when to leave the party, and how; if one has no more good days, and is looking at increasing degradation and pain, perhaps it is not such a bad thing.

On the other hand -- death is a natural process. When did it become necessary for us to neaten up the process? With the best will in the world, birth remains a messy, painful, undignified business. Why should death be tidier? Isn't the very act of dying an act of deliverance as well, from the toils of this world and this body?

I could very easily argue myself into a corner with this, so I think I'll be quiet now.

 

[Skibum]

My mother presented me with a document called a living will a few years ago. She is so afraid of a lingering death that she has left specific instructions on the circumstances under which her life should be extended by medical technology.

I am very unhappy with being placed in a position where I may be called upon to tell a doctor to refrain from taking steps that could save my mother's life. I do not know if I will be able to comply with her wishes if the time ever does come. Fortunately for her, my brothers and sisters are more willing to accept her terms for allowing her life to end.

I still believe that it is never to late. I will have to be dragged kicking and screaming "into that good night".

 

[teresafannin]

I am in the process of getting a living will & all the necessary documents, including a do not resuscitate order. My grandmother was in so much pain at the end, I will not let that happen to me. My ex-husband's dad committed suicide when the pain got to be too much. I don't have a death wish or anything, but I am not going to have machines keep me alive, that isn't living.

 

[CreamyLady]

We should be clear on the point that euthanasia is a very active process; a DNR order is passive -- things are NOT done, and death occurs without any interference.

Euthanasia, on the other hand, is a physician deliberately causing death, albeit in a humane and controlled manner. It is not even assisted suicide, as the patient has no part in the process except the act of dying.

The major argument brought against euthanasia is the perception that the directed death might come about for the convenience of the living, and not as a result of the wishes of the patient.

There are valid arguments for and against assisted suicide, but I haven't heard too many arguments favoring euthanasia. The issue of expedience looms large, and it doesn't leave positive ideas.

 

[KillerMuffin]

I've considered the issue, and I have to oppose euthanasia. Simply because it can become a convenience for the living very very easily despite any laws enacted to prevent it. Human beings are just too greedy or morally lax at times. Not all, but enough to ruin things for everyone else.

Clarification: Morally lax in regards to the respect of other persons, their property, their lives, and their humanity

 

[MADDOG]

I'm not sure if Australia was the first, but Euthanasia was actually legalised in the Northern Territory over 2 years ago. (Don't quote me on the time fram, but it was definately legalised).

However, in order to be allowed to die in that mannor (a lethal injection which was administered by a machine ONLY after the patient confirmed their wish to die by pressing a button themselves), the patient had to find a bunch of psychiatrists and doctors willing to sign the papers, and it was obviouly a long and arduous task.

After a brief period, the law was scrapped. But not before several people took advantage of it.

So I do believe that Australia was the first country to legalise it.

MADDOG

 

[Cheyenne]

I still believe that it is never to late. I will have to be dragged kicking and screaming "into that good night".

I think the point is what happens when you no longer can kick and scream, but just lay there like a blob? That's what your mom is trying to avoid.

I also have all the legal paperwork filled out and filed away so that others can make sure this doesn't happen to me some day. My sister will decide for me when the time comes. My parents have also done the paperwork and will rely on me to decide for them. I also hope I will have the strength to be able to actually carry out their wishes if I am ever called on to do so. I can't imagine that it wouldn't be one of the most difficult things to ever do in my life.

 

[Expertise]

I realize that there are some pretty strong feelings on both sides of the argument.

That being said, I heard an interview on CBC last night with one of the formulators of the law. It has several built in fail safes and strict rules ie. two physicians and a psychiatrist, the patient must undergo consultations or provide the doctor with documentation. I really couldn't find any obvious holes in it.

It seems to me that dieing with dignity is a basic human right. The law should allow this to occur whenever possible.

I agree to an extent with Skibum. I will fight anything tooth and nail but there comes a time when that fight is for naught. A time when you have traveled many miles and earned your sleep.