Netherlands Legalizes Euthanasia Of Children / Babies

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous Health Discussions' started by haidut, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:34 AM.

  1. haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Considering doctors around the world have had no problem giving morphine to terminally ill patients until they expire on their own, I really don't see what good the explicit permission to euthanize children of ANY age does to the families of those children or to society in general...
    We no longer need to use the expression "to club a baby seal" as the ultimate expression of cruelty, we now have the "to club a baby" *cough*...I mean "to euthanize a baby" as a replacement. The world is going madder by the minute...
    Netherlands legalizes child euthanasia despite opposition from Christian parties

    "...The Dutch government will allow doctors to euthanize terminally ill children as young as one year old, making the Netherlands the second country in the world to permit the practice....The decision does not amend any laws, but exempts doctors from prosecution for ending a child’s life in certain conditions and with parental consent. Children between the ages of one and 12 will now be eligible for assisted suicide, whereas previously only newborn infants and teenagers could be euthanized."

    Now, keep in mind that "terminal condition" is actually a very vague definition under Dutch/Belgian (the 2 countries allowing euthanasia so far) law. You'd think it is reserved for something like inoperable cancer but it is not. There was a news article back in 2013 on 2 adult Belgian brothers choosing euthanasia because they were...deaf and thought they were going blind. Belgian law allows defining blindness as a "terminal" condition and thus allowed the doctors to go along with the brothers' wishes to be euthanized. I hope that article below sinks in deep into the brains of any haters that keep emailing me that I am fear-mongering without evidence. :):So, when I say that we may soon see doctors euthanizing babies for being born without a leg or with, God forbid, cleft palate it is not just some far-fetched conspiratorial dream of mine.

    Deaf Belgian twins euthanized after discovering that they are going blind

    "...Marc and Eddy Verbessem, 45-year-old twin brothers who were born deaf, were euthanized in Belgium on Dec. 14 after finding out they were going blind, in a case that has drawn euthanasia in Europe back into the spotlight. It's the first assisted suicide case in which two brothers have been allowed to die together, and is also unusual because neither man was in extreme pain or terminally ill at the time of death."

    @Drareg
     
  2. TheSir

    TheSir Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2019
    Messages:
    377
    Post-birth abortion in disguise?
     
  3. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Probably...and keep in mind that "terminal condition" is actually a very vague definition under Dutch/Belgian (the 2 countries allowing euthanasia so far) law. You'd think it is reserved for something like inoperable cancer but it is not. There was a news article back in 2013 on 2 adult Belgian brothers choosing euthanasia because they were...deaf and thought they were going blind. Belgian law allows defining blindness as a "terminal" condition and thus allowed the doctors to go along with the brothers' wishes to be euthanized.
    I hope that article below sinks in deep into the brains of any haters that keep emailing me that I am fearmongering without evidence :): So, when I say that we may soon see doctors euthanizing babies for being born without a leg or with, God forbid, cleft palate it is not just some far-fetched conspiratorial dream of mine.
    Deaf Belgian twins euthanized after discovering that they are going blind

    "..."...Marc and Eddy Verbessem, 45-year-old twin brothers who were born deaf, were euthanized in Belgium on Dec. 14 after finding out they were going blind, in a case that has drawn euthanasia in Europe back into the spotlight. It's the first assisted suicide case in which two brothers have been allowed to die together, and is also unusual because neither man was in extreme pain or terminally ill at the time of death."
     
  4. Capt Nirvana

    Capt Nirvana Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2018
    Messages:
    94
    Gender:
    Male
    Forced sterilizations are returning to the U.S. too. Some say they never ceased since the days of Supreme Court Judge Oliver Wendell Holmes proclaiming, "Three generations of imbeciles is enough!"
     
  5. Ableton

    Ableton Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2019
    Messages:
    1,111
    Gender:
    Male
    lol even as a relatively healthy man life is barely enjoyable for me. If I had a serious disease as a child I'd 100% prefer my parents to euthanize me. And this is even children that are terminally ill. Sickens me that some people think they have the moral audacity to dictate these children have to go through more pain than necessary.
    Selective infanticide is not a modern phenomenon either.

    We should focus on creating an environment in which babies are born healthy instead of focusing extremely difficult ethical questions that do not go to the root of the problem.

    Or just wait until science has handled the problem, which will probably come with new problems.
     
  6. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    If you want to commit suicide then I doubt anybody can really interfere with your actions but to codify that as state-sponsored and state-assisted practice is very, very dangerous. The issue is not the (arguably) ethical euthanasia of terminally ill people. The issue is the extreme vagueness of the law and whether a child has the mental capacity to decide if he/she wants to die. What if the parent decides their child "wants" a suicide and through manipulation (or, worse, abuse) conditions the child to ask for one?
    Did you see my other comment about the 2 Belgian brothers getting euthanized because they were deaf? Does that sound like a terminal condition to you? More importantly, do you think doctors should be allowed to legally assist in suicides of people who are basically mentally ill due to whatever non-terminal disability (such as deafness/blindness) they have and decide they want to die? What good it is to codify it as a law to actually make such suicides of non-terminally-ill people, or of people who cannot make a sound life/death judgment yet, easier? You don't see any possibility for such laws to be misused?
     
  7. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    That does not mean there should be a law allowing anybody who thinks life is not worth living to ask for a state/doctor assisted suicide and get one. Suicide is an option for everybody simply due to their capacity to commit one. The moment you codify that as a law with definitions, restrictions and, dare I say, financial benefits for some you are asking for trouble. What if a doctor/practice/institution/etc makes money by primarily carrying out assisted suicides? You do not think they will find a way to maximize their revenue (by killing questionable cases) or, worse, their profit (by finding ways to cut corners in drugs/procedures/etc leading to pain/terror during the procedure)? We have plenty of examples already of the medical industry doing horrible things to millions/billions of people while chasing profit. No need to add suicide-on-demand to the list of profitable tools they have.
     
  8. Ableton

    Ableton Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2019
    Messages:
    1,111
    Gender:
    Male
    as an ill infant this is probably not possible for me to do


    a child also does not have to capacity to decide if he/she wants to live either. and has never asked to be born. you could say children do this through their actions: a kid plays and smiles. hey it probably wants to live. a kid lays terminally ill in the bed, struggling to breath? well maybe it wants the suffering to end more than it wants it to continue.

    well you have to implement structures to prevent this obviously.


    no. thats crazy. it's tragic and should not be happening obviously. cases like this are extremely vile, however, they get probably vastly outnumbered by cases where its justified that never make the news.


    no. mentally ill people shouldn't be able to decide.

    I do, but I also see potential to create safe structures. The good it would do is to reduce unnecessary suffering. Obviously should only be available for terminally ill kids, nothing else. My comment that I would prefer my parents to euthanize me if I have a non terminal serious condition does not mean I approve of laws letting this happen. Would be fascist and totalitarian. Adults who take the responsibility to birth a child should take the responsibility to reduce it's suffering if the child is dying anyways. Can do that away from the state, too, but would require the parents to be very smart about it, do the killing action themselves, and research the methods, get the materials etc. Not the way to go either in other words. Even more traumatizing.
     
  9. boris

    boris Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,511
    Gender:
    Male
    This is basically the future they want and akin to chemotherapy for cancer or intubation for COVID, a "bandaid" type of solution like almost our entire health system. Why not remove the cause that makes terminally ill children that seem better off dead? (the answer is obvious)

     
  10. Ableton

    Ableton Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2019
    Messages:
    1,111
    Gender:
    Male
    i know except that I do not think there is a "they". I said we should focus on environment in my post, and not on those ethical questions.
    As long as the system is corrupted (whether you think its due to a cabal or a systemic issue is irrelevant in this context), calls for assisted suicides are ethically warranted. You do not get to birth children in our shitty environment and then ***** out of your responsiblity if they turn out to be non functioning suffering organisms.
     
  11. Michael Mohn

    Michael Mohn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2019
    Messages:
    50
    Certain fundamental question shouldn't be touched upon, not in terms of law a least. Parents have the responsibility for the well being of their children. If a child has been treated or diagnosed by several specialists and they can't give any hope for a cure then nobody would ask questions or demand an autopsy when the child suddenly dies. The decision to end the life of a terminally ill child should stay between parents.
     
  12. boris

    boris Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,511
    Gender:
    Male
    You think no one rules over us? In some countries I currently don't even have the right to decide over my own body and health.

    Maybe, but in my opinion it's a step in the completely wrong direction and destructive in the long run. You would basically install a system to conveniently remove "evidence" of the broken system. Out of sight out of mind. Not even taking into account that it further normalizes euthanasia, suicide, suicidal thought, and so on, making it a normal thing of human life in people's minds even though it's completely ab-normal.
     
  13. Regina

    Regina Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,679
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Chicago
    It's perfect for mandatory vaccines with zero liability. Then mandate that insurance does not have to pay for anyone who needs long-term care for vaccine injury. Just euthanize the ones that get autism or seizures or paralysis.
     
  14. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Very true. Considering we now have licensed euthanasia of children/babies and non-terminally-ill adults it makes a complete laughing stock of the argument that lockdowns/vaccines/etc were implemented to save lives. It is quite obvious that the system has no respect/care for any human life and as such any draconian measures implemented with the claim of "social responsibility" obviously have other goal(s) in mind.
     
  15. Dutchie

    Dutchie Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    Yep....our government is f'ed up.
     
  16. Ableton

    Ableton Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2019
    Messages:
    1,111
    Gender:
    Male
    i sympathize with your position but realistically a very small percentage of adults in todays day and age would have the guts to take that step, even when realizing its necessary. the average person today is not the average spartan from 2000 years ago.
     
  17. michael94

    michael94 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    2,050
    That is cruel to the parents and the child if the assissted suicide is not done properly. I am personally not against this law if the child is truly suffering. Torture is worse than death, I dont see this as draconian but rather restoring some sovereignty to oppressed people. Infant circumcision on the other hand is cruel and unusual, and its considered normal.
     
  18. michael94

    michael94 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    2,050
    I dont think the author of this article understands pain
     
  19. Drareg

    Drareg Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,549
    Gender:
    Male
    This is worse when viewed through a bioenergetic lens, with time humans will look back on this in dismay not because we didn’t know but because we’re stuck in rigid cult like thinking when information to the contrary is there but ignored mainly for financial reasons.

    I bet most people being euthanized are from a lower socioeconomic class and probably being prescribed SSRI’s for a long period , parents should not be allowed make this decision if they receive SSRI’s or any other kind of antipsychotics.

    Always keep in mind that people everyday of the week are dying from cancer and throughout their treatment they do not get a full blood work up, think about that, no T3,RT3, hormones etc , these clowns claim to be doing all they can and when questioned as to why in the case of terminal illness they don’t test every aspect of bloods possible the response is "we don’t normally do that".
    Folks are now being euthanized that in "some cases" may need rt3 measured and adjusted accordingly, the experts don’t normally measure that so we are going to kill you instead with a big emotional ceremony to entertain everyone.
    From politicians, doctors to patients everyone is off their heads on potent pharma pills that is driving this behavior.

    The medical establishment is an environment that breeds psychopathology as well as attracting it.
     
  20. R J

    R J Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2020
    Messages:
    261
    Gender:
    Male
    In the non fiction book “Shabono”, author who stayed with an Amazon tribe witnessed a mother killing her newborn by snapping its neck. It was explained it was done because the mother already had enough kids and resources to raise another child maybe wasn’t a sure thing.