Remembering Terri Schiavo: A Five-Year Anniversary Marked By Cruel Bigotry

Townhall ^ | 3/31/10 | Bobby Schindler

[wagglebee]

March 31st will mark the five-year anniversary of the needless death of my sister, Terri Schiavo.

It is difficult to believe this much time has passed since that horrible event which will be forever seared into my memory.

I wish I could say things have changed for the better since my sister’s death or that people with cognitive disabilities are now better protected in response to the horror she had to endure.

Tragically, however, it seems the rights of the brain-injured, elderly and others are still being violated.

All one has to do is look at what happened just last week. On March 21st, Fox aired an episode of The Family Guy that featured a "sketch" called "Terri Schiavo: The Musical." I was astonished at the producer’s cruel bigotry directed towards my sister and all cognitively disabled people.

Sadly, although more offensive than what my family has seen in the past from the media since Terri died, the bald-faced ignorance expressed in that episode of The Family Guy was nothing new. In fact, all signs indicate that we have embarked on a very disturbing path.

There is no disputing that Terri’s life – and death – had an astonishing impact on our nation. Our family still receives letters, emails and phone calls almost every day from people who tell us how Terri’s story touched them in profound ways, particularly when they come to know the facts.

Indeed, it was because of my family’s experience trying to protect Terri that we realized how all persons with similar cognitive disabilities are completely vulnerable to state laws that currently make it “legal” to deny them the most basic care – food and water.

This horrifying realization was why we established Terri’s Foundation. In Terri’s name, my family now works to protect tens of thousands of people with similar brain-injuries from having their fundamental freedoms taken away by an aggressive anti-life movement hell-bent on portraying severely disabled and otherwise vulnerable human beings as nothing more than “useless eaters”.

If the amount of phone calls we receive is any indication, what happened to Terri has become common. I think most people have no idea how our individual rights to make decisions about basic care like food and water, antibiotics, etc., have been so dramatically eroded. This not only includes family members advocating for loved ones but also protecting oneself by medical directive.

We recently heard from a woman whose mother was being cared for at a hospice facility. The daughter was powerless to effectively advocate for her mother because she had no power of attorney.

Even though she was her mother’s next-of-kin, and despite the fact her mother was begging her for food, the daughter was not allowed to feed her. It had been determined the mother was no longer able to swallow. But the daughter said her mother was eating safely just prior to being sent to hospice and questioned whether she still could. The mother was not given a feeding tube, and died just a short time later.

Perhaps the “Death Panels” Sarah Palin spoke of sounded like bombastic language. Yet when Palin added this term into our nation’s debate on health care, I believe she did not realize that many hospitals and facilities already have something frighteningly similar. Ethics committees are making many life and death decisions about patients, including whether to withhold simple provisions.

In a seemingly clandestine way, these ethics committees – comprised of medical and legal professionals – are empowering facilities to make life and death decisions independent of the family or a person’s own wishes.

The chilling stories we receive make it clear few citizens have any idea how vulnerable they are when it comes to judgments left in the hands of these ethics committees and facilities. And with the federal government now controlling our health care, there is no reason not to believe that these types of committees won’t become nationalized. Particularly when a health care system has been sabotaged by cost factors and quality of life judgments.

When our office receives phone calls from people fighting for their loved ones, I cannot help but look back and reflect on the courage of many individuals and groups who advocated on behalf of my sister.

As time has passed, however, many of those people, organizations and politicians – even many of our own friends – have fallen silent. Many who once ardently supported Terri’s life no longer actively educate or advocate for vulnerable patients.

With each troubling phone call from a frantic family, I am reminded there are countless other Terris in desperate need of our voice. Terri’s Foundation has been successful helping to save some, but sadly so many others have fallen victim.

I understand our nation faces many challenges today that may threaten our very existence. But how can we claim to be a just and honorable society, deserving of any blessing at all, if we richly reward hateful bigots while refusing to protect our weakest citizens?

Moreover, how did the tremendous courage and kindness we saw when we were fighting for Terri’s life have faded? How can any of us abandon this issue when all signs are that things are getting worse?

There are still many who support our efforts, who recognize the erosion of the value and dignity of the medically weak and who believe in protecting the life and liberty of all human beings.

The problem is their voices are often drowned out by the din of the pro-death lobby that claims death is the only dignified answer to a complicated problem.

Meanwhile the pro-death movement has not fallen silent. Rather, it has grown more vocal. The issue for them did not die with Terri. Indeed, their success in killing her seems to have only bolstered their determination to gain wider acceptance among the American people.

There will always be people with needs, there will always be others who work tirelessly to help them, and there will always be those who turn the other way; or worse – sit behind their drawing tables, disseminating cruel bigotry and hatred toward the disabled and vulnerable.

Until we all recognize that our inherit worth doesn’t change because of life’s circumstances, illness, disability or other events, we will continue to rob our most vulnerable of their right to fairness, justice and the ability to guide their own course in life.

[wagglebee]

I guess this is the "change" that Zero promised.

Thread by Kaslin.

Death Panels Begin As Reform Takes Shape

Medicine: After the recess appointment of a Medicare and Medicaid head, an FDA panel drops its endorsement of a widely used cancer drug. Another FDA-approved cancer therapy may not be paid for. It begins.

It didn't take long for the health care philosophy of Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama's choice to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, and an appointee we have labeled a "one-man death panel," to have an effect.

Berwick is an admirer of Britain's National Health Service and its National Institute for Clinical Excellence, with the Orwellian-acronym NICE.

"NICE," Berwick has said, "is extremely effective and a conscientious, valuable and — importantly — knowledge-building system." But NICE is really a system of rationing, through a bureaucratic formula for "cost-effectiveness," that has rushed untold numbers of Britons to an early grave.

Avastin, the marketing name for the drug bevacizumab, is the world's best-selling cancer drug. Used mainly to treat colon cancer, it was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2006 after it was found that by cutting the blood flow to tumors, it helped in treating breast cancer.

An estimated 17,500 American women are treated with the drug each year. It is effective, having been shown to extend life by at least 20 months, but it is not cheap.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

[wagglebee]

The culture of death desperately wants to remove the wishes of the family.

Thread by me.

N.J. court declines to hear families' case against hospital that ended life support

ELIZABETH — An appeals court panel has declined to take up an issue that could have had nationwide implications — whether hospitals can refuse to continue life support over the objections of a patient’s family.

In a 26-page decision released today, the three judges said when Ruben Betancourt died in May 2009, the case brought by his daughter, Jacqueline, against Trinitas Regional Medical Center in Elizabeth to keep him alive, died with him.

"Although we recognize the significance of the issues raised by the parties and (their supporters) on appeal, we conclude that both the lack of an adequate factual record as well as the limited, but unique, factual context presented, warrant dismissal of the appeal as moot," the judges wrote.

Todd Drayton, the East Brunswick attorney who represented the Betancourt family, said "we’re happy. The family ultimately got what it wanted. This case isn’t about the broad issues. The fact is it is all about Ruben Betancourt."

(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...

[wagglebee]

The left views laws as an inconvenience.

Thread by markomalley.

Nebraska attorney general declines to defend state's pro-life law

Omaha, Neb., Aug 21, 2010 / 07:47 am (CNA).- Last week, a law restricting abortions in Nebraska was permanently blocked from taking effect. The law, which was passed earlier this year in the state, would have required a health screening for any woman planning to have an abortion.

On Wednesday, Nebraska’s Attorney General Jon Bruning said he agreed to a permanent injunction against the new law, reported the Washington Post. The law was challenged by Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and had already been prohibited from taking effect by a temporary ruling earlier this year.

Spokeswoman Shannon Kingery for the attorney general's office told the Washington Post that Bruning did not think the law had much chance against a lawsuit. "Losing this case would require Nebraska taxpayers to foot the bill for Planned Parenthood's legal fee," said Kingery. "We will not squander the state's resources on a case that has very little probability of winning."

However, if a second state abortion law is challenged, the pro-life organization, Nebraska Right to Life, is confident the attorney general will defend it.

The law, scheduled to take effect on October 15, would ban abortions after 20 weeks of gestation based on research which says fetuses can feel pain at that point. The law would preempt current legislation which limits late term abortions only to those infants whose lives outside the womb aren’t deemed viable.

According to the Washington Post, the Center for Reproductive Rights has suggested that they may challenge the ban.

"Any suggestion that Attorney General Bruning is shirking his responsibility to defend pro-life legislation is not shared by Nebraska Right to Life," said Julie Schmit-Albin, the organization’s executive director. “We are confident that the attorney general will vigorously defend any attack on that law,” should that law be taken to court.

[wagglebee]

This WILL be America if Zero gets his wish.

Two threads by me.

Brampton Civic hospital imposes euthanasia by dehydration through pressure tactics

Yesterday, I received a phone call and then an email from Bernard Stephenson, concerning Joshua (Kulendran Mayandi) the pastor of a small christian church in Brampton Ontario. The email outlined several significant concerns for the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

First: Joshua (48), who is not otherwise dying, is being dehydrated to death (euthanasia by omission). This is not a case when hydration and nutrition need to be withdrawn because he is actually dying and nearing death, but rather the decision appears to have been made to intentionally cause his death by withdrawing IV hydration and nutrition probably because he is unlikely to recover from his disability.

Joshua has otherwise stabilized and would likely live for many years in this condition. Society cannot condone intentionally dehydrating a person to death because of their disability or the potential cost of long-term care. Article 25 (f) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities states: Prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability. (http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml)

Second: It is deplorable that the Consent and Capacity Board in Ontario, the hospital and the lawyer for the hospital, who are all paid by the government and have nearly unlimited resources to pressure people to consent to their will, appeared to appoint a Substitute Decision Maker (SDM) to make decisions on behalf of Joshua, based on that persons willingness to agree to a non-treatment plan, even though there is no proof that the plan of non-treatment represented the values of the person.

The Consent and Capacity Board was established to ensure that consent to treatment is based on the prior wishes or values of a person, before that person became incapacitated to make decisions for themselves. The fact that Joshua did not write down his personal wishes or assign a person to make legal and health care decisions on his behalf in these circumstances, does not negate the fact based on his religious convictions it is unlikely that he would have agreed to death by dehydration.

To pressure a person to agree to intentionally dehydrate a person to death, (euthanasia by omission) based on the cost of continuing the legal battle to defend the values of a person, is unconstitutional and inconsistent with Ontario law.

Everyone needs to strongly respond by sending letters and emails to:
Brampton Civic Hospital - email: communications@oslerhc.org or call the Communications Hotline at: 905-494-2120, ext. 22505.

Consent and Capacity Board of Ontario - email: ccb@ontario.ca, Phone: 416-327-4142, Fax: 416-924-8873

The letter should state:
I am disgusted with the decision by the Brampton Civic Hospital, its lawyer, and the physician for (Joshua) Kulendran Mayandi, to intentionally cause his death by removing his IV hydration and nutrition even though he is not otherwise dying (euthanasia by omission). If this decision is not reversed, it will create fear among the citizens of Brampton that if they experience a disability that they too would be killed by dehydration and starvation.

For the sake of justice and equality, I demand that you change your policy and once again continue feeding.

The following is the email from Bernard Stephenson:

Joshua is a 48 year old pastor of a small Brampton Church. He was admitted to the Brampton Civic Hospital (William Osler Health Centre), after collapsing in front of the ER on May 29, 2010.

He was revived but not before sustaining a significant cognitive disability.

He remained in the ICU, but after regaining the ability to breathe on his own, he was transferred to the respirology ward, where he remains.

He has regained some ability to communicate despite the fact that he has a significant cognitive disability.

He has progressed from being in a deep coma with signs of decerebration and decortication to almost full movement of his arms and legs and coherent use of mostly one-word answers and occasionally multi-word sentences with his sister over the phone.

He recognizes the family he was living with for the past 10 years, who have been at his bedside from morning to evening, 7 days a week.

From the beginning of his stay in the ICU until now, the doctors have repeatedly asserted that there is no hope of recovery, from a medical point of view, and they have strongly suggested that all life-sustaining treatment be removed.

His family, who live in Sri Lanka, and his supporters here have rejected these suggestions.

Nevertheless, the fact is that he had assigned no Substitute Decision Maker (SDM), and he has no immediate family living in Canada.

His first physician in the ward, removed his feeding tube, without consent, leaving him only IV fluids.

He was in this situation for over three weeks until his supporters appealed to the Ethics Committee adn the Consent and Capacity Board through a lawyer and forced the hospital to restart feeding through a nasogastric (NG) tube. Even though he was entitled to a long term gastric (G) tube the physicians refused the latter option, even though they had initially suggested it, citing that it is 'artificial' and possibly 'harmful'.

Currently, the only option the hospital and his current physician is offering is to withhold all life-sustaining treatment and care including IV fluids, food and medication.

The court first rejected Joshua's sister, Mallika Arumugan, as his (SDM) because they did not consider her capable of making medical decisions for Joshua, but she also did not agree to the demands of the hospital.

After the court rejected Joshua's sister as his SDM, a friend for 25 years became the next option. We were told that this friend would only be accepted as the SDM if he agreed to the preconditions – palliative care with the removal of all medications, IV hydration and nutrition. The alternative was a continuation of the costly legal battle before the Consent and Capacity Board or allowing the Public Guardian to take over. Since we were not able to sustain the costly legal battle and the family did not want Joshua to fall into the hands of the Public Guardian, this friend decided to accept the terms. He was subsequently granted SDM status with those limiting conditions.

Personally, I disagreed with the decision as it was immoral, unethical, inappropriate and wrong besides being totally useless.

Brampton Civic hospital on August 17 withdrew all life-sustaining treatment and care, including fluids and food, based on the forced agreement between the hospital and the SDM.

I deplore what the hospital and doctors are doing. They have a duty to inform people about quality of life and treatment options in a given situation, such as Joshua's, but they do not have the right to impose their preference for death or to assume that Joshua would not want to live the rest of his life in this condition. The Hospital and doctor's actions are both unethical and inappropriate.

Bernard Stephenson, M.D., M.Div.
Email: bernard@mcbc.on.ca

 

___________________________________________________

 

'We'll do cancer scan on Monday...if she's still alive': Agony of family of dying grandmother

As a hospital cleaner, Margaret Cummins dedicated years of her life to the Health Service.

She would keep the buildings spick and span - and go out of her way to help the sick and reassure those in distress.

But if she expected a little respect in return when she became a cancer patient, she was very wrong.

Instead, the 74-year-old's family were told that she could not have a vital scan because that particular unit was closed at weekends.

The locum doctor said: 'We'll do it on Monday - if she's still here.'

That crass remark was among 36 criticisms levelled at Northampton General Hospital, where Mrs Cummins spent 24 days.

The grandmother died in a hospice just two months after being diagnosed with a lung cancer that had been deemed treatable.

And Mrs Cummins's family claim that her appalling treatment in hospital contributed to her death.

Her daughter Julie Fordham said: 'Mum dedicated much of her life to working for the NHS. She wasn't high-profile, simply back-room, going about a menial but important job with spirit and a sense of pride. She loved the patients.

'She always believed the NHS was marvellous, but in this case its standards fell sadly short. We feel she was left to die.' The family's claims prompted the chief executive to apologise for 11 failures in her care.

Those included her walking frame being moved out of reach so she fell out of bed, being unable to ring a bedside alarm for help because it was out of reach and being left on the floor for 15 minutes.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."

[sport]

Again, it was what the people wanted. Every vote for a Democrat in 2006 and 2008 affirmed it. Now, like the dog that chased the car tire, and when he finally catches it, decides he doesn’t want it near as bad as he thought he did. Health Care!,Health Care!, Health Care! The Republicans do not want you to have Health Care, vote Democrat. They did. Now they got it.

The truth of the matter was, the United States had the best medical system it the World. There was nothing fundamently wrong with it.

Now,in just a few short years, the fools that so gladly and gleefully voted for the Democrats are going to see just how good it was. The problem is that they were too stupid to understand what they had and they will be too stupid to understand that they got what what they voted for in 2006 and 2008.

This is one of two reasons that the Democrat Party is pursuing the illegal vote full speed ahead. The first reason is that they aborted their young voting base. The second reason is they are going to eliminate[read kill] their elderly voting base. In the end, as one sows, they also reap.

[wagglebee]

Great move by the Virginia Attorney General!

Thread by topher.

Virginia Attorney General Offers Legal Opinion [of] Oversight of Abortion Clinics

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a legal opinion Monday that could pave the way for greater restrictions on the state's abortion clinics.

...

"The state has long regulated outpatient surgical facilities and personnel to ensure a certain level of protection for patients. There is no reason to hold facilities providing abortion services to any lesser standard for their patients. Even pharmacies, funeral homes, and veterinary clinics are regulated by the state," [Brian Gottstein said. Brian Gottstein is the spokesman for Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli]

...

"This means fewer women are going to be injured and fewer children in future childbirths will be injured. that's what it means," [State Rep Bob] Marshall said.

...

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[wagglebee]

The New York Slimes believes that it's "fear mongering" to warn about death panels, but then they proceed to push rationing.

Thread by me.

Wesley J. Smith: NYT Editorial Condemns Rationing Fear Mongers–Pushes Rationing

Well, I couldn’t get away to Wyoming without casting a little light on a revealing NYT.  On one hand, it castigates critics of Donald Berwick–for, among other things, accusing him of promoting rationing for the USA.  It’s all fear mongering, don’t you know.  But, we need rationing!  From the editorial:

Republicans are also eagerly, and shamefully, pillorying Dr. Donald Berwick, the new head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. There are few figures who command greater respect for uniting health professionals and institutions to improve the quality of medical care while reducing costs. That is not stopping these critics from implying — baselessly — that he will introduce socialized medicine and death panels in this country.

The truth is that Dr. Berwick has praised the socialized British health care system, especially for its emphasis on primary care. This country certainly needs to do more to develop its primary care system. And he has, rightly, called for an open discussion of the health care rationing that is already widespread in our system. When insurers decline to cover procedures, or high prices screen out low-income people, that is rationing.

Dr. Berwick has endorsed the use of “comparative effectiveness” research to determine which treatments work best. He would use such research to judge whether a new drug or procedure is worth the cost of coverage, a step the reform law shies away from. He does not have the power to change that law. But the issue will have to be addressed at some point if there is to be any hope of restraining medical spending.

How dare those anti-rationers pillory a rationing advocate who understands we need rationing! Hilarious.

[wagglebee]

Thanks to the vigilance of Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and all of the people who sent emails and made phone calls, it looks like the Canadian death panels will spare Joshua Kulendran Mayandy.

Multiple threads by EternalVigilance and me.

Dying of Thirst: Joshua (Kulendran Mayandi)

On Friday, August 20, I published a blog post about Joshua (Kulendran Mayandi), a 48 year old pastor of a small pentecostal Church in Brampton who had a heart attack on May 29. Joshua is at the Brampton Civic Hospital (William Osler Health Centre) where his IV fluids, food and medication have been removed since Tuesday, August 17.

Link to my August 20 blog comment: Brampton Civic Hospital imposes euthanasia by dehydration through pressure tactics: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/08/brampton-civic-hospital-imposes.html

Joshua was first in coma. He then came out of coma and has recovered a little from his cognitively disability.

He has the ability to recognize his closest friends and respond with one-word answers and sometimes with multi-word responses. He is able to move his body and appears to be physiologically stable.

Joshua is not otherwise dying. There is no indication that Joshua will experience a heart attack again. Other than the fact that Joshua is cognitively disabled he is otherwise healthy and could possibly live many years in this condition.

I have received an incredible number of emails supporting Joshua. Thank you to everyone who sent an email or a letter.

I have also received several emails questioning my point of view, especially in relation to the use of assisted techniques to provide hydration (fluid) and nutrition (food).

Therefore I will clarify my position.

Euthanasia is an action or omission of an action which of itself and by intention causes the death of a person for the reason of suffering.

In other words, to directly and intentionally cause the death of a person by action or omission, whereby the death is the result of the action or omission, is euthanasia, when the intention is to relieve suffering.

It is not euthanasia to withhold or withdraw medical treatment, especially when it is burdensome, extra-ordinary, disproportionate, etc.

 

Joshua is not otherwise dying. The intention is to directly cause his death by dehydration. If the SDM or the hospital do not provide hydration or nutrition, Joshua will intentionally die from dehydration.

Even if the law fails to recognize it, this is a form of euthanasia because death is directly and intentionally caused by dehydration and not by his medical condition.

In this case, Joshua may be capable of effectively eating and drinking by mouth, but due to the traecheotomy, he is currently unable to be fed or hydrated effectively without medical assistance.

Joseph has been breathing for a long period of time without medical assistance, why has the traech not been plugged? ...

 

_________________________________________________

 

Still Dying of Thirst: Joshua (Kulendran Mayandi)

After a long discussion with our legal counsel concerning the possible legal avenues that could be taken to stop the dehydration of Joshua (Kulendran Mayandi) the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has determined that a legal action is possible.

For those who have not followed the story of Joshua, he is a pastor of a small pentecostal church in Brampton Ontario who is currently in the Brampton Civic Hospital (William Osler Health Centre) where IV fluids, nutrition and medicine has been completely withdrawn since August 17.

Links to the story:
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/08/joshua-kulendran-mayandi-case-continues.html

http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/08/brampton-civic-hospital-imposes.html

The problem is that the cost of a legal intervention, which may or may not be successful, is significant and the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition needs to know if we will have the financial support of our donors and members to go ahead with this endeavour?

Our original goal was to convince the court appointed Substitute Decision Maker (SDM) to change his mind and have the IV re-inserted.

Time is running out. If action is not taken soon, Joshua will begin to die.

You need to know that Joshua was a loved pastor. The members of the Church have been with him constantly...

 

_________________________________________________

 

Hospital withholds food, water from Christian pastor [Canadian death panel is killing him]

It's been more than a week since pastor Joshua Kulendran Mayandy has been given food or water at a Brampton, Canada, hospital where he is being treated for a brain impairment following a heart attack.

The medical facility's officials are following a determination that he will get his next sustenance only when he can ask the doctor for it.

The Sri Lankan Mayandy, who arrived in Canada 10 years ago to pastor a small church, complained of chest pain and was hospitalized after collapsing with a heart attack May 29.

He was revived successfully, although the apparent brain damage from the attack left him in a coma for a time. He was placed in intensive care where he regained consciousness. An eyewitness has reported he has regained movement in his arms and legs and that he recognizes the family he is living with.

According to Bernard Stephenson, another local pastor and friend who visits Mayandy daily, the injured man can speak some words.

But staff with Brampton Civic Hospital, which is part of the William Osler Health Center, disagree. According to Stephenson, doctors asserted all along that there was no hope of recovery.

The disagreement over his condition and capacity triggered in Ontario the involvement of the region's "Consent and Capacity" board, which by law determines the proper medical treatment for patients unable to make decisions themselves...

_________________________________________________

 

Pastor centre of pro-life battle

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) has launched a letter-writing campaign in a bid to stop what it says is the unjust treatment of a disabled patient at Brampton Civic Hospital.

EPC is urging residents to file letters en masse after the Consent and Capacity Board, an independent provincial tribunal whose mandate, in part, is to determine a person’s capacity to consent to or refuse medical treatment, gave a public guardian power of attorney over Kulendran (Joshua) Mayandy, a 48-year-old pastor who acquired a cognitive disability after suffering a heart attack in May.

Doctors have determined there is no hope of recovery and suggested all life-sustaining treatment be removed. But without family members or appointed legal guardian in Canada, the Consent and Capacity Board placed the fate of the Sri Lankan native, a Pentecostal pastor at Humberlea Worship Centre in Etobicoke, in the hands of a Substitute Decision Maker (SDM).

This SDM, in turn, agreed with authorities that no special efforts should be made to prolong Mayandy’s life and on Aug. 17 gave doctors at Brampton the go-ahead to withdraw intravenous hydration and nutrition to speed up his death.

However, EPC members have condemned the decision on the basis that it contradicts Mayandy’s Christian beliefs. Christians are generally opposed to the idea of interfering with the natural process of death. “Other than the fact that Joshua is cognitively disabled, he is otherwise healthy and could possibly live many years in this condition,” states Alex Schadenberg, executive director of EPC-Canada. “This is not a case when hydration and nutrition need to be withdrawn because he is actually dying and nearing death, but rather the decision appears to have been made to intentionally cause his death by withdrawing IV hydration and nutrition because he is unlikely to recover from his disability.”

“Society cannot condone intentionally dehydrating a person to death because of their disability or the potential cost of long-term care,” he said. Hospital officials have refrained from offering up specific details on the matter, stating patient confidentially limits them on what they can disclose publicly.

However, William Osler Health System, which runs Brampton Civic Hospital stressed everyone “involved in the patient’s care is in agreement with his treatment plan.”

“The treatment plan being followed for him has been determined to be medically in the best interests of Pastor Mayandy,” reads a statement prepared by William Osler on the matter. “It was developed according to Ontario law and with the input and oversight of the patient’s Substitute Decision Maker and their lawyer, as well as the patient’s independent lawyer. The course of care is clearly described in an Order of the Ontario government’s Consent and Capacity Board.”

Mayandy’s family, who live in Sri Lanka, and his supporters here, reject that notion, Schadenberg said. “The fact that Joshua did not write down his personal wishes or assign a person to make legal and health care decisions on his behalf in these circumstances, does not negate the fact based on his religious convictions it is unlikely that he would have agreed to death by dehydration,” writes Schadenberg in a blog post at http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com.

The EPC says Mayandy, who has been living with a Brampton family for the last 10 years, was admitted to Brampton Civic after collapsing in front of the emergency department on May 29.

He was revived, but sustained a significant brain injury and fell into a coma.

He was placed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and remained there until regaining the ability to breathe on his own, at which time he was transferred to the respiratory ward— where he still remains, according to EPC.

The group says Mayandy emerged from the coma and regained some ability to communicate...

_________________________________________________

 

Update email from Alex Schadenberg:

Thank you to everyone who has done something to help Pastor Joshua (Kulendran Mayandy). If you have not followed the story closely, the article that was printed in the Brampton Guardian is included with this email.

After meetings yesteday with our legal counsel, several doctors and a lawyer from the Christian Legal Fellowship, a major breakthrough happened today. The court appointed Substitute Decision Maker (SDM) has given permission for a nurse, who is a member of the Church, to feed Joshua orally.

Today Joshua was fed orally and I was told it went very well.

We thank the SDM for this wise decision but we remain cautious. This is incredible news but we recognize that an opposite decision may be made at any time.

The decision on August 13, 2010 by the Consent and Capacity Board stated:

"If the attending physician determines that his condition sufficiently improves to the point that aggressive care becomes appropriate, and proposes such treatments, nothing precludes (the SDM) from consenting to same."

Now that Joshua has proven that he is capable of swallowing while being orally fed, how can anyone deny him this basic necessity of life?

The final hope is that Joshua will get the opportunity to recover.

"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."

[BykrBayb]

Thanks for the good news. We were due for some good news. Overdue actually. Tears of joy here.

[wagglebee]

It is now abundantly clear that Canada is preparing to embrace euthanasia.

Thread by me.

Euthanasia debate heats up in Quebec

A group of medical specialists is speaking out against euthanasia ahead of a Quebec-wide consultation on the controversial practice, warning that previous attempts at legislation elsewhere in the world have failed.

A provincial legislature committee is scheduled to travel to 11 Quebec cities in the fall to consult with the public on the polarizing practice, in which patients with terminal diseases request a doctor's help to die.

What is the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide?

• Euthanasia refers to the practice of ending a life in a manner which relieves pain and suffering. Assisted suicide is the deliberate hastening of death by a terminally ill patient, with assistance from another individual.

Quebec's Federation of Medical Specialists has already publicly supported government legislation on euthanasia for "exceptional circumstances," stating the practice already happens across the province.

But a handful of Montreal-based medical specialists cautions the government about regulation.

"I think that ultimately, we're going to go down a slippery slope, where eventually, what patients purport to want, which is autonomy of decision-making, will be lost," said Paola Diadori, a pediatric neurologist at the St-Justine Hospital.

"Patients need care. And we need to be responsible for providing the care that they need. I don't think that it's good medicine to have physicians end these people's lives.

"That's not caring for them. That's basically just getting rid of a person."

Diadori was among a group of specialists who gathered Wednesday night in St-Bruno, on Montreal's South Shore, for a public meeting.

Some doctors are concerned that the eventual legalization of euthanasia will ultimately sour relations between physicians and patients.

"What's going to happen is by euthanasia, we give doctors the power to kill," said José Morais, a geriatrics specialist. "I think there are consequences to that. Patients would start thinking, or questioning the intentions of their doctors."

Proper palliative care can be adequate for terminal patients, Morais added.

Doctors at the meetings are concerned the public is not properly informed about the practice, and are concerned people will support legislation without knowing all the facts.

"It could work for a while, but then it will be trivialized, and that is the slippery slope," warned Dr. Joseph Ayoub, a Montreal oncologist in palliative care. "We've seen that happen in Holland."

Committee hearings on euthanasia were held in early 2010 at the national assembly in Quebec City, resulting in a consultation document called "Dying with Dignity." The document will be used in public hearings this fall that that start Sept. 7. Liberal national assembly member Geoff Kelley is heading the commission.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal in Canada.

[Dante3]

bump

[Lesforlife]

“he will get his next sustenance only when he can ask the doctor for it.”

SO EVIL AND WRONG!!!!!!!!

If you advocate for such insane policies, does it ever cross your mind
that you might be the victim of such cruelty???

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[wagglebee]

The danger to the elderly and the disabled is more real than it has ever been.

Thread by me.

Pennsylvania Court: Guardians Can't Pull the Plug on Mentally Disabled People

Harrisburg, PA (LifeNews.com) -- In a ruling involving a mentally disabled man whose legal guardians sought the power to end his medical care, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has determined that state law requires life-preserving treatment for people who are not near death and have not refused treatment.

The Alliance Defense Fund and allied pro-life attorneys filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of 53-year-old David Hockenberry, who has had acute mental disabilities since birth, arguing that his legal guardians should not be allowed to deny him life-preserving treatment while he is not terminal or unconscious.

Hockenberry’s guardians unsuccessfully attempted to deny him temporary life-preserving medical treatment for pneumonia.

“Having a disability shouldn't be a death sentence when treatable medical complications arise,” said Independence Law Center Chief Counsel Randall L. Wenger, one of the allied attorneys.

"The court made the right decision to protect Mr. Hockenberry’s right to live. He is not dying or unconscious, and his life isn't worthless just because he has a disability that may lead others to view his life as less worthy to live," he added.

“A person’s value isn't based on his or her physical or mental abilities,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “No one should be allowed to decide that a person’s life is not worth saving just because he or she has a disability or medical condition.”

In December 2007, Hockenberry developed aspiration pneumonia. Hockenberry’s guardians--appointed as his legal guardians in 2002 by a trial court--tried to decline his required ventilator treatment to assist his breathing, but the hospital proceeded despite their objection. After three weeks on the mechanical ventilator, he recovered from pneumonia and no longer required the treatment.

Hockenberry’s guardians filed a petition with a trial court in January 2008 that would allow them to end his care if a similar situation were to arise in the future. The Department of Public Welfare objected, stating that Hockenberry was neither terminally ill nor permanently unconscious and never appointed a third party with the power to refuse healthcare necessary to the preservation of his life.

Hockenberry’s guardians filed a series of appeals until their case reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.

In March, ADF and allied attorneys argued in a friend-of-the-court brief that people should not be considered better off dead just because of a disability. The high court concurred that the Health Care Agents and Representatives Act requires life-preserving care for such persons.

“We hold that where, as here, life-preserving treatment is at issue for an incompetent person who is not suffering from an end-stage condition or permanent unconsciousness, and that person has no health care agent, the Act mandates that the care must be provided,” the opinion states. “The enactment...regulates the situation in which the incompetent person suffers from a life-threatening but treatable condition, obviously reflecting the Legislature’s assertion of a policy position of greater state involvement to preserve life in such circumstances.”

[wagglebee]

More proof that even "successful" abortion is dangerous to women.

Thread by julieee.

Study: 52% of Women Experience PTSD After Abortions

Study: 52% of Women Experience PTSD After Abortions

Washington, DC -- A new study finds the later a woman has an abortion the more likely it is that she faces mental health risks and is under pressure from a partner or others to have an abortion she may not otherwise want. Women getting later abortions also are more likely to be ambivalent about having an abortion.

(Excerpt) Read more at LifeNews.com ...

[wagglebee]

The culture of death figures they have "won" on abortion and are close to winning on euthanasia, so now they are pushing eugenics.

Two threads by me.

Sterilize the Unfit Says British Professor

LONDON, August 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The mentally and morally “unfit” should be sterilized, Professor David Marsland, a sociologist and health expert, said this weekend. The professor made the remarks on the BBC radio program Iconoclasts, which advertises itself as the place to “think the unthinkable.”

Pro-life advocates and disability rights campaigners have responded by saying that Marsland’s proposed system is a straightforward throwback to the coercive eugenics practices of the past.

Marsland, Emeritus Scholar of Sociology and Health Sciences at Brunel University, London and Professorial Research Fellow in Sociology at the University of Buckingham, told the BBC that “permanent sterilization” is the solution to child neglect and abuse.

“Children are abused or grossly neglected by a very small minority of inadequate parents.” Such parents, he said, are not distinguished by “disadvantage, poverty or exploitation,” he said, but by “a number or moral and mental inadequacies” caused by “serious mental defect,” “chronic mental illness” and drug addiction and alcoholism.

“Short of lifetime incarceration,” he said, the solution is “permanent sterilization.”

The debate, chaired by the BBC’s Edward Stourton, was held in response to a request by a local council in the West Midlands that wanted to force contraception on a 29-year-old woman who members of the council judged was mentally incapable of making decisions about childrearing. The judge in the case refused to permit it, saying such a decision would “raise profound questions about state intervention in private and family life.”

Children whose parents are alcoholics or drug addicts can be rescued from abusive situations, but, Marlsand said, “Why should we allow further predictable victims to be harmed by the same perpetrators? Here too, sterilization provides a dependable answer.”

He dismissed possible objections based on human rights, saying that “Rights is a grossly overused and fundamentally incoherent concept … Neither philosophers nor political activists can agree on the nature of human rights or on their extent.”

Complaints that court-ordered sterilization could be abused “should be ignored,” he added. “This argument would inhibit any and every action of social defense.”

Brian Clowes, director of research for Human Life International (HLI), told LifeSiteNews (LSN) that in his view Professor Marsland is just one more in a long line of eugenicists who want to solve human problems by erasing the humans who have them. Clowes compared Marsland to Lothrop Stoddard and Margaret Sanger, prominent early 20th century eugenicists who promoted contraception and sterilization for blacks, Catholics, the poor and the mentally ill and disabled whom they classified as “human weeds.”

He told LSN, “It does not seem to occur to Marsland that most severe child abuse is committed by people he might consider ‘perfectly normal,’ people like his elitist friends and neighbors.”

“Most frightening of all,” he said, “is Marsland’s dismissal of human rights. In essence, he is saying people have no rights whatsoever, because there is no universal agreement on what those rights actually are.”

The program, which aired on Saturday, August 28, also featured a professor of ethics and philosophy at Oxford, who expressed concern about Marland’s proposal, saying, “There are serious problems about who makes the decisions, and abuses.” Janet Radcliffe Richards, a Professor of Practical Philosophy at Oxford, continued, “I would dispute the argument that this is for the sake of the children.
 
“It’s curious case that if the child doesn’t exist, it can’t be harmed. And to say that it would be better for the child not to exist, you need to be able to say that its life is worse than nothing. Now I think that’s a difficult thing to do because most people are glad they exist.”

But Radcliffe Richards refused to reject categorically the notion of forced sterilization as a solution to social problems. She said there “is a really serious argument” about the “cost to the rest of society of allowing people to have children when you can pretty strongly predict that those children are going to be a nuisance.”

Marsland’s remarks also drew a response from Alison Davis, head of the campaign group No Less Human, who rejected his entire argument, saying that compulsory sterilization would itself be “an abuse of some of the most vulnerable people in society.”
 
Marsland’s closing comments, Davis said, were indicative of his anti-human perspective. In those remarks he said that nothing in the discussion had changed his mind, and that the reduction of births would be desirable since “there are too many people anyway.”

Davis commented, “As a disabled person myself I find his comments offensive, degrading and eugenic in content.

“The BBC is supposed to stand against prejudicial comments against any minority group. As such it is against it’s own code of conduct, as well as a breach of basic human decency, to broadcast such inflammatory and ableist views.”

__________________________________________________

HLI Denounces Eugenicist Professor's Call to Sterilize the 'Unfit'

FRONT ROYAL, Virginia, September 2, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) -  Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro-Carambula, Interim President of Human Life International (HLI), yesterday denounced comments made recently by British Professor David Marsland in which Marsland called for certain "unfit" members of society to be forcibly sterilized.

"Professor Marsland's comments only go to show that no evil is ever fully buried in the past," said Monsignor Barreiro. "Every time we think we've seen the last of the Sangerian calls to forcibly sterilize and otherwise do away with the disabled, we are aghast at their return." Monsignor Barreiro was referring to Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, and a noted racist eugenicist who, along with Adolf Hitler and many progressive intellectuals, openly called for such programs to be used against racial minorities and other "unfit" persons in the early 20th century.

"Our elites have established a society of contraception and abortion, wherein life itself is just another factor to be controlled at our whim. This society in turn creates more and more people who are depersonalized and marginalized, and they think that the answer to this is to simply get rid of the people whose situations we have helped to create? This is insanity," said Monsignor Barreiro.

"What many people may not realize is how mainstream Prof. Marsland's comments are in the 'progressive' academy. These so-called 'philosophers' are not lovers of wisdom, but destroyers of wisdom and of life itself. Only a corrupt person could make this barbarity sound so 'reasonable'," said Monsignor Barreiro. "We are not fooled. We must all denounce this evil and stop it in its tracks."

Monsignor Barreiro called in particular on Christians and all those of good will who serve in academia to reject Marsland's reasoning: "This is an opportunity to show that although we have disagreements, at least we can agree that Marsland and those like him have again gone too far. We must tell them that we reject the notion that human beings are mere animals that must be controlled by those who think they know better."

[wagglebee]

The truly "inconvenient truth" about the Discovery Channel gunman that the media is ignoring.

Threads by GonzoII and me.

Video: Pro-Life Group Recalls Eerie Run-In with Discovery Channel Gunman

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 2, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The crazed eco-extremist who flung himself into the national spotlight yesterday after taking three hostages at the Discovery Channel headquarters is no stranger to the pro-life community in the nation’s capital.

Newly unearthed footage shows an unsettling 2009 confrontation between pro-lifers and a man who they say they have identified as James J. Lee, 43, who was destined to be gunned down by police a year later, after acting on his extreme dedication to "stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies."

(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...

__________________________________________________

Discovery TV Gunman Demands Halt to 'Parasitic Human Infants,' Credits Al Gore with ‘Awakening’

SILVER SPRING, Maryland, September 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Chaos erupted after at least one hostage was taken at the Silver Spring headquarters of the Discovery Channel by what appears to be a crazed radical environmentalist.

The armed man has reportedly demanded that Discovery Channel executives run programming geared toward stopping the propagation of "parasitic human infants" in order to save the planet from global warming and pollution.

In a document apparently authored by James J. Lee, identified by law enforcement as the gunman, Lee expresses his intention to force the network to discourage overpopulation and the "human filth" of new children, particularly among immigrant populations.

Discovery Channel employees first noticed Lee in February 2008, when he was arrested during a protest at the Discovery building. For his involvement in that protest he served two weeks in jail. 

Lee, a San Diego resident according to some reports, has said he experienced an ‘‘awakening” when he watched former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental documentary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth," reports MSNBC. 

Police Wednesday afternoon were engaged in negotiating the release of what has been reported to be as little as one and as many as three hostages by Lee, who was seen with a possible explosive device strapped to himself. No injuries have yet been reported.

A list of demands published on savetheplanetprotest.com, signed as "the demands and sayings of Lee," seeks programming from the TV station showing "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution."

"Saving the Planet means saving what's left of the non-human Wildlife," it states. "That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies! ... It is the responsiblity of everyone to preserve the planet they live on by not breeding any more children who will continue their filthy practices."

The manifesto emphasizes that immigrant populations and their "anchor baby filth" must also be stopped, and that Darwin's theory of evolution and the Malthusian theory of overpopulation must be reiterated "until it sinks into the stupid people's brains until they get it."

In addition, the document insists that the channel must "stop all shows glorifying human birthing" and "the false heroics behind those actions."

"In those programs' places, programs encouraging human sterilization and infertility must be pushed. All former pro-birth programs must now push in the direction of stopping human birth, not encouraging it," it says, adding that civilization and "all its disgusting religious-cultural roots and greed" "must be exposed for the filth it is."

[wagglebee]

Very Sad News Update

For a few days it appears that Pastor Joshua (Kulendran Mayandy) would be spared from the death panel's wrath, but barring a miracle it now appears that this will not be the case. Please pray for Pastor Joshua and his loved ones.

Thread by me.

Alex Schadenberg: Pastor Joshua Kulendran Mayandy (Sad News)

A week ago, the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition was successful in helping the friends of Joshua (Kulendran Mayandy) gain permission to have Joshua orally fed. Joshua was then able to feed orally without complications, but any other form of feeding (IV or otherwise) continued to be denied. We helped by organizing legal and medical support and a media response to his case throughout North America.

A couple of days ago, Joshua had a seizure. He is now in a semi-coma state and unable to feed orally.

He is not receiving any fluids or nutrition by IV or any other means.

He also appears to be experiencing kidney failure.

It is anticipated that he will die within the next couple of days.

Please pray for Pastor Joshua, his family, friends and members of the Church.

[Sun]

Prayers for Pastor Joshua and all concerned.

How can they deny him the most basic need - hydration.

[Alamo-Girl]

I join in earnest prayer for Pastor Joshua.