Posted on 11/04/2006 5:15:44 PM PST by Pokey78
ONE of Britains royal medical colleges is calling on the health profession to consider permitting the euthanasia of seriously disabled newborn babies.
The proposal by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology is a reaction to the number of such children surviving because of medical advances. The college is arguing that active euthanasia should be considered for the overall good of families, to spare parents the emotional burden and financial hardship of bringing up the sickest babies.
A very disabled child can mean a disabled family, it says. If life-shortening and deliberate interventions to kill infants were available, they might have an impact on obstetric decision-making, even preventing some late abortions, as some parents would be more confident about continuing a pregnancy and taking a risk on outcome.
Geneticists and medical ethicists supported the proposal as did the mother of a severely disabled child but a prominent childrens doctor described it as social engineering.
The college called for active euthanasia of newborns to be considered as part of an inquiry into the ethical issues raised by the policy of prolonging life in newborn babies. The inquiry is being carried out by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
The colleges submission to the inquiry states: We would like the working party to think more radically about non-resuscitation, withdrawal of treatment decisions, the best interests test and active euthanasia as they are ways of widening the management options available to the sickest of newborns.
Initially, the inquiry did not address euthanasia of newborns as this is illegal in Britain. The college has succeeded in having it considered. Although it says it is not formally calling for active euthanasia to be introduced, it wants the mercy killing of newborn babies to be debated by society.
The report does not spell out which conditions might justify euthanasia, but in the Netherlands mercy killing is permitted for a range of incurable conditions, including severe spina bifida and the painful skin condition called epidermolysis bullosa.
Dr Pieter Sauer, co-author of the Groningen Protocol, the Dutch national guidelines on euthanasia of newborns, claims British paediatricians perform mercy killings, and says the practice should be open.
Sauer, head of the department of paediatrics at the University Medical Centre Groningen, said: In England they have exactly the same type of patients as we have here. English neonatologists gave me the indication that this is happening.
Although euthanasia for severely handicapped newborn babies would prove contentious, some British doctors and ethicists are now in favour. Joy Delhanty, professor of human genetics at University College London, said: I would support these views. I think it is morally wrong to strive to keep alive babies that are then going to suffer many months or years of very ill health.
Dr Richard Nicholson, editor of the Bulletin of Medical Ethics, who has admitted hastening the death of two severely handicapped newborn babies when he was a junior doctor in the 1970s, said: I wouldnt argue against this. He spoke of the pain, distress and discomfort of severely handicapped babies.
The colleges submission was also welcomed by John Harris, a member of the governments Human Genetics Commission and professor of bioethics at Manchester University. We can terminate for serious foetal abnormality up to term but cannot kill a newborn. What do people think has happened in the passage down the birth canal to make it okay to kill the foetus at one end of the birth canal but not at the other? he said.
Edna Kennedy of Newcastle upon Tyne, whose son suffered epidermolysis bullosa, said: In extremely controlled circumstances, where the baby is really suffering, it should be an option for the mother.
However, John Wyatt, consultant neonatologist at University College London hospital, said: Intentional killing is not part of medical care. He added: The majority of doctors and health professionals believe that once you introduce the possibility of intentional killing into medical practice you change the fundamental nature of medicine. It immediately becomes a subjective decision as to whose life is worthwhile.
If a doctor can decide whether a life is worth living, it changes medicine into a form of social engineering where the aim is to maximise the benefit for society and minimise those who are perceived as worthless.
Simone Aspis of the British Council of Disabled People said: If we introduced euthanasia for certain conditions it would tell adults with those conditions that they were worth less than other members of society.
Wow. You are, of course, 100% accurate.
See Post #27 for the answer.
No fetus can beat us!
There was a thread some time back about the Hippocratic Oath. A majority percentage of doctors in this country polled answered that the oath was more of a tradition, a rite of passage that had to be said as part of becoming a doctor. But it wasn't a binding oath as they saw it.
Then there were some who wanted the oath changed because they did not want to take a chance at feeling bad about themselves should they break some of the tenets of the oath.
I could make claim to that myself. Thanks for using that as your tag line, It could have taken me years to find it if you had not.
Fine! How about this, as well? Any docter losing a malpractice suit will be administered a 9mm injection of lead to the back of the head. This will give us needed "management options".
[If a doctor can decide whether a life is worth living, it changes medicine into a form of social engineering where the aim is to maximise the benefit for society and minimise those who are perceived as worthless. ]
That about says it all. It's all about "playing God" and (God knows) doctors love to do that. For some, it's why they go into the profession in the first place.
21 years ago today my nephew was born at 26 weeks, weighing 2-1/2 lbs. When I saw that respirator pumping 150 breaths per minute into his tiny naked body I prayed for God to take him. I did not want my brother and his wife to be burdened by a significantly handicapped child.
Well, God taught me! My nephew is now at the top of his class in his junior year at our state's finest university. He is physically normal, handsome, charming and brilliant!
I know the doctor thinks he is using a pejorative term, but the word "murder" is the correct word in English.
Maybe in Nazi Germany this was "social engineering."
Yes. That's what's happening.
The doctors are not talking about witholding extraordinary treatment. They are not talking about giving only pallitive care for babies who are beyond the hope of medical science. They are not talking about ending life support when brain function ceases. They are talking about active euthanasia. Active euthanasia is a code word for murder. It is based in the teachings of utilitarian ethics which hold the good of society is always superior to the rights of an individual.
This is the polar opposite of Judeo-Christian teaching which holds that person's life is a gift from God and is not the property of any nation, state or other person. It says that societies' and governments' legitimate function is the protection of this and other God given rights.
Killing babies is wrong. It is wrong when they are in the womb and it is wrong when they are born.
Nice post.
Thanks - had computer/other problems today but hopefully can do some pingifying tomorrow.
Britain is really hurtling into the abyss. And many in the US want to follow suit.
What can you say, there are sociopaths in every profession. Some people are just evil...
"The only difference is the Nazis believed the ones who deserved to die were born to the wrong race."
Not entirely. The Nazis started by euthanizing maimed German vets from the first world war, and also disabled German children.
The enthusiasm in this article is chilling. Really creepy.
I propose we do away wqith healthy doctors- heck, all healthy people- let's make it normal to be dissabled & look upon helathy people as the freaks for a change- we'll excersize our management options & euthenize them- Cripes- Docs are going to be waging a jihad against peopel who are different- good going Europe- Cripes- dissabled peopel are responsible for some of our most important discoveries and inventions- I'm tellin ya- this world is freakin messed up in the stinkin head! Besides, if Docs start euthenizing the dissabled, Kerry is going to be in big trouble
Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
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.