Posted on 07/13/2019 2:30:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
The media are reporting that one Frenchman's case represented a “right to die” fight. But, in their language, they’re overlooking that his story stood for something else: the right to live.
On July 11, outlets broke the news that 42-year-old Vincent Lambert had passed away after being denied food and water for nine days. Left a quadriplegic with serious brain damage after a traffic accident more than 10 years ago, Lambert needed a feeding tube, but could breathe on his own. He was heavily sedated by French doctors as he died, in a move that divided not only France but also Lambert’s family.
As devout Catholics, his parents fought for their son as a disabled man. Lambert’s wife, Rachel, argued that he would have wanted to die if his life meant being in a “vegetative state.” His siblings were divided too – as well as French citizens, the courts, and even international leaders.
His plight, media outlets reported, represented the “right to die.”
Following his death, a New York Times headline announced, “Vincent Lambert, Frenchman at Center of Right-to-Die Case, Dies at 42.”
He passed away “after an intense family dispute over his fate that led to years of legal battles and put him at the center of right-to-die debates,” wrote reporter Aurelien Breeden.
A CBS headline also recognized the “man at the center of right-to-die debate in France.” For CNN, writers remembered the man “whose case had come to symbolize France's right-to-die debate.”
But others stressed that Lambert’s case was more so about the right to live – and the intrinsic value of life.
While president Emmanuel Macron refused to intervene, Pope Francis voiced his position on Twitter. On July 10, the pontiff tweeted, “We pray for the sick who are abandoned and left to die.”
“A society is human if it protects life, every life, from its beginning to its natural end, without choosing who is worthy to live or who is not,” he urged. “Doctors should serve life, not take it away.”
A day later, following Lambert’s death, he prayed, “May God the Father welcome Vincent Lambert in His arms. Let us not build a civilization that discards persons those whose lives we no longer consider to be worthy of living: every life is valuable, always.”
Catholic Church doctrine teaches that “Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate.” But nutrition and hydration are usually considered “ordinary” rather than “extraordinary.” Catholics draw the distinction between whether a withdrawal of food and water allows someone to die or actually kills the person. The latter is forbidden.
Others also chimed in.
Alongside the pope, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York, tweeted, “We are all God’s children, made in His image. We must respect the dignity and sanctity of human life, regardless of race, economic status, or condition.”
EWTN host Matt Swaim typed, “Vincent Lambert was not ‘taken off life support.’ He was starved and dehydrated for a week by the state until he died.”
“If this were suggested as a form of capital punishment, it would be rejected by the courts as cruel and unusual,” he concluded.
Pro-life leaders also chimed in.
Commentator and author Obianuju Ekeocha added, “#VincentLambert has been killed by French court order. I repeat, Vincent Lambert has been killed.”
Lila Rose, the founder and president of pro-life group Live Action tweeted, “May he Rest In Peace. And may all of us who are living—who have the health and freedom to speak—work tirelessly so that this crime against humanity is never committed again.”
Days before, she called his treatment “horrific.”
“Food, water are basic necessities. Starving or dehydrating a patient to death is immoral & barbaric,” she stressed. In another tweet, she repeated, “Food & water are basic necessities-NOT ‘life support.’ We don’t even treat animals this way.”
One American News chief White House correspondent Emerald Robinson shared a video of “More than 1,500 people” who “gathered in silence at this church to mourn the death of Vincent Lambert - murdered by the French authorities by starvation.”
“May God bless him and keep him,” she added.
That’s because death, after all, just marks the end of life here on Earth.
Unbelieveable.
Well, that’s the media for you.
The ‘divine State’ and its statist worshippers forcibly murdered him via starvation. Thus his death is really the divine State’s ‘right to murder’
This dude’s condition was stabilized.
But the elite media loves to hate us peasants. Basically, death is never a victory , but a show of our impotency and mediocrity in conceiving life. How should that be celebrated or be thought as a good thing. They are using the same argument with abortion and it was only a matter of time this history revisionism would come upon.
“Free health care” and “free education” you can believe in...
I’ve seen other cases that have been compared to that of Terri Schindler, but this is the only one that has been remotely similar.
If you do not want to be starved to death when your body is healthy but you have brain damage, you should probably put that in a living will. But also specify if you do not want your body to remain on machines if you are genuinely brain dead. There are a lot of possibilities to think about for documentation in a living will.
When organ transplantation began there was a need to define death more precisely. “Brain Death” was seen as a way to provide viable organs without “ethically”. During my residency in neurosurgery we dealt with brain death diagnoses regularly. If you understand nueroanatomy it is a straightforward, easy diagnosis. If you don’t it is probably mysterious gobbledygook. The problem is this. It is impossible to keep a brain dead person alive for more than a couple days. You reach a point where the pressers just aren’t enough and you can’t keep their blood pressure up. Now someone in a “persistent vegetative state” can be kept alive, almost indefinitely.
Where the problem arises is the media and the political elite have purposefully conflated the two diagnoses and created a controversy where none needed to exist. Conveniently one product of that confusion is the state can just kill you.
Its amazing to me how vigilant and downright fanatical these Cretans are when it comes to the state murdering a murderer rapist or serial killer but its as easy as pie killing a newborn or a person with disabilities
Schiavo
Very warped, no question.
I use the name “Schindler” because that creep Schiavo was no loving husband. It was due to his efforts that she was murdered in such a cruel fashion. I will not disrespect her by associating Schiavo’s name with her.
They kept Jahi McMath’s body functioning for several years after the brain death. It may be her age at the time of death that allowed for maintaining the body for so long. In any case, Jahi was not a medical miracle.
I also saw a research article by some Japanese physicians who preserved some bodies in a pseudo-living state for several months after brain death. It was unclear what the pertinent medical question being addressed with this research was.
But we’re the Nazis.
Just the beginning of government-enforced death. They can do it by any one of several methods. They will not call it murder. They will be successful because the public is apathetic.
You got me thinking about this one. Precise choices in clear language.
SPOT ON!
God is the decider of when a person is born and when they die, not men (or even spouses or parents.)
Does anyone know if he received the Annointing of the Sick (the Last Sacraments?)
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.