Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: When you’re gonna die, the state will make you die.
First, a little mood music:
We are told that euthanasia, when allowed, will only apply to incurable disorders so that a patient can “die with dignity”, and not over something transient like feeling down after a breakup… but Belgium shows that that slippery slope to killin’ em all ain’t to fallacy.
“A court in Belgium has acquitted three doctors accused of unlawfully poisoning a woman whose life they helped to end.
“Tine Nys, 38, died surrounded by her family on 27 April 2010.
“In the landmark case, her sisters and prosecutors had argued she wanted to die because of a failed relationship – not an ‘incurable disorder’ as required by Belgium’s euthanasia law.
“But after hours of deliberations the jury in Ghent cleared the doctors, prompting applause in the courtroom.”
We are told that euthanasia, when allowed, will only apply to incurable disorders so that a patient can “die with dignity”, with texts of bills and enabling legislation declaring “protections against abuse”… yet once homicide had been legitimized as a medical procedures, those “protections” became “barriers” against the right to die be killed.
“Razzle-dazzle them. That’s what good carney pitchmen do to sell their wares.
“So do assisted-suicide advocates. When pitching legalization, they solemnly promise that they have written, oh so ‘protective guidelines’ into the legislation to prevent abuse.
“Then, once the law is safely in place, advocates grouse that the guidelines they touted are ‘obstacles’ or ‘barriers’ that unjustly prevent suffering people from accessing assisted suicide. Eventually, political agitation begins to amend the law to make things, shall we say, more flexible.
“We see this slippery slope process in action in Washington. Assisted suicide has been legal for several years, and now a bill has been filed to require a university study into alleged ‘barriers facing Washington’s residents to the Death with Dignity Act,’ and to have that study recommend changes in the law to break down such barriers.”/p>
The proposed HB 2419 highlights these promises turned problems to be “solved”:
- a lack of awareness of the Act;
- the 15-day waiting period;
- concerns that inhibit participation of health care providers;
- hospital, medical, hospice, and long-term care providers’ policies that restrict the participation and distribution of information about the Act;
- geographic access to pharmacies that dispense medications related to the Act;
- restrictions based on the self-administration requirement;
- ack of insurance coverage for the services and medications necessary to participate in the Act;
- the need for improvements to the data collection system;
and any other barriers identified in the course of performing the study.
The full HB 2419, with expanded substitute language can be read below:
We are told that euthanasia, when allowed, will only apply to incurable disorders so that a patient can “die with dignity”, and that no one would be forced to be involved… until they were.
“I have a piece today on the home page describing the pressure being put on a British Columbia hospice by the government to allow euthanasia — despite it being adverse to the hospice philosophy.
“The pressure has included a threat to cut off all funding — illustrating the danger associated with single-payer health care. Now, the administrators of the hospice are under attack and are threatened with loss of jobs on the ludicrous basis that refusing to kill patients is ‘inhumane.’”