UK courts okay right to end 12 year old's life

[jjtj22]

U.K. Courts Grant Mother Right to End Her 12-Year-Old Disabled Daughter’s Life - The Daily Beast

UK High Court Allows Mother to Euthanize Severely Disabled Daughter; Joni Eareckson Tada Says Judge's Decision 'Terrifying'

This mother fought for the right to end her child's life because of her disabilities. Now, I am a nurse, I have seen people kept alive, exhausting all medical efforts when they should have been allowed to go. I have seen people in extreme pain and fear, I can understand some of the argument for the desire to let your loved one out of their pain.

But, then I remember this is how Nazi Germany started, by killing the physically and mentally disabled and elderly first. Doctor's were encouraged not to care for their patients leading to the more euthanasia of the "useless". That is why this is such a slippery slope, what stops a parent from neglecting a child to the point of doctors agreeing to put them out of their pain? Go to any nursing home in you will see pain, hopelessness and many with a desire to die, are we going to be clearing them out in a few years?

The Murder of the Handicapped

 

[MadParrotWoman]

I agree it's a worrying trend and another symptom of the nearing toward end times. God and God alone is the only one who should determine when a person's time is up. It is even more disturbing that this decision was requested by someone other than the actual patient.

 

[SoulWeaver]

It is already fully legal in Belgium and Netherlands.

 

[skipp]

This is very worrying. I can easily see this as being used to get rid of the disabled and vulnerable among us. A slippery slope indeed.

 

[Nautilus]

I really don't think many can judge unless they are willing to give up their time, finances, and life to support a child with this many issues. Besides the kid is probably in heaven now. Can't complain over that.

 

[skipp]

Yes, people who are too difficult to take care of should be disposed of.

 

[HLR]

Its a slippery slope for certain. I understand that the child is now [probably] in Heaven. And I know that means she's in a much better place than here on this wretched earth. That being said though, where do you draw the line? If a woman is pregnant with a child that has shown to be positive for Down Syndrome and the mother does not want the child to live with Down Syndrome is it okay to abort the child?

 

[jjtj22]

I really don't think many can judge unless they are willing to give up their time, finances, and life to support a child with this many issues. Besides the kid is probably in heaven now. Can't complain over that.

Great idea, Nautilus, offing people who are a drain on resources, earth is overpopulated anyway. What do you suggest, should we let retirees spend their last paycheck before we do away with them? Or give them the pill with the celebratory cake?

Seriously, your post is so ridiculous it doesn't deserve a genuine answer.

 

[Nautilus]

Yes, people who are too difficult to take care of should be disposed of.

So would you say the mom should just deal with for an unknown amount of time or do you have a better solution?

 

[Nautilus]

Great idea, Nautilus, offing people who are a drain on resources, earth is overpopulated anyway. What do you suggest, should we let retirees spend their last paycheck before we do away with them? Or give them the pill with the celebratory cake?

Seriously, your post is so ridiculous it doesn't deserve a genuine answer.

So what do you suggest the solution is? Families should just be forced to deal with it? Have special homes for people with such great disabilities to care for them?

Everyone is quick to judge the mother's choice, but no one has any solutions or concern for the stress and ruin this probably brought to the family emotionally, mentally, and financially.

 

[jjtj22]

So what do you suggest the solution is? Families should just be forced to deal with it? Have special homes for people with such great disabilities to care for them?

Everyone is quick to judge the mother's choice, but no one has any solutions or concern for the stress and ruin this probably brought to the family emotionally, mentally, and financially.

I feel as though you have misunderstood my OP, I have great sympathy for this mother and she is in my prayers. She was not worried about her time, money, life or reputation, she was in extreme pain and distress over the pain her daughter was experiencing. I believe she was doing what she thought was best, I also believe she was deceived.

As for what should be implemented to ease the burdens of these families, there are pediatric home health services that send trained nurses into the home for 12 hour shifts.

Many, many families deal with these issues everyday, my best friend from childhood has a child with a rare degenerative genetic disorder, his prognosis is late teens early twenties, he is nine now. He experiences pain, surgeries and constant infections. I have watched her age with the stress, right after the diagnosis her anger and bitterness kept her isolated from everyone for bout a year and a half. But, she LOVES that boy, I would not want to be you if you suggested to her that it would be better for her time, finances and life if his life ended, at that point it might be your life that ended!

 

[Human]

U.K. Courts Grant Mother Right to End Her 12-Year-Old Disabled Daughter’s Life - The Daily Beast

UK High Court Allows Mother to Euthanize Severely Disabled Daughter; Joni Eareckson Tada Says Judge's Decision 'Terrifying'

This mother fought for the right to end her child's life because of her disabilities. Now, I am a nurse, I have seen people kept alive, exhausting all medical efforts when they should have been allowed to go. I have seen people in extreme pain and fear, I can understand some of the argument for the desire to let your loved one out of their pain.

But, then I remember this is how Nazi Germany started, by killing the physically and mentally disabled and elderly first. Doctor's were encouraged not to care for their patients leading to the more euthanasia of the "useless". That is why this is such a slippery slope, what stops a parent from neglecting a child to the point of doctors agreeing to put them out of their pain? Go to any nursing home in you will see pain, hopelessness and many with a desire to die, are we going to be clearing them out in a few years?

The Murder of the Handicapped

The child had the developmental age of a six month year old, was blind, and spent most of her life living from feeding tubes and being unable to eat or drink normally. She was twelve, and if not for medicine she'd have died by the age of four.

Last year she developed a serious condition that left her screaming in agony all day and through the night, unable to sleep.

Even the staff at Great Ormond Street children's hospital supported the petition to euthanize the little girl, because her life was no life.

How cruel you would need to be to artificially prolong that girls suffering any longer.

 

[Nautilus]

I feel as though you have misunderstood my OP, I have great sympathy for this mother and she is in my prayers. She was not worried about her time, money, life or reputation, she was in extreme pain and distress over the pain her daughter was experiencing. I believe she was doing what she thought was best, I also believe she was deceived.

As for what should be implemented to ease the burdens of these families, there are pediatric home health services that send trained nurses into the home for 12 hour shifts.

Many, many families deal with these issues everyday, my best friend from childhood has a child with a rare degenerative genetic disorder, his prognosis is late teens early twenties, he is nine now. He experiences pain, surgeries and constant infections. I have watched her age with the stress, right after the diagnosis her anger and bitterness kept her isolated from everyone for bout a year and a half. But, she LOVES that boy, I would not want to be you if you suggested to her that it would be better for her time, finances and life if his life ended, at that point it might be your life that ended!

Could be my life that is ended but better that than being a burden on those i love in my personal opinion.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

... but what does God's Word reveal.

Could be my life that is ended but better that than being a burden on those i love in my personal opinion.

 

[ColinCat]

Could be my life that is ended but better that than being a burden on those i love in my personal opinion.

Personally i can't wait to get old and be a real burden to my family.

On a serious note..

Where do you draw the line between euthanasia and artificially keeping people alive with medicines or machines?

If the only thing keeping someone live is a man made medicine or machine then isn't that already going against the will of God?

How is then ending the medication or turning off a machine seen as 'Playing God' when people were already playing god by artifically prolonging life?

 

[Agricola]

There is a huge difference between injecting someone to put them to sleep forever and just pulling out the life support stuff, you could argue that if God wants the person to live they will live without the life support, which is what happened in the case of this 12 year old. Just because we have the scientific advances to keep peoples life prolonged does not mean we should do that if it means the person is just going to live a non-existent life as a vegetable in constant pain, which is what this 12 year old was going through. Where do we stop? Oh the brain is alive, lets keep our dear daughter alive as a brain in a jar?

 

[ColinCat]

There is a huge difference between injecting someone to put them to sleep forever and just pulling out the life support stuff, you could argue that if God wants the person to live they will live without the life support, which is what happened in the case of this 12 year old. Just because we have the scientific advances to keep peoples life prolonged does not mean we should do that if it means the person is just going to live a non-existent life as a vegetable in constant pain, which is what this 12 year old was going through. Where do we stop? Oh the brain is alive, lets keep our dear daughter alive as a brain in a jar?

Well yeah. You might as well put it in a jar because it will perform the actions in a jar as it would in a vegetable body.

Then we have to ask the motives for keeping someone in that state alive. Its certainly not for the benefit of the patient.

 

[Lizathrose]

But, then I remember this is how Nazi Germany started, by killing the physically and mentally disabled and elderly first. Doctor's were encouraged not to care for their patients leading to the more euthanasia of the "useless". That is why this is such a slippery slope, what stops a parent from neglecting a child to the point of doctors agreeing to put them out of their pain? Go to any nursing home in you will see pain, hopelessness and many with a desire to die, are we going to be clearing them out in a few years?

No legitimate correlation can be made between the Nazi Party's ulterior political objectives and the genuine intent of a mother to end the senseless suffering of a child whose life was artificially prolonged (with no real hope of recovery, mind you) to begin with. That doesn't take into consideration the fact that many physical and mental disabilities that "justified" Nazi executions by Nazi standards (which, to reiterate, were predominantly politically motivated by a utilitarian agenda hidden from the public eye) wouldn't remotely stand in today's framework of medical ethics, or in our society in general. Fundamentally, the two phenomena are worlds apart.

So, just to be clear, political utilitarianism isn't a factor that contemporary medical ethics is reasonably ever going to consider as legitimate in its dealings with euthanasia. It's really nothing more than ridiculous, tabloid fear-mongering. If anything should be criticized, it's the fact that so many threads in this forum are making silly, dubious extrapolations from articles without taking things into consideration from their proper scope and context.

 

[Human]

No legitimate correlation can be made between the Nazi Party's ulterior political objectives and the genuine intent of a mother to end the senseless suffering of a child whose life was artificially prolonged (with no real hope of recovery, mind you) to begin with. That doesn't take into consideration the fact that many physical and mental disabilities that "justified" Nazi executions by Nazi standards (which, to reiterate, were predominantly politically motivated by a utilitarian agenda hidden from the public eye) wouldn't remotely stand in today's framework of medical ethics, or in our society in general. Fundamentally, the two phenomena are worlds apart.

So, just to be clear, political utilitarianism isn't a factor that contemporary medical ethics is reasonably ever going to consider as legitimate in its dealings with euthanasia. It's really nothing more than ridiculous, tabloid fear-mongering. If anything should be criticized, it's the fact that so many threads in this forum are making silly, dubious extrapolations from articles without taking things into consideration from their proper scope and context.

I'd also like to add that the ethical considerations associated with euthanizing a child who suffers because he or she has been neglected are not genuinely comparative to the ethical considerations in relieving the continuous and unrelenting misery of a perpetually ill person, just as they are not comparative to the political and sociological (not genuinely medical) considerations of Hitler's eugenics. To consider the former a valid medical-ethics consideration would require an unconscionable contravention of the hippocratic oath as well as a highly improbable, dramatic shift in medical ethics as a whole, while the latter is in the eyes of many experienced medical professionals a valid ethical dilemma whose debatability stems from considerations about the morality of artificially prolonging a patient's suffering, not taking into account race, gender, eye colour, religion, sexuality or, inherently, convenience. The question is; 'is it really more ethical to keep a hopelessly ill, suffering person alive than allow them to die?' Not; 'is this child a burden we should just rid ourselves of?'

I come across some extraordinary 'slippery slope' statements on this website, but that one takes the biscuit.

 

[ChristIsGod]

I've seen the withholding of all food and water from elderly people who's children just didn't want anymore of their inheritance spent on health care since 1971 working at the Paterson General Hospital as a Respiratory Therapist. They've been doing this for at least that long. This child's case may be different but the withholding of food and water is very common - even in the last Christian Nursing Home I worked in until 2002.
In both places the situation I walked in on was the same - finding the unit's nurses and aides crying that one of the women that they all loved was not permitted to be fed nor given water [NPO] and in both cases the women were pleading with them for just a piece of ice or a sip to wet their mouth. This was not under "comfort measures", where they give as much morphine as possible to kill the pain of this starvation & dehydration process.
It happens everyday in this country and not because the elderly person couldn't live much longer - but in one case where I knew the family - the Dr talked them into it [b/c Medicare doesn't pay much] and the family believed the Dr..
Because of my Dad now - I got hooked up with this group and recommend it for everyone, so that you will have designated people to make the decisions that YOU want and not whomever else.

www.patientsrightscouncil.org started by an Attorney and for $15. you can have forms specifically for your State to protect your children and the rest of your loved ones. I have friends that have Durable POA for my Health Care thanks to this attorney and her Org.