Wesley Smith has written an article that examines the Groningen Protocol in light of the German experience. It seems that the Dutch are upset over the comparisons between the Groningen Protocol and the Nazi decree that brought about the termination of the lives of babies that were born with birth defects as well as the adult disabled population.
If one truly examines the history of euthanasia, it is not hard to see that the Dutch medical profession are continuing along the path that started in Germany. The path to the murder of the disabled began in the 1920s when two men wrote a book outlining when it would be appropriate to put the disabled to death. From that beginning, babies who were born with severe disability were taken to a clinic and they were "put to sleep". In other words they were put down as though they were a dog or a cat.
Hitler became involved when a father wrote to him about his son who had severe disability. Hitler sent his advisors to have a look at the boy. These murderers wanted protection from the state so that they could continue with their killing of the innocent. Hitler gave them that protection.
Now let us move forward to the present Dutch experience, that is being copied in other parts of the world. The measure that is being used is that they are taking the life of a severely disabled baby because it is considered to not have a quality life. It is the notion of a quality of life that ought to be challenged, and indeed Justice Holman in his decision on baby MB did in fact consider that case from the point of view that we cannot define the quality of life of the child from pain alone. It must be noted that baby MB's condition is such that he suffers from a lot of pain but he has a quality of life because of his interaction with his family.
The other thing that comes out of Smith's article is the way in which the Dutch, just like the Germans before them apply a notion of compassion. This compassion is a false compassion because it is solely based upon the premise that the person does not have a right to live because the life is different from that of other people.
There are grave implications as a result of the implementation of the Groningen Protocol. I do not think that we can ignore those implications either now or in the future because as more and more people embrace these ideas, people with disability are being placed at risk. For example, what has been happening in the USA is that there has been an insidious campaign against people who are ill, or have some form of disability. Ever since the 1960s there has been a revival of the push for what is termed voluntary euthanasia. The Living Will that is improperly drafted can end up as a death warrant for people who sign a form without reading and understanding the implications of what is being signed. It is now common practice for doctors to refuse to treat someone they deem to be unworthy of living. This same risk aslo exists in Great Britain as well as in Australia. What happens in the USA is being copied in Australia, even though our case law is supposed to follow the protocols that are set up in Westminster.
In the past 50-60 years what we have witnessed is a push by the medical profession to absolved themselves when they deliberately take a life. The push for both the legalisation of abortion on demand and the legalisation of euthanasia on demand, has its roots in the early philosophies that were preached in Germany. They also have their roots in the desire to keep out of jail. There is a very real fear that those who were participating in what had been illegal should be prosecuted. That is why these professionals set out to change public opinion into their way of thinking.
The Groningen Protocol is the same as the German Protocol. The only difference is the lack of the backing of a political party. There are implications here for everyone, especially the unborn who then become premature babies. Their prematurity is a determinant in whether they are given the right to survive or must die because some adult says that their tiny lives are not worth living. It is through something like the Groningen Protocol that Michael Schiavo has been allowed to murder his wife. The lawyer George Felos, kept on spreading the lie that Terri was not able to feel anything and that when everything that sustained her life was taken away that she would not feel a thing but that she would drift off into oblivion. Yet, that statement was a lie. The other statement that he used to soften up the community is that there are thousands around the USA who die as a result of this technique every day. What Felos failed to understand that the majority public opinion cannot make the action right.
No comments:
Post a Comment