• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Imposed Death
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
Advertising Supplement
 
Euthanasia literally translated from the Greek means "good death." Some who promote euthana-sia call it "mercy killing." Death by euthanasia isneither good nor merciful. Therefore, in thispublication, the more accurate term "imposeddeath" is frequently substituted for "euthanasia"and also for "assisted suicide." (See Definitions,p.3)You may ask, "Why should I be concerned? Whydo I need to read this publication?"Because the entire human race has a stake in theanswer to the question, "Should imposed death bepermitted and regulated by law?" History teachesus that a society which does not respect and protectall human life will ultimately bring about its owndestruction.Allowing the lives of certain people to be terminat-ed because they are viewed as "not worth living" or "burdensome" has profound repercussions for all of us. Devaluing one human life devalues all humanlife. (See the true stories highlighted in our Case inPoint Features.)This supplement examines the history of imposeddeath, the facts about it and the experiences andopinions of those most intimately affected by it.You need the unvarnished truth in order to makeinformed decisions about such vital matters.Advocates of euthanasia and assisted suicide useterms like "choice in dying" and "self-determina-tion." They promote the social and legal acceptanceof the "right to die"—that is, the "right" for individ-uals to choose how, when, where and why to die,and to receive assistance in dying from others.Although the expression "right to die" is seductive,it is fundamentally anti-libertarian. Giving the Statethe right to authorize our "right to die" begins theprogression from voluntary imposed death to invol-untary imposed death. Who will decide for thosewho cannot make their own choices? At what pointdoes a "right" become an expectation, even a duty?Instead of pursuing a "right to die," let us strive tocreate an environment —a culture of life— inwhich no person feels compelled to seek the "quick fix" of death and every person's life is respected bysociety and protected by law.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Human Life Alliance assembled a talented team of writers, researchers and experts who contributed todeveloping this supplement. We are grateful tothese men and women for their dedication to thisproject, as well as for their perseverance in defend-ing the unalienable right to life of all humanbeings, especially those who are most vulnerable,the voiceless. Foremost, we want to thank our mul-titude of friends whose faithful support enablesHuman Life Alliance to continue its life-savingeducational projects.
Imposed Death
Human Life Alliance is a non-profit,pro-life, educational organizationdedicated to protecting human lifefrom fertilization until natural death.HLAcreates educational publicationson abortion, abstinence and euthanasia.Foradditional copies ormoreinformation, contact:Human Life Alliance3570 Lexington Avenue NorthSuite 205Saint Paul, Minnesota 55126 USAwww.humanlife.org(651) 484-1040
What’s the Big Deal?
Features4Living Wills: Vital… or Deadly?
ALiving Will may be a license to kill.
5"Persistent Vegetative State"
How reliable is a PVS diagnosis?
8Thirsty? Too Bad.
Withholding food and water is the new “mercy killing.”
11Hospice Care: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
by Tracy Berntsen
Tread carefully when you select a hospice.
12Terri Schiavo: A Senseless Death
The story of one disabled woman’s fight for life.
3Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide:What in the World is Going On?
The imposed death agenda creeps across the globe.
6The History of Imposed Death in America
How the right-to-die agenda has infiltrated America.
9Would you never want to be hooked up to amachine?
by Marlene Reid
It might just save your life.
10Organ Donors Wanted: Dead or Alive!
by Dr. Paul A. Byrne
Dead by whose definition?
Additional Features
A Time to Let GoNot Dead YetSave a LifeThanks for all the fish!Follow the MoneyOrgan Donors, NOT “Brain Dead”A Brother's Grief
humanlifealliance
PresidentContributing Writer and Editor 
This publication was created by Human Life Alliance © 2006 
 feedback@humanlife.org
2
Imposed Death
Human Life Alliance
Editor 
 
Euthanasia:
Euthanasia means an act or omissionintended to cause death in order to eliminate suffer-ing. The act or omission is committed by someoneother than the person being euthanized, allegedly for his/her benefit.
Euthanasia can be an action, such as a lethalinjection, smothering or shooting.
Euthanasia can be an omission, such as withhold-ing or withdrawing necessary and ordinary (bene-ficial, usual, and not excessively burdensome)medical care and treatment, or food and fluids.
There is no moral distinction between an act thatis intended to cause death and an omission thatcauses death. The victim is equally as dead.
Euthanasia can be voluntary—the personrequests or gives consent to be killed.
Euthanasia can be involuntary—the person doesnot give consent or is incapable of giving consentto be killed.
MercyKilling:
Euthanasia is sometimes calledmercy killing. "Mercy" describes the (assumed)motive. "Killing" describes the act.
Assisted Suicide:
Suicide is self-murder. In assistedsuicide, the means—drugs, gun, plastic bag,instructions for their use, counseling, etc.—areprovided by someone else, but the last act is doneby the person being killed.
Physician-Assisted Suicide:
Physician-AssistedSuicide means that a physician provides the meansfor a person to commit suicide.
Aid in Dying:
Aid in Dying is a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia.
Imposed Death:
Imposed Death is an umbrellaterm which covers all acts of killing human beingseither in order to end their suffering or to relieveothers of the duty to care for them.The Netherlands and Belgium are theonly nations in the world so far thathave legalized active euthanasia andphysician-assisted suicide (PAS).Switzerland has not legalized PAS, butliberally allows it. In the United States,although euthanasia by action is notlegal, "living will" laws and courtdecisions have ushered in euthanasiaby omission. "Right to die" activists inthe U.S. have waged battles to legalizePAS in many states, but have managedto win in only one—Oregon. In 1994,Oregon voters narrowly (51%)approved the "Death With DignityAct." They had been led to believe thatthe Act would restrict PAS to cases of unbearable, uncontrollable pain. That'swhat they approved, but what did theyactually get?
Oregon - We'll Help You Die!
Delayed by legal challenges, Oregon's"Death With Dignity Act" did notbecome operative until 1997. By theend of 2005, physicians had reported246 suicides using physician-pre-scribed drugs. These patients’principalconcerns were "decreasing ability toparticipate in activities that made lifeenjoyable" and "loss of autonomy"—not pain.
1
The Act, in fact, does notmention pain as a justification for PAS. It merely requires the diagnosisof a terminal illness that will lead todeath within six months.
2
Predictions of life expectancy areunreliable. Two patients who receivedprescriptions in 2001 were still alivemore than a year later—one died in2003, the other was still alive at theend of 2003.
3
Isn't it probable thatsome patients who killed themselveswould have lived longer than sixmonths? Might some physicians"help" non-terminally ill patientscommit suicide?The law requires doctors to report allprescriptions for PAS, but Oregonconducts no independent reviews toverify that doctors are complying, sothere really is no way of knowing theactual number of PAS deaths or thereasons for them.The Hippocratic Oath states, "I willgive no deadly medicine to anyoneeven if asked," but today very fewphysicians make that promise. Thisanti-Hippocratic climate disposesphysicians to do whatever the patient,physician or even the state wants.Oregon rations health care. Its"Prioritized List of Health Servicesfor Medicaid Patients" will not allowpayment for treatment of many typesof cancer unless the patient has at leasta five percent chance of living another five years. So, a patient with cancer of the bowel, for example, who mightlive a few more years with treatmentto slow the cancer's progress, will notbe treated. Yet Oregon will pay for PAS as "comfort care" for Medicaidpatients.PAS creates less concern for providingthe best medical treatment and moreconcern for cost-containment. PASdiscriminates against low-incomepatients who are old, sick, or disabledby offering them drugs to die rather than reasons to live. Oregon's taxpayersdid not vote to pay for killing the poor.
Understanding
Gonzales v. Oregon 
In 2001, Attorney General JohnAshcroft issued a directive thatphysicians could lose their federalregistration to prescribe controlledsubstances if they prescribe them for assisted suicide because it is not a"legitimate medical purpose." Hissuccessor, Alberto Gonzales, agreed.In 2004, the Ninth Circuit Courtdeclared that Ashcroft had oversteppedhis authority and the U.S. SupremeCourt agreed to hear the case of 
Gonzales v. Oregon
.On January 17, 2006, the SupremeCourt ruled 6-3 that the ControlledSubstances Act (CSA) does notaddress assisted suicide and thereforeAshcroft did not have the authorityto prohibit doctors from prescribingfederally controlled drugs for PAS.Contrary to the spin PAS supportersput on this decision, the Court did notuphold Oregon's law nor did it endorseassisted suicide. In fact, the justicesin the majority agreed that the federalgovernment possesses the power to prevent narcotics from beingprescribed for PAS, for example, byamending the CSA.
The Netherlands - We EuthanizeChildren!
In 2001, as a mere formality, theNetherlands legalized assisted suicideand euthanasia. Wesley Smith, anattorney and author of numerousbooks on bioethical issues, neatly sum-marizes the progression of medicalkilling in the Netherlands:
First, Dutch euthanasia advocatessaid that patient killing will belimited to the competent, terminallyill who ask for it. Then, whendoctors began euthanizing patientswho clearly were not terminallyill, sweat not, they soothed: med-icalized killing will be limited tocompetent people with incurableillnesses or disabilities. Then, whendoctors began killing patients whowere depressed but not physicallyill, not to worry, they told us: onlycompetent depressed people whosedesire to commit suicide is "ration-al" will have their deaths facilitat-ed. Then, when doctors begankilling incompetent people, such asthose with Alzheimer's, it's allunder control, they crooned: non-voluntary killing will be limited to patients who would have asked for it if they were competent. And nowthey want to euthanize children.
4
In 2004, Groningen UniversityHospital decided to permit its doctorsto euthanize children under the age of 12 with or without the parents consent.
5
By the end of 2005, the Netherlandswas setting up a commission to regulatethe practice of ending the lives of "seriously suffering" newborn babies.
Belgium - Get a Euthanasia Kit!
In 2002, a new Belgian law wentinto effect that allows a physician toeuthanize an adult patient whorequests it because of a "hopeless"medical condition and unbearablephysical or mental pain that cannot becontrolled. With modern palliativecare, very few people should fit thatdescription. Nevertheless, the govern-ment reported that in the first year after the law took effect over 250Belgians were legally killed!In 2005, pharmacies in Belgium beganselling "euthanasia kits" containing allthe necessary materials to efficientlykill a patient. Akit costs about 60euros ($77).
Switzerland - You’ll Never TakeAnother Vacation!
Switzerland is becoming known for its"suicide tourism." The non-profitorganization Dignitas, headquarteredin Zurich, assists foreigners who wantto die. They fly to Zurich whereDignitas takes care of everything fromsupplying the drugs to disposing of thebody. Dignitas has recently expandedits operations by opening a branchoffice in Hanover, Germany.
6
Unlike other countries, Switzerlandhas not considered assisted suicide a"medical treatment." However, that ischanging. Lausanne UniversityHospital decided to permit assistedsuicides starting January 1, 2006.Other hospitals are debating whether to follow suit.
Does Legal Equal Ethical?
Legalizing medical murder doesnot change a crime into a medicaltreatment; rather, it turns the law itself into an accessory to murder.
1Eigth Annual Report on Oregon's Death WithDignity Act. Oregon Department of HumanServices. 3/9/062Ibid.3Stevens, Kenneth MD. "Latest assisted suicidereport should be cause for alarm,"
TheOregonian
. 3/12/04.4Smith, Wesley J. "Now They Want toEuthanize Children." www.weeklystandard.com, 9/13/045Hewitt, Hugh. "Death by Committee."
TheWeekly Standard 
. 12/2/04. www.weeklystandard.com.6Whitlock, Craig, "Branching Out to Serve aGrowing but Dying Market." 11/1/05www.washingtonpost.com.
Definitions
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: What in the World is Going On?
International Task Force onEuthanasia and Assisted Suicidewww.internationaltaskforce.orgPhysicians for CompassionateCare Educational Foundationwww.PCCEP.org
Information
Advertising Supplement
www.humanlife.org
3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...