Belgian Parliament Legalizes Euthanasia of Children.

Death

The Belgian Parliament has passed a law allowing doctors to euthanize children and people with dementia. The vote was 86 to 44 with 12 votes abstaining.

I have no idea why anyone would abstain on a vote like this. Speaking as a lawmaker, I would never miss the chance to say “NO!!” to a heinous piece of legislation like this. I would be there and I would both speak and vote, if they had to carry me in on a gurney.

I’ve read that euthanizing children is a popular idea in Belgium. Pity for them — and all the rest of the so-called civilized world. I can only assume that some of the abstentions came from people who were afraid of the vote politically. Again, I say, pity for them. There are times, and this is certainly one of them, when getting kicked out of office over an unpopular vote would be a badge of honor.

I assume the usual folks will line up and explain how this is a great thing.

Let me be clear: It is murder. It is not acceptable. Nothing makes it acceptable.

From BBC News Europe:

Parliament in Belgium has passed a bill allowing euthanasia for terminally ill children without any age limit, by 86 votes to 44, with 12 abstentions.

When, as expected, the bill is signed by the king, Belgium will become the first country in the world to remove any age limit on the practice.

It may be requested by terminally ill children who are in great pain and also have parental consent.

Opponents argue children cannot make such a difficult decision.

It is twelve years since Belgium legalised euthanasia for adults.

In the Netherlands, Belgium’s northern neighbour, euthanasia is legal for children over the age of 12, if there is parental consent.

Conditions for child euthanasia

  • Patient must be conscious of their decision
  • Request must be approved by parents and medical team
  • Illness must be terminal
  • Patient must be in great pain with no treatment available to alleviate their distress

Under the Dutch conditions, a patient’s request for euthanasia can be fulfilled by a doctor if the request is “voluntary and well-considered” and the patient is suffering unbearably, with no prospect of improvement.

‘Immoral’ law

One man in the public gallery of Belgium’s parliament shouted “murderers” in French when the vote was passed, Reuters news agency reports.

  • Bill S

    Any person afflicted with a terminal disease has a right to be assisted in dying with a minimum of pain and suffering. This isn’t even a religious issue. It is a medical issue and an ethical issue.

    Religious people interject themselves throwing around buzz words like “the sanctity of life” and “the culture of death”. It is not their issue. It is a very private and personal matter that the family of a terminally ill patient has to deal with and it is painful enough without having to deal with people who try to make it a moral issue.

    • hamiltonr

      Bill, if killing children isn’t a moral issue, then there are no people with morals. You should be ashamed of yourself, advocating for this.

      • Almario Javier

        I wager he seems to be of the school that consent should be the only criterion in the legality of most behaviors. It’s a classical liberal tenet (liberal in the traditional sense, not as in the Democrats – lot of classical liberals are also for free markets).

    • FW Ken

      People have always been able to find ways to die. Turning it into a “right” takes it out of the private realm and turns out into precisely the sort of political football you decry.

      Life is sacred. Top day otherwise leads precisely to that slippery slope at the bottom of which is “suicide” of those unable to give consent. Which is precisely where Belgium is right now. The Netherlands have been there for some years.

    • Joeglocken Rightjustice

      It is as you say “very private and personal matter that the family of a terminally ill patient has to deal with …” but a moral issue still applies. Twenty five years ago, little morphine was given as it also shortened the patients life . Many patients suffered unnecessarily as did their loved-ones who endured an inept powerless predicament. Im not aware of how this position changed, but the medical staff involved, were offered a choice concerning moral or religious belief. I believe these present ethical moral issues are being manipulated for certain political objectives etc. To undermine the sanctity of life is their main agenda.

      • hamiltonr

        Pain medication used to control pain is not euthanasia in either the legal or moral sense, even if it shortens the patient’s life. Euthanasia is the deliberate taking of a human life. For instance, giving someone a massive — and lethal — dose of morphine with the purpose of ending their life is euthanasia, or to use simpler language, it is murder.

        Simply giving them adequate pain medication, even if that medication does shorten their life is not the same thing. I am talking about obvious end of life situations. I don’t mean snowing someone out just because they have a terminal illness that will eventually kill them, which by the way is how euthanasia is often applied. In fact, euthanasia is being used more and more on people who do not have terminal illnesses.

        Now, with this legislation, it will be used on children who can not, by virtue of their age and innocence are incapable of giving informed consent.

        This legislation allows parents to kill their children; a sort of post birth abortion, I guess you could say.

        • AnneG

          Rebecca, you covered the medical issues exactly correctly. It is post birth abortion. Next they will “euthanize” unhappy children. But they call any instance of capital punishment uncivilized. Plummeting quickly into the Abyss.

        • Joeglocken Rightjustice

          I wasnt aware of all the details , but I see that these groups that are pro euthanasia etc have an agenda.
          They create a scenario for this agenda.

      • Bill S

        “Twenty five years ago, little morphine was given as it also shortened the patients life . Many patients suffered unnecessarily as did their loved-ones who endured an inept powerless predicament.”

        My father’s life was ended by an intentional overdose of morphine. It was administered with our consent and I have no regrets. I can see numerous circumstances where it is more humane to end the suffering and hopelessness. The idea of putting the time and place of one’s death “in God’s hands” leads to all kinds of chaos and needless pain and suffering for all involved. I’ve been through it.

        • hamiltonr

          Bill, you keep confessing to murders you have committed. You killed your unborn child. You killed your father. Each time, you say you have no regrets. To top it off, you come on this blog and repeatedly try to convince others to kill as you have killed.

          If you do not repent and change, you will go to hell. It is as simple as that.

          • Bill S

            Well. I must admit that I type all these comments (including the ones that are censored) to find justification and to argue against condemnation. It’s like New York, New York. If I can make it here, I’ll make it anywhere, it’s up to you, New York, New York.

            I can’t repent when I didn’t do anything wrong.

            • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

              ” to find justification and to argue against condemnation”

              You don’t need to justify something that isn’t wrong. You don’t need to work against condemnation if it isn’t wrong.

              ONLY if these views are wrong, do you need to “work against condemnation”, oppressing others to justify your own selfish actions and wants.

            • AnneG

              Bill, you are just rationalizing. Sounds like you do that a lot. Have you numbed your conscience that far or is is now dead?

          • Lamont Cranston

            Going to hell would be fair more preferable than having to spend eternity surrounded by people like you.

            • Fabio Paolo Barbieri

              Who asked you to visit this blog?

            • SisterCynthia

              The only reason you say that is you do not have an appreciation for the horror that is Hell. :( It would be preferable to spend eternity with your most annoying family members living down the street, to entering an unending, visceral torment. If you have ever experienced either severe physical or emotional pain, you have a glimpse into how Hell is presented. Now, just hold that experiential “note” until you are ready to go mad. And keep holding it. Without stop, without pause, without hope. I’m sorry, but I have yet to meet ANYONE I disagreed with or disliked so much that their mere presence could make me prefer Hell.

            • FW Ken

              You clearly have no notion of Hell. Have you ever been desperate, in deep pain, alone, hopeless? Multiply that by infinity and consider it won’t end. You might read the Space Trilogy of C.S.Lewis, particularly That Hideous Strength. If books aren’t your thing, the TV show Supernatural has a few.choice episodes about Hell.

              In any case, Hell is not to be taken lightly.

          • perpper

            I was in a parish spiritual development group at one point … and another participant was a woman who had aborted her child in her unmarried young adulthood. She said she had repented and confessed, yet she also maintained that it was the right decision at the time. Since then, I have paid attention and it seems that many people who are nostrils-deep in the mortal sin are like this — no regrets kind of people who yet persist in hanging out in religious venues. I don’t understand it, but it’s a common enough phenomenon.

        • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

          I think the main objection you have to a culture of life, is your own sins against a culture of life, Bill.

    • vox borealis

      This isn’t even a religious issue. It is a medical issue and an ethical issue…it is painful enough without having to deal with people who try to make it a moral issue.

      So, it’s not a moral issue, but it is an ethical issue? Huh?! What does that even mean?

      Still, like a well-tuned clock that chimes right on the mark, Bill S. weighs in in favor of killing children and babies.

      • Bill S

        Moral implies being judged by God for most of the people on this blog.

        Ethical is more being judged by the experts as to whether it is something we should be doing.

        • hamiltonr

          You believe in absolutes when it suits you Bill. You argue that people shouldn’t be able to vote on gay marriage because you claim it is a “right,” i.e., a moral absolute. However, when it comes to killing old people and children, you think a vote is just fine.

        • vox borealis

          That’s semantic gobledegook. Look up the words “ethics” and “morals” and they are virtually identical in meaning and usuage. You are creating a definitional difference out of whole cloth to obscure the internal contradiction of your argument.

          The notion that we should cede to “experts” (experts on what?) the decision about when “should” kill people (“should” based on what consideration?) would strike me as ludicrous if it were not so frightening in its ramifications.

  • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

    If they consider a child to be able to consent to death, can forced marriages of the very young be far behind?

    • oregon nurse

      There are numerous precedents being set in law that treat children like adults in the criminal justice system. We see the age of consent or the age at which children can be legally emancipated from requiring the consent of a parent being lowered in many areas. This will all coalesce one day into inescapable precedent for ephebophiles and eventually pedophiles to get legal blessings to prey on children ‘who know what they want’. All because moral relativists blinded by their own narcissism refuse to acknowledge that legal and moral slippery slopes exist and should be avoided in the name of public good over personal preference.

    • Bill S

      I would think the consent of the child would be the stipulation in both cases. Allowing a child to consent to one thing should not lead to being forced into another thing.

  • oregon nurse

    Well it’s consistent at least. Why should little children’s lives be any less utilitarian than their elders.

  • Guest

    Bill S, I pray you have a change of heart. It’s bad enough adults are euthanized (yes, even here in US) but this is about children. The Sanctity of human life til natural death is, at it’s core, who we are… no buzzwords here. The “professionals” who tried to hasten the death of my parents were indeed influenced by the cult of death. Of course, money was part of the equation. But I made promises, entrusted with my folks care. I can’t describe the horror I felt when my own family members asked me to break this promise, some actually worked against me. But as caregiver I know God allowed they live til He decided, long after “pros” predictions (one Dr. actually said of my mother before my bringing her home “I thought she’d be dead by now”). They both died peacefully in their own home. I could not help my sister, though. I’ve said too much. I will pray for you.

    • Bill S

      Religious taboos are getting in the way everywhere I look. Religious people look at those who oppose their stands on these controversial issues of the day as part of the “culture of death”. I saw this first hand in 2010 when Question 2 failed to get enough votes because of a strong campaign against it by the Archdiocese of Boston. I discussed this issue at that time.

      I’m sure it will come up again.

      • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

        If it was just a taboo, then I wouldn’t care very much.

        After all, religious taboos are practically non-existent in American society today.

        What it is, is greedy people killing off people who cost too much. If this is what the hippies and baby boomers were protesting for, then what they got is worse than Vietnam.

      • Theophilus2

        I thought I’d deleted the comment and account… a little raw after losing many friends and family in a rather short time. But thanks for the reply and opportunity. See, it’s not about a negative but a positive. For love of God who is Perfect Love do I seek to love and serve. It is because I love you that I pray for you. Our Merciful Father loves you and awaits your return with open arms. God bless you.

  • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

    “Patient must be conscious of their decision”? WHAT??????? This is horrendous. This is even worse than I thought. Oh my God. I never thought I’d live to see something like this. It’s as if western civilization is dying right before my eyes.

    • hamiltonr

      I know. I had to take time to sit down and pray after I saw this Manny. I knew it was coming, but I was devastated when it happened.

      • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

        I knew it was coming to, but when i saw they actually have to get a kid’s consent, it shocked the hell out of me. It’s downright revolting.

    • SisterCynthia

      I hate to say I’m starting to lose the ability to be shocked or horrified anymore…. In resignation, I’m tempted to shrug, “well, at least this requires the kid to agree, so they can’t just murder a ‘bothersome’ kid,” but that just ends up meaning children will be invited to choose to commit suicide, and that’s a mortal sin, right? In which case, this actually DOES seem rather horrifying… encouraging a child to flee temporary discomfort at the price of eternity!? :(

      I sure hope the priests and ministers there are gearing up to deal with the pressures their members may face to “help” their sick children pass. Which makes me wonder, how long will it be before it becomes viewed as bad parenting to “make” a kid suffer thru the end of their life, rather than ending it early–you know, the kind of thing parents lose parental rights over? Will this one day progress to the point pressure will be applied to make sure “no one out there” is suffering and resisting parents will see kids legally taken away and “guardians” appointed for the sake of agreeing to euthanizing them? Dear God, I don’t think I want to think about this, because I think I just asked a rhetorical question… :(

      • hamiltonr

        Children will do what their parents tell them to do. The idea of children “agreeing” is a ruse, and a weak one. This law lets parents kill their kids.

        • SisterCynthia

          :(
          From the heights of civilization,
          down into the abyss
          does the dying West plunge,
          like a mad jumper
          reaching terminal velocity,
          No turning back,
          embracing the approaching dirt
          like a drug fueled “superman.”
          Maranatha, Lord Jesus.
          Maranatha.

          • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

            Did you write that Cynthia or does it come from somewhere else? That’s worth quoting.

            • SisterCynthia

              That’s me. Some times, when I feel at a loss for words (either really negative OR positive situations), the images/feelings that bubble up come out like this.

              • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

                Very nice. :)

        • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

          “Children will do what their parents tell them to do.”

          They will? I mean, I don’t entirely disagree on the subject of euthanasia, but in general, this statement is demonstrably false. Under pain of illness, a despairing parent giving up would certainly cause this, but in more mundane matters, I find children rarely will do what their parents tell them without either promise of bribery or threat of punishment.

  • FW Ken

    Here’s the bottom line: 30 years ago, palliative care was a serious medical discipline. The British, in particular, were known for a combination of heroine and some other drugs that provided pain-free consciousness, in most cases, that allowed the person to die naturally. But the fact is, it’s cheaper and less bother to just kill the useless elderly.

  • pagansister

    IMO a child has NO concept that death is FOREVER. You are not going to wake up again, and be fine, not in pain, and seeing your family etc. again. Religious beliefs will have been taught to some, telling them that they will be reunited with a relative (grandpa, grandma etc and eventually parents, siblings) in an after life. Depending on the age of a child, they will actually think death is just another adventure, not that they will no longer be alive. Even those that are raised without the concept/belief of an afterlife, deciding that they would be better off dead because the pain they have will be gone etc. is, IMO not a concept that is comprehensible. How can one decide to die if they really can’t conceive the idea of death? I’m an adult in the last 1/3 of my life—and I sure as heck don’t completely have a concept of totally NOT being here on this planet. :-)

    • hamiltonr

      Good point Pagansister.

  • hamiltonr

    Yes. Check some of the links to more recent posts, or go back through previous posts. You can also simply google and find it.

  • hamiltonr

    I linked to instances in recent posts. I think they’re still on the first page of this blog, but not sure. I do not have the time now to find links for you. Perhaps some of the other readers can help. If not, I’ll try to do it later. It will be Wednesday at the earliest before I have much time to do anything.

  • Ann Hessenius

    Never ever thought that one day Adolph Hitler and the rest of the Nazi regime’s actions would lose their horror, but it now appears that that is becoming the case. I mean, after “legislation” like this atrocity (and other similar occurences in the world recently), don’t the death camps lose some of their punch and revulsion in our minds??? If they hadn’t, then ideas like this would be incomprehensible to all people – even the unbelievably narcissistic ones who can pass laws such as this.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X