On the heels of Polly Toynbee’s lament that her cancer-stricken mother could not legally kill herself, (and my response to that, here) comes another UK resident to suggest that it is better for the old to just kill themselves and not be a burden.
Is anyone surprised that in a post-Christian Europe, where abortion is a question no longer even meriting debate and where some countries, like Holland, are already enthusiastically lining up the sick and the elderly for “compassionate” life-ending, we’re seeing this swift devolution, where euthanasia is touted not simply because it is “merficul” but because it is economically practical? This Baroness Warnock has all the answers.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, she said:
“I know I’m not really allowed to say it, but one of the things that would motivate me (to die) is I couldn’t bear hanging on and being such a burden on people.
“In other contexts, sacrificing oneself for one’s family would be considered good. I don’t see what is so horrible about the motive of not wanting to be an increasing nuisance.
“If I went into a nursing home it would be a terrible waste of money that my family could use far better.”
We hear a lot about how materialistic Americans are, but it’s not materialistic Mr. & Mrs. Sappy Moralistic America suggesting the Soylent Green Solution: Put the old into a chair, before a videoscreen of pretty pictures and put them down, like poor old Edward G. Robinson. The secularist Europeans, so enlightened, so progressive, are the ones who now suggest that filthy lucre is more important, has more meaning, than a human life that has become difficult or “burdensome.”
Just yesterday, I wrote that I didn’t wish to consider what this era’s embrasure of “mercy” death would lead to. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out:
“If you’re sick and over a certain age, why, you don’t really need that kidney transplant. If you’re old and won’t kill yourself, or if you’re young, but sick-and-going-to-die-soon-anyway (and unwilling to play along) then screw you, Toots, and you’d better have enough money to pay for your upkeep, because we’ll want no part of you.”
Or, as the Baroness puts it:
“Maybe it has come down to saying ‘Okay, they can stay alive but the family will have to pay for it.’ Otherwise it will be an awful drain on public resources,” she said.
Warnock sat on a Lords select committee which agreed on a ban on euthanasia in 1993, but last year she conceded that the law needed to be reviewed.
Admittedly, her remarks concerned the medical care of premature infants, but the effect is the same. Baroness’s words unwittingly echo the unconverted Ebenezer Scrooge, “If they’d rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.” Or, you know, stop being a vulgar drain on the public pocketbook.
“Okay, they can stay alive, BUT…”
What chilling words. Perhaps the Nazis have not been defeated, after all.
Grandmamma is sorry she will not be able to share genuine experiences of love with you, sweetikins, but just think how joyfully you’ll remember her when you buy an iPod, or when you ride Space Mountain! That’s what really counts, after all, isn’t it, that poopidoops has every earthly pleasure, is denied nothing in this world? Because after all, there is nothing else beyond ourselves and our lives.
Just think, if England had not moved to socialized medicine, Grandmamma wouldn’t be such a drain on the books and she might be allowed to stay alive long enough to dandle a baby on her knee, or give her daughter some excellent advice that won’t be available after she’s been compassionately killed off.
Heaven help us. These are ugly, ugly days.
EGAD-BUT-ENGLAND-IS-IN-TROUBLE UPDATE: Put down the old, put down the sick, put down the prematurely born, but for heaven’s sake, DO NOT HURT THE BURGLARS!