Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide - Main Talk

to see you all. I'm familiar, I think, with most of your faces, some new faces for me, and

thanks for coming out on a Sunday evening, and I hope you'll feel it was worthwhile.

A Christian perspective on euthanasia and assisted suicide. It's not a light topic,

and I don't have any jokes. Maybe that was a little joke, I don't know, but

it's one of these topics that I don't like to be in, and when I was researching this book,

it troubled me deeply. And even preparing for this talk, I found the whole thing quite upsetting.

And so it comes with a little bit of a warning. Maybe you're very familiar with what's going on

in the Netherlands and in other countries. But if you're not, it could be quite shocking for you

to hear some of the details. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are illegal in Ireland,

but providing information on how to commit suicide is not illegal in many countries,

including Ireland. And hence you have organizations like Exit International, hosting seminars and

workshops on how to commit suicide throughout the world and in Ireland. And there have been workshops

held in Dublin and attended by a lot of people in their 60s and in their 70s. Grandmothers that you

might expect to be at home knitting booties for their grandchildren are at Exit International

workshops. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are legally permissible, of course, in some countries

in Europe. I'm sure you're aware it's permissible in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Luxembourg,

and in Switzerland. And euthanasia is illegal in most of the United States. But assisted suicide

is legal in Washington, in Montana, in Oregon, California, Vermont. Did I say Montana? Let me say

Montana again if I didn't. And Bernalillo County in New Mexico. It's been resisted in many of the

states of the United States. The key difference between euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide

is who administers the lethal dose of medication. Euthanasia entails the physician or another third

party administering medication, whereas physician-assisted suicide requires the patient to self-administer

the medication and to determine whether and when to do this. Because it's lawful, many people think

it's a legitimate entitlement. But there's a difference, as we know, between law and morality.

Currently, there is widespread opposition to both euthanasia and assisted suicide from professional

medical associations in many countries. And many of these bodies have made public statements

asserting that opposition. It's a fundamental principle of medicine that a doctor should not

kill or offer to assist in killing. Euthanasia and assisted suicide must be distinguished from

two other things. One, the withholding or withdrawal of inappropriate or unwanted or futile medical

treatment. That's the first thing. Secondly, the provision of compassionate palliative care,

even when these practices shorten life. Not all available treatments are beneficial in the course of a

particular patient's care. After obtaining informed consent, doctors can withhold or withdraw any medical

intervention that the physician and patient think imposes a greater burden than a benefit.

There's a difference, of course, between non-intervention and direct intervention to kill.

And, you know, the decision not to intervene can be done even if the unintentional result of such

non-intervention or withdrawal might hasten the patient's death. The dilemma about assisted suicide

emerges partly from the medical ability to sustain life beyond the point where, in the past,

patients would have been allowed to die. People are becoming increasingly adamant about personal autonomy

and other values are being forgotten, like solidarity and community. Assisted suicide,

though presented as an act of compassion, is actually a violation of the sanctity of human life.

We all want our loved ones to die with dignity, and we all hope for a good death ourselves.

Maybe not tonight, but when the time comes.

And there are times when a patient's life should not be prolonged by unnatural interventions.

If a person is diagnosed with terminal cancer, they have the right to refuse treatments

which prolong the duration of life, but at the same time adversely affect the quality of that life.

It's not wrong to want to avoid spending your last few months of life in a hospital bed on chemo or radiation therapy.

But that's not the same thing as asking somebody to assist in taking your life.

Some people argue that laws should accommodate what they call mercy killing.

They say that bringing about a gentle death in the case of incurable and painful disease

is a humane and appropriate response.

When a person has a terminal illness and there's loss of mobility and dignity and consciousness,

some people think an injection, a simple injection which brings an end to their life is the solution.

But this is very dangerous thinking, and it raises many ethical and legal issues,

including the consent of the patient and the role of the doctor.

End-of-life concerns must be addressed in a way that represents the sanctity of human life.

Care at the end of life is an important issue,

and primary care physicians help patients and their families cope with the decisions and emotions

surrounding the dying process.

The practice of medicine involves meeting patients at their most vulnerable times.

Doctors must recognize their fear, embarrassment, and sadness,

but acknowledge their humanity and value.

Doctors who advocate euthanasia are a minority,

and they are actually assisting in the suicide of their own venerable profession.

Once euthanasia and assisted suicide become legal,

conscientious objection for doctors becomes increasingly difficult to defend.

A doctor cannot be both a healer and a killer without losing the trust of society.

Assisting patients to die prematurely is not part of the moral ethos or the primary goal of medicine.

Having a dual role in taking life while at the same time protecting life

would undermine the credibility and the trust that exists between patient and doctor.

Doctors shouldn't become executioners.

Now Holland, I'll refer to Holland sometimes as the Netherlands.

They're not exactly the same thing, but let's not get bogged down in it.

You know what I'm talking about.

Holland has shown that once the doctor has accepted the fact that she or he can end life,

no amount of rules or regulations will protect the public.

The notion that a life is meaningless is a moral judgment,

outside the scope of a physician's remit.

Doctors should respect the right of a competent patient to accept

or reject any medical care recommended,

recommended.

And this will mean recognizing the patient's wishes about the initiation,

the continuation, or the cessation of life-sustaining treatment.

Doctors must recognize the person, not just the condition.

The doctor must try to offer treatment or care that re-establishes their dignity.

Palliative or comfort care is a holistic approach to the whole person

and seeks to treat the whole person with dignity.

I believe that society is on the threshold of ushering in a new and corrupt culture of medicine,

and I believe that this could very quickly be foisted on us without consultation.

Medical professionals in Ireland exercise their judgment about whether or not a person in certain circumstances

should be resuscitated.

It was revealed by Kate Holmquist in the Irish Times on the 19th of September 2009

that 46% of elderly patients who had the words,

do not resuscitate, on their charts were not consulted,

and in most cases these fateful words were written by relatively inexperienced junior doctors.

Something to be concerned about.

It is acceptable, of course, in certain circumstances not to attempt resuscitation,

and legitimate in certain circumstances to allow somebody to die.

I want us to get this clear in our heads first,

but there is a difference between that and killing people.

There are many pragmatic arguments against euthanasia,

such as the fact that pain can now be effectively managed,

so that physical suffering is virtually eliminated,

and improvements in this regard are being made all the time.

But it is the principled argument against it that is the most compelling.

The sanctity of life must be protected,

and the code of ethics based on the sanctity of human life

is needed in a culture of moral relativism.

We do not just have a vacuum, an absence of morality.

What we have is a vortex,

where people are being sucked down into ever-lowering morality.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are opposed by most national medical associations

and prohibited by the law codes of most countries,

but this is under threat.

It is under threat from lobbyists for change,

and high-profile people and worst-case scenarios

are presented in the media to argue for this.

Requests for euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide

are being made in the UK.

Some doctors are facilitating these requests in other jurisdictions.

The balance between personal autonomy and responsibility to society is important,

and what we have now is unbridled personal autonomy

driving this agenda.

There is an important absolute principle at the core of this issue,

and it is not a good moral argument to say

that because something is desired and widely practiced

that it should be legalized in order to monitor and control and regulate it.

And this argument has prevailed in Holland

with regard to the use of cannabis, prostitution,

as well as euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.

But where does such a pragmatic and unprincipled approach ultimately lead,

and who is to say where the boundaries are to be drawn?

If euthanasia is legalized,

there will be undesirable outcomes.

Some patients will feel pressurized

to relieve their families of the burden,

emotional and financial,

of keeping them alive.

Now, I've been asked by Johnny to say something about the Irish context,

and I'm sure you're all quite familiar with some of the things I'm going to say,

but let me just refresh your memories.

In Ireland, it's illegal for a doctor, as I've said,

or anyone else to actively contribute to someone's death.

The law on these issues could be changed

either by court decisions, parliament or plebiscite.

It's not, however, illegal to remove life support and other treatment

should a person or their next of kin request it under certain conditions.

A September the 17th, 2010 Irish Times poll

showed that a majority, 57% of adults,

believed that doctor-assisted suicide

should be legal for terminally ill patients who request it.

If palliative care was properly understood,

I believe the poll results could be different.

I believe that fear and ignorance is driving this agenda.

You might have heard of the case of Marie Fleming v. Ireland.

She was a university lecturer who suffered from multiple sclerosis,

and she lost a landmark Supreme Court challenge

for the right to an assisted suicide in 2013.

And she died, sadly, peacefully at home on the 20th of December 2013,

aged 59.

She challenged the absolute ban on assisted suicide

in the Criminal Law Suicide Act of 1993.

She argued that as a severely disabled person,

unable to take her own life, unaided,

the law disproportionately infringed her personal autonomy rights,

I'm quoting now,

under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

She claimed that the ban was discriminatory

in that an able-bodied person may take their own life lawfully,

but she could not be lawfully helped to do the same.

Ms. Fleming had perfect cognitive function,

but had lost all motor function.

Marie Fleming was not the first person

to raise the issue of assisted suicide,

but her case has embedded the matter in the public consciousness.

The debate is well underway in Ireland,

and I wonder if you know how far advanced it is now.

In the Fleming v. Ireland case,

the seven-judge Supreme Court held

that although suicide is no longer a crime in Ireland,

this does not mean that there is a constitutional right

to take one's own life

or to determine the time of one's death.

It also found that the principle of equal treatment

did not confer on Ms. Fleming,

as a disabled person,

the right to be helped in taking her own life.

The judges stressed

that they were conscious of Ms. Fleming's suffering.

Nevertheless, they said, and I quote,

it is impossible to craft a solution

specific to the needs of a plaintiff such as Ms. Fleming

without jeopardizing an essential fabric of the legal system,

namely respect for human life

and compromising these protections for others.

Wise men, indeed.

This echoed the earlier ruling of the High Court,

which found that it could not rule in Ms. Fleming's favor

because, quote,

it could open a Pandora's box

leading to the involuntary deaths of vulnerable others.

End quote.

Ms. Fleming could have taken an appeal

to the European Court of Human Rights,

but other decisions of the Strasbourg Court

are not supportive

because they tend to leave decisions of this nature

to the national supreme courts.

In November 2013,

the then-tawnished Eamon Gilmore in the Dáil

praised Ms. Fleming's, quote,

brave and courageous campaign.

End quote.

He went on to acknowledge

that there's a range of ethical, legal,

and other issues associated with this topic.

However, he added,

this issue requires to be dealt with legislatively.

And this campaign, of course,

it didn't end with Ms. Fleming's death,

the matter is now in the hands of politicians,

very firmly.

A bill has been introduced to the Dáil last June 2015,

passed, uncontested,

and will go to the next stages.

In fact, it's meant to be debated this year,

but when will that happen?

One wonders.

Anyway, as I say,

the matter is now firmly in the hands of politicians,

and some of these legislators have indicated

that change is needed

in order to accommodate assisted suicide.

When Eamon Gilmore says

this issue requires to be dealt with legislatively,

we have legislation.

What he means is

this needs to be changed

to accommodate assisted suicide.

Right.

Tom Curran,

that's Marie Fleming's partner,

he has worked with TD John Halligan,

Waterford Independent TD,

and a team of four barristers

to draft legislation

to allow for assisted suicide.

And they completed

a right to die bill

based on the Oregon

Death with Dignity Act.

And Curran has got support

from several other TDs

and some senators.

Halligan introduced

the Dying with Dignity bill

to the Dáil

June 2015.

He said,

and I'm quoting in the Dáil,

he said,

Dáil Éireann needs to enter this debate,

and when we do so,

we need to leave

any religious dogma

at the door.

It reminds me of a sign

that I saw once

in a Paris hotel.

Please leave your values

at the front desk.

The Humanist Association of Ireland

has an interest in this bill,

and in March 2013,

they invited Tom Curran

to speak about his experience

of trying to help his partner

succeed in fulfilling her wish

to have an assisted suicide.

Halligan's bill would allow

for a person to end their own life,

subject to being examined

by two separate medical practitioners

who then sign a valid declaration

that the person in question's decision

is voluntary.

Halligan said the doctors

would have to certify

that the person has an incurable

and progressive illness

which cannot be reversed

by treatment

and which is likely to lead

to their death.

It all sounds very good.

All sounds very reasonable.

He said that a third independent witness

who is not a beneficiary

of that person's estate

must also testify

that the person seeking assisted suicide

has a clear and settled intention

to end their own life

when their illness becomes

too much to bear.

Halligan told the Dáil,

At all times,

safeguards must be met

to show the terminally ill person

has reached their decision

on an informed basis

and without coercion or duress.

Well, all of this was said

in the Netherlands.

Ten years, you know,

like, it's legal in the Netherlands

since the 1st of April 2002.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide

are both legal since that time.

But a decade before that

it was widely practiced.

And all of these safeguards

were put in place

and all of them now

no longer exist.

None of them at all.

And if you're tired of life

and you're 16 years old

you can have your life terminated.

I work in the Netherlands.

I've also suffered from depression

in the past.

Should I be overwhelmed by depression

on a two-week visit

to the Netherlands

I could be dispatched

by visiting a doctor

who doesn't have to refer me

for any psychiatric counseling

who doesn't have to consult

any relative.

I don't have to have

a terminal illness.

I don't even have to be ill.

Technically that's illegal

in the Netherlands

but that's widely practiced

because those criteria

are still in place

but they're totally ignored.

The first bear would hear of it

could be, possibly,

imagine this scenario

my ashes arriving at the door.

That's the kind of scenario

that we have

a nightmarish scenario now.

Anyway, Halligan's bill

would allow for

all of this

and these are the safeguards

that are talked about

at this stage

but once legislation is introduced

all of these things

are diluted

and expanded

and ignored.

And that's the evidence

that we have

from places

where it does exist

like the Netherlands.

And all we can go on

is that evidence.

And in April 2015

you might be familiar

with this.

Gail O'Rourke

I'll come back to that

and what has happened

in the Netherlands

in a few minutes

but let me just finish off

on the Irish context.

In April 2015

Gail O'Rourke

was found not guilty

of attempting

to assist her friend

and MS sufferer

Bernadette Ford

to travel to a euthanasia clinic

Dignitas

in Zurich

in Switzerland.

The trial lasted

eight days

and the jury

deliberated for seven hours

and it was the first

prosecution

under the Criminal Law

Suicide Act 1993

which decriminalized

suicide

but made it an offence

to assist another

to end their life.

The O'Rourke Ford

plan was thwarted

when a travel agent

alerted the Gardee.

Judge McCartan

ordered the jury

to acquit

Miss O'Rourke

of ordering

a lethal dose

of barbiturates

from Mexico

which were later

taken by Miss Ford

to end her life

on June 5th 2011.

The judge

also told the jury

to find O'Rourke

not guilty

of procuring

the suicide

of her friend

by helping

to organize

her funeral

before her death.

A Gardee

investigation began

after Miss Ford's

body was found

in her apartment

with the drug

pentobarbital

nearby.

Pentobarbital

is used

in euthanasia

and in capital punishment

in the U.S.

curare

is the drug

they use

in the Netherlands

and curare

is a drug

I don't know

if you ever remember

the films

with the pigamies

in Africa

the tribe

of very

low sized people

and they shoot

poison darts

that's curare

there are

there are

it's a paralytic

drug

and there are

of course

synthetic versions

of that now

but anyway

Gardee

first became

aware of the matter

when they were

alerted by the

manager of

Rathgar Travel

that a group

of people

were traveling

to Dignitas

in Zurich

and O'Rourke

told the travel agent

the purpose

of the trip

and this information

was passed

on to Gardee

who were waiting

for her

when she came

to collect

the tickets

now Gardee

didn't make

an arrest

but they told

O'Rourke

it was an offense

to assist

in a suicide

now let me

just say

that voter

referendums

and legislative

bills on

assisted suicide

have failed

in many places

so we shouldn't

despair

why have they

failed though

that's the question

partly because

of the concerns

of a broad

coalition of

healthcare

professionals

hospice workers

disability rights

advocates

pro-life advocates

and various

moral leaders

who have

vigorously opposed

the legalization

of euthanasia

and assisted

suicide

in these

political

jurisdictions

what are their

concerns

they've been

concerned about

the inability

to contain

assisted suicide

once it

starts

and evidence

shows that

once you

open the door

to legalize

euthanasia

and assisted

suicide

things change

dramatically

and that's

what

Hope Ireland

wants to

prevent

hope

Ireland

is a

new

organization

opposed

to

legalizing

euthanasia

and assisted

suicide

and it

is warned

that the

consequences

of doing

so in

Ireland

would be

would be

catastrophic

now

they're an

independent

organization

I might say

a little bit

more about

them in a few

minutes but

in countries

where assisted

suicide was

legalized

more often

it wasn't

used by

older people

but by

middle-aged

people who

feared

disability

or age

related

disease

and the

answer to

that fear

is more

support

more education

more compassion

right to die

advocates point

to Holland

as the

model for

how well

physician

assisted

suicide

and voluntary

euthanasia

for terminally

ill

competent

patients

can work

without abuse

but the

facts indicate

otherwise

the Rotterdam

court

established

the following

guidelines

I list

eight

the patient

must be

experiencing

unbearable

pain

that's number

one

number two

the patient

must be

conscious

number three

the death

request

must be

voluntary

number four

the patient

must have

been given

alternatives

to euthanasia

and time

to consider

these

number five

there must

no longer

there must be

no other

reasonable solution

to the problem

number six

the patient's

death

cannot inflict

unnecessary

suffering

on others

number seven

there must be

more than one

person involved

in the

euthanasia

decision

number eight

only a doctor

can euthanize

the patient

and there is

a ninth

great care

must be

taken in

actually making

the death

decision

all of those

strict you

would say

criteria

were established

by the

Rotterdam

court and

these guidelines

they've been

interpreted

by the

Dutch

courts and

the Royal

Dutch

Medical

Association

in ever

broadening

terms

one example

is for

example

the very

first one

the interpretation

of the

unbearable

pain

requirement

reflected in

the Hague

court of

appeal

decision

the court

ruled that

the pain

guideline

was not

limited to

physical pain

this is where

it starts

and that

psychic

suffering

it said

or the

potential

disfigurement

of personality

could also

be grounds

for

euthanasia

and the

main argument

in favour

of euthanasia

in Holland

has always

been the

need for

more patient

autonomy

that patients

have the

right to

make their

own end

of life

decisions

yet over

the past

20 years

Dutch

euthanasia

practice has

ultimately

given doctors

not patients

more and

more power

the question

of whether

a patient

should live

or die

is often

decided

exclusively

by a

doctor

or a

team

of

physicians

now

in spite

of the

fact

that

medical

care

is

provided

everywhere

in

Holland

free

or

well

not

free

but

it's

you know

it's

a

developed

country

and

it has

good

medical

care

but in

spite

of that

palliative

care

programs

with

adequate

pain

control

techniques

and

knowledge

are

very

poorly

developed

and

where

euthanasia

is an

accepted

medical

solution

to

patients

pain

and

suffering

there's

little

incentive

to

develop

programs

which

provide

modern

available

and

effective

pain

control

for

patients

that

is

one

of

the

outcomes

of

introducing

something

like

that

there

are

very

few

hospice

programs

in

Holland

and

the

services

they

provide

are

very

limited

in

the

mid

90s

1990s

for

example

there

were

only

two

hospices

in

Ireland

in

the

Netherlands

two

for

a

country

that

has

a

population

four

times

the

size

of

Ireland

in

Ireland

there

are

nine

hospices

three

in

Dublin

and

one

each

in

Cork

Limerick

Galway

Sligo

Donegal

and

Kildare

there's

none

for

example

in

Waterford

to my

knowledge

but

you see

most

palliative

care

is

delivered

in

homes

that

service

is

offered

in

Waterford

and

in

South

Kilkenny

by

a

palliative

care

team

and

hospice

specialists

but they

don't have

a hospice

building

with beds

if you

know

what I

mean

but

there's

a

big

difference

there

why

you

know

active

medical

intervention

to cut

short

a life

without

an

express

request

is a

common

practice

in the

Netherlands

they've

officially

sanctioned

euthanasia

for those

who cannot

ask for

it

particularly

handicapped

newborn

children

the

court

found

that

psychiatrist

Dr.

Shabbat

was

medically

justified

and

followed

established

euthanasia

guidelines

in helping

his

physically

healthy

but

depressed

patient

commit

suicide

why

was

this

person

depressed

well

the

patient

50

year

old

Hilly

Bosher

said

she

wanted

to

die

after

the

death

of

her

two

children

and

the

subsequent

breakup

of

her

marriage

it's

not

surprising

that

this

woman

wanted

to

die

it

seems

like

a

natural

reaction

to

such

tragedy

in

her

life

but

such

a

distressed

woman

should

have

been

helped

to

live

you

know

that

some

doctors

run

self-help

programs

for

adolescents

to

end

their

lives

in

the

Netherlands

general

practitioners

wishing

to

admit

elderly

patients

to

hospitals

have

sometimes

been

advised

to

give

the

patients

lethal

injections

instead

cost

containment

is one

of the

main

aims

of

Dutch

health

care

policy

and

euthanasia

training

has been

part of

both

medical

and

nursing

school

curricula

for

many

years

now

euthanasia

has been

administered

to

people

with

diabetes

rheumatism

multiple

sclerosis

AIDS

bronchitis

and

accident

victims

what you

have is

suicide

on

prescription

and you

do

have

you know

we have

meals on

wheels

in

Ireland

well you

have

death

on

wheels

in the

Netherlands

because

the

right to

die

people

in the

Netherlands

found that

there were

some

conscientious

objectors

doctors

who didn't

want to

participate

in these

programs

and so

they

introduced

a mobile

service

whereas if

your doctor

refused to

give you

this service

you could

ring them

up

they'd call

around to

your house

and you

could be

dispatched

in that

way

in 1990

the Dutch

Patients

Association

a disability

rights

organization

developed

wallet

sized cards

which state

that if

the signer

is admitted

to a

hospital

no

treatment

be

administered

with the

intention

to

terminate

life

many

in

Holland

see

the

card

as a

necessity

to help

prevent

involuntary

euthanasia

being performed

on those

who do not

want their

lives

ended

especially

those

whose

lives

are

considered

low

in

quality

in

1993

the

Dutch

senior

citizens

group

the

Protestant

Christian

Elderly

Society

surveyed

2066

seniors

on general

health care

issues

the

survey

didn't

address

the

issue

of

euthanasia

at all

yet

10%

of the

elderly

respondents

clearly

indicated

that

because

of the

Dutch

euthanasia

policy

they were

afraid

that their

lives

could be

terminated

without

their

request

right to

die

advocates

often argue

that assisted

suicide

is a

choice

issue

the

Dutch

experience

clearly

indicates

that

where

euthanasia

and

assisted

suicide

are

accepted

practice

a

significant

number

of

patients

end up

having

no

choice

at

all

it's

inevitably

applied

to those

who are

chronically

ill

disabled

elderly

mentally

ill

mentally

retarded

and

depressed

the

rationale

being

that

such

individuals

should

have

the

same

rights

to

end

their

suffering

as

anyone

else

even

if

they

do

not

or

cannot

voluntarily

request

death

unlike

Holland

where

medical

care

is

automatically

provided

for

anyone

for

everyone

in the

USA

millions

of

people

cannot

afford

medical

treatment

if

euthanasia

and

assisted

suicide

become

accepted

more

widespread

in the

USA

death

would be

the only

medical

option

many

people

could

afford

doctors

may

not

always

recognize

if

a

patient's

assisted

suicide

request

is the

result

of

depression

or

the

sometimes

subtle

pressure

placed

on

the

patient

to

get

out

of

the

way

also

given

the

current

push

for

health

care

cost

containment

medical

facilities

may be

tempted

to view

patients

in terms

of their

treatment

costs

instead

of their

innate

value

as

human

beings

patients

should

not

be

viewed

merely

as

customers

in a

health

care

business

what

is

needed

is

customized

care

not

customer

care

in a

society

of

economics

without

ethics

it's

often

the paramount

consideration

is the

bottom line

and

there's a

danger

that

ultimately

even

clinical

decisions

will be

determined

by

financial

management

policies

and

professionals

the

elderly

the

chronically

sick

the

intellectually

and

physically

disabled

would

become

vulnerable

termination

of life

on request

and assisted

suicide

act

it took

place

on the

1st of

April

2002

and it

legalized

euthanasia

and

physician

assisted

suicide

the

procedures

codified

in that

law

had been

widely

practiced

by the

Dutch

medical

community

for many

years

prior to

that

and

what

the

law

did

was

it

transformed

the

crimes

of

euthanasia

and

assisted

suicide

into

medical

treatments

and

specifically

it

allows

euthanasia

for

incompetent

patients

16 year

olds

can request

termination

of life

requests

don't have

to be

made

for any

particular

medical

condition

children

12 to

15 years

of

old

can

also

request

and

receive

euthanasia

if

a

parent

or

guardian

agrees

one

parent

or

guardian

agrees

see

first

a person

might

qualify

for

assisted

suicide

if

the

doctor

certified

that

the

patient

was

suffering

from

a

terminal

illness

and

that

the

patient's

suffering

is

lasting

and

unbearable

then

that

was

changed

so

that

there

was

no

requirement

that

the

suffering

be

physical

or

that

the

patient

be

terminally

ill

now

you

just

have

to

be

tired

of

life

and

we

know

that

medical

tourism

is a

reality

in our

world

people

already

travel

to

foreign

countries

for

dental

medical

and

cosmetic

treatments

that

are

either

more

readily

available

or

of

higher

quality

or

just

simply

cheaper

and

assisted

suicide

tourism

exists

in the

Netherlands

and

there

have

been

kind

of

public

relations

statements

that

deny

that

but

actually

doctors

are not

legally

forbidden

to

administer

assisted

suicide

to

people

from

outside

the

Netherlands

let me

just

say

I'll just

continue

I want

to say

I want

to close

with something

about

the

biblical

perspective

or the

Christian

view

but let

me just

say that

making

assisted

suicide

widely

available

with

mobile

teams

to help

patients

die at

home

and

that

has already

happened

but now

there's a

proposal

that anybody

over 70

will automatically

have an

entitlement

to

assisted

suicide

so you

get it

with your

pension

in the

Netherlands

the criteria

for these

things are

being

continuously

expanded

the process

of

liberalization

has shifted

from

terminally

ill

adults

to

adults

who

have

lost

their

interest

in

living

to

suffering

children

to

children

whose

parents

are

suffering

the

Groningen

protocol

Groningen

is the

name of

a

hospital

a

research

hospital

in

Utrecht

in the

Netherlands

and

they

have

they

recommended

that

the

Groningen

protocol

recommended

that

newborns

can be

euthanized

and

you know

lots of

people in

the Netherlands

instead of

opting for

second trimester

termination

well a lot

of

children are

aborted

if there's

any kind

of physical

or

any kind

of abnormality

they're aborted

in the second

trimester

so there's

a lot less

say

handicapped

people

now

but

should

a child

be born

with some

kind of

deformity

the

parents

suffering

is

now

a legal

entitlement

under the

Groningen

protocol

to have

those

children

euthanized

so

babies

are being

euthanized

now