On Feb. 24, The Forum published an article in its SheSays section on
Belgium’s new law allowing for the euthanization of children. The
article headlined the new legislation as a “humane stance on dying
kids.” The author assured readers that acts of euthanasia would be
carried out with strict guidelines (minors faced with constant and
unbearable pain; capacity for discernment; parental consent;
psychological evaluation) so that abuses don’t occur.
Belgium’s
experiment with euthanasia for adults has proved the ineffectiveness of
such guidelines set forth by legislation and offers no guarantee that
abuses will not occur with this new law for children. Passed in 2002,
Belgium permits adults who are in a “medically futile condition of
constant and unbearable pain or mental suffering that cannot be
alleviated, resulting from a serious or incurable disorder caused by
illness or accident” to request that they be intentionally killed.
The
reality of the past 10 years of legalized euthanasia for adults shows a
500 percent increase in cases; half of the cases are not reported;
Euthanasia has been committed on persons who are blind, anorexic and who
have had botched sex change operations; and the practice of organ
transplant from patients who die after voluntary euthanasia is becoming
more common.
The American College of Pediatrics issued a statement on Feb. 17 condemning the passage of the new law. In part, they said:
“Physicians
are healers, not killers. An individual’s future quality of life cannot
be predicted by caregivers. The role of the physician is to promote
health, cure when possible, and relieve pain and suffering as part of
the care they provide. The intentional neglect for, or taking of, a
human life is never acceptable, regardless of health system mandates.
The killing of infants and children can never be endorsed by the
American College of Pediatricians and should never be endorsed by any
other ethical medical or social entity.”
Euthanasia,
regardless of the euphemisms used to mask its true identity, can never
be considered a “humane” act. It can never be an authentic human
response to kill an innocent human person, most especially when they are
suffering, vulnerable, terminally ill or dying. The author of the
article calls for people to talk about euthanasia with “more honesty and
less hyperbole,” yet would it not be a more proper human response to
talk about ways the medical community can better educate and provide
adequate palliative care services, pain control management, and support
programs for parents who are suffering with a child who has
disabilities, is terminally ill or dying?
This would be the true
human response of care and concern, of using medical expertise combined
with compassion in order to meet the needs of children and family
members struggling with the dying process.
By:
Rachelle Sauvageau
Sauvageau is director, Respect for Life Office, Diocese of Fargo.
No comments:
Post a Comment