Belgium became 1st country to allow euthanasia for children

[Darthrevan]

 

Belgium became the first country to allow euthanasia for terminally ill children of any age on Thursday when its lower house of parliament passed new "right-to-die" legislation by a large majority.

The law goes beyond Dutch legislation that set a minimum age of 12 for children judged mature enough to decide to end their lives. It has popular support in Belgium, where adult euthanasia became legal in 2002.

In the Chamber of Representatives, 86 lawmakers voted in favor, 44 against and 12 abstained. Most opposition parties supported it, as well as the governing socialists and liberals.

One man in the public gallery shouted "murderers" in French when the vote was passed.

The Christian Democrats, although members of Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo's coalition, voted against. Christian, Muslim and Jewish leaders denounced the law ahead of the vote in a rare joint declaration and Catholic bishops have led days of prayer and fasting against it.

"This is not about lethal injections for children. This is about terminally ill children, whose death is imminent and who suffer greatly," said Carina Van Cauter, a lawmaker for the Flemish Liberal Democrats who back the law.

"There are clear checks and balances in the law to prevent abuse," she said of the legislation, which now has to pass the largely symbolic stage of being signed by the country's monarch.

"SLIPPERY SLOPE"

The vote has attracted more attention abroad than in Belgium, where none of the major newspapers carried the news of Thursday's vote on their front pages, and television news concentrated on Belgium being in the international spotlight.

Children seeking to end their lives must be "capable of discernment", the law says, and psychologists must test them to confirm they understand what they are doing. Parents must also approve of their child's decision.

Supporters of the law say these safeguards would rule out the very young and teenagers not mature enough to decide.

Opponents have dismissed these rules as arbitrary and warned the new law will lead to a slippery slope of ever wider interpretation and a "banalization" of euthanasia.

Brussels Archbishop Andre-Joseph Leonard, head of the Catholic Church in Belgium, asked at a prayer vigil last week why the state wanted to give minors such responsibility when they had to wait until 18 for many other legal rights.

"The law says adolescents cannot make important decisions on economic or emotional issues, but suddenly they've become able to decide that someone should make them die," he said.

Belgium's rules on euthanasia have come under international scrutiny in the past year after it granted the right to die to deaf twin brothers who were about to turn blind and to a transgender person after an unsuccessful sex change operation.

The new law specifies that children seeking euthanasia must be terminally ill rather than just in a state of unbearable suffering, which is the qualification for adults.

FEW EXPECTED TO OPT TO DIE

Belgian nurse Sonja Develter, who has cared for some 200 children in the final stages of their lives since 1992, said she opposed the law.

"In my experience as a nurse, I never had a child asking to end their life," Develter told Reuters before the vote.

But requests for euthanasia did often come from parents who were emotionally exhausted after seeing their children fight for their lives for so long, she added.

In practice, supporters of child euthanasia say, there are likely to be few minors who will be allowed to die.

The Netherlands has had five cases of child euthanasia since the law went into effect there in 2002. The total number of Dutch euthanasia cases has been 2,000 to 4,000 a year.

Between 2006 and 2012, there was just one case of a Belgian under the age of 20 requesting euthanasia. Over 1,000 people opt for euthanasia in Belgium annually.

Apart from Belgium and the Netherlands, euthanasia is also legal in neighboring Luxembourg, and France is considering legalizing it later this year. Switzerland allows assisted suicide if the person concerned takes an active role.

In the United States, assisted suicide is legal in Montana, Oregon, Vermont and Washington states.

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/world/story/belgium-adopts-law-allowing-euthanasia-children-20140214

[RadX]

Recently, in sg, this debate has taken on a new life and I am all for it.

 

Really, I have come at such a stage in my life that what is it about really? We come, we go. If I had a choice to chooe active Euthanaisa, I will!

 

 

http://www.kspr.com/news/nationworld/Costello-Pro-life-and-pro-death-penalty/21051646_25969242

[LoneCatFish]

 

Really, I have come at such a stage in my life that what is it about really? We come, we go. If I had a choice to chooe active Euthanaisa, I will!

 

Bro, no offense, sounds to me that you have suicidal tendency.

 

I am pro Euthanasia too, if the quality of life is more suffer than enjoyment.

[RadX]

 

Bro, no offense, sounds to me that you have suicidal tendency.

 

I am pro Euthanasia too, if the quality of life is more suffer than enjoyment.

 

 

hahhah..no lah. Philosophical more like. As I see each day pass by, and the news that gathers around us, one tends to question the validity of living. the end destination is always there, regardless. thus sets me thinking abt this question of 'life and living' in a holistic manner.

[LoneCatFish]

 

 

hahhah..no lah. Philosophical more like. As I see each day pass by, and the news that gathers around us, one tends to question the validity of living. the end destination is always there, regardless. thus sets me thinking abt this question of 'life and living' in a holistic manner.

 

I like science alot, as a hobby. My simplified view of life is a two dimentional graph, vertical y-axis is happiness, and horizontal x-axis is time. We all started at 0,0 and finally will end at X,0 which X is the time we die. Objective of life is to maximize the area under the curve, meaning to maintain as high of y value as possible for all time. Sounds boering, but it's definitely much simpler than today's primary school maths.

 

If y value goes negative all the time, then it's time to consider euthanasia.

Edited May 16, 2014 by LoneCatFish

[RadX]

 

I like science alot, as a hobby. My simplified view of life is a two dimentional graph, vertical y-axis is happiness, and horizontal x-axis is time. We all started at 0,0 and finally will end at X,0 which X is the time we die. Objective of life is to maximize the area under the curve, meaning to maintain as high of y value as possible for all time. Sounds boering, but it's definitely much simpler than today's primary school maths.

 

If y value goes negative all the time, then it's time to consider euthanasia.

 

 

hmmm...v interesting approach.

[1fast1]

I like science alot, as a hobby. My simplified view of life is a two dimentional graph, vertical y-axis is happiness, and horizontal x-axis is time. We all started at 0,0 and finally will end at X,0 which X is the time we die. Objective of life is to maximize the area under the curve, meaning to maintain as high of y value as possible for all time. Sounds boering, but it's definitely much simpler than today's primary school maths.

 

If y value goes negative all the time, then it's time to consider euthanasia.

Hmm... while I like the AUC approach, that sounds less like an argument for euthanasia than it does an argument to legalise marijuana or even narcotics!

[Ktglfc]

I am all for this.

 

Why let the children suffer so much more, when we know they will go soon ?!

I know its terrible, but the sufferings of the children are even worse at their age.

 

We are just prolonging their agony w/o thinking on their behalfs.

[The_Bear]

 

I like science alot, as a hobby. My simplified view of life is a two dimentional graph, vertical y-axis is happiness, and horizontal x-axis is time. We all started at 0,0 and finally will end at X,0 which X is the time we die. Objective of life is to maximize the area under the curve, meaning to maintain as high of y value as possible for all time. Sounds boering, but it's definitely much simpler than today's primary school maths.

 

If y value goes negative all the time, then it's time to consider euthanasia.

For some people, it starts to go downhill from 0,0. Would that area count too?

[Xers007]

Recently, in sg, this debate has taken on a new life and I am all for it.

 

Really, I have come at such a stage in my life that what is it about really? We come, we go. If I had a choice to chooe active Euthanaisa, I will!

 

 

http://www.kspr.com/news/nationworld/Costello-Pro-life-and-pro-death-penalty/21051646_25969242

but you have been given a new lease of life recently and enjoying your beemer...

[The_Bear]

Recently, in sg, this debate has taken on a new life and I am all for it.

 

Really, I have come at such a stage in my life that what is it about really? We come, we go. If I had a choice to chooe active Euthanaisa, I will!

 

 

http://www.kspr.com/news/nationworld/Costello-Pro-life-and-pro-death-penalty/21051646_25969242

Totally agree. Can I send my neighour's kid to Belgium?

[1fast1]

Recently, in sg, this debate has taken on a new life and I am all for it.

Some people are against all active euthanasia, even if it's done with the full volition of the subject, and if it's actually a rational choice (based on expected abysmal quality of life). These people are usually approaching the topic from an idealised religious perspective (which is very pro-life), but not always - since there are some atheists who may make the same argument from a secular perspective, such as seeing the preservation of life as a Kantian categorical imperative.

 

Then there are those (like you, I assume) who take a more pragmatic approach and say that voluntary euthanasia should be legalised. But there are still objections to those from many pragmatists, and they all concern "the slippery slope".

 

The slippery slope here is the descent from the intended fully voluntary euthanasia to a system that tolerates or even encourages involuntary euthanasia. It's not as far-fetched as you might think. Even now, a sick relative places a severe burden financially, emotionally and physically on the loved ones. Can coercion from the relatives really be ruled out? And even if it's not explicit coercion as such, can one really say that the loved one is not voluntarily laying down their life prematurely just to save cost/agony for the relatives? The argument gets even more macabre when considering the fact that healthcare resources are already being stretched to their breaking point in many nations. Would the caregivers (physicians, nurses, counsellors) have a conflict of interest when discussing end-of-life options with a terminal patient? Suppose they knew that a really sick child couldn't get a particular life-saving modality (access to life-support equipment or an ICU bed) because a terminal adult was occupying it. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that one of them might quietly and privately counsel the terminal adult to "get on with it"?

 

This is why medical ethics is such a minefield (I've worked in this area before). The concept of euthanasia has very far-reaching consequences, going to the very root of how we define the value and meaning of human life and our society. If it is introduced, very stringent safeguards should be put in place to ensure that the decision is made by the subject with full information, deliberation and without coercion. But that is easier said than done.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Turboflat4

[Wyfitms]

i'm not so philosophical about the whole concept of euthanasia

 

i just feel that it is damn depressing that children would be in a situation to choose to live or die

[RadX]

but you have been given a new lease of life recently and enjoying your beemer...

 

 

life is not all abt the material stuff around you, but the quality of life. One does not affect the other.

 

anyway, i just having catharsis lah, seeing all the bad news, etc etc...hahahaha

[Baal]

This will never come to pass in Sg. Medical industry has to much vested interest. Besides, using chemicals would mean that the good organs (if any) cannot be donated/harvested.

 

However, what I can do is refuse treatment & just pile on the morphine on myself & die at home. Maybe with a dosage high enough and with sufficient strength to climb the ledge I can expedite the process before I become completely bedridden.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Baal

[1fast1]

to climb the ledge

Don't do that. Think of the poor cleaners who have to clean up after you.

[LoneCatFish]

For some people, it starts to go downhill from 0,0. Would that area count too?

 

That's negative area ...... sad

[Vid]

I don't mind going early. Life is not easy.