End Times and Current Events
August 19, 2018, 10:17:07 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Euthanasia: A Culture of Death Expands Globally

Shoutbox
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Euthanasia: A Culture of Death Expands Globally  (Read 158 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21338



View Profile
« on: May 23, 2016, 08:54:49 pm »

Euthanasia: A Culture of Death Expands Globally

Euthanasia - legalizing premature deaths in a process usually euphemized in such terms as "assisted suicide" and "mercy killing" - is growing and making inroads into new countries such as Canada, South Africa and India.

In countries with long history of euthanasia, the practice is also becoming more accepted.  Recent euthanasia statistics for 2015 have been released in the Netherlands, showing a significant increase of 4 percent as compared with 2014.

Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent for Life Site News explained that the rise is mainly due to the increase of euthanasia for demented, elderly people, as well as psychiatric patients, two categories that raise even more questions than "ordinary" euthanasia for untreatable physical pain.

According to Smit's report, in 2015, 109 demented persons (against 81 in 2014) were killed while still "mentally competent" enough to express their own will.  56 patients with psychiatric disorders were put to death at their own request in 2015, a sharp rise from the 41 such cases recorded in 2014.

In this last category, the End of Life Clinic was reportedly involved in most cases. Out of a total of 5,561 reported euthanasia acts - compared with the 3,695 reported five years earlier - four were deemed not to be in compliance with the Dutch euthanasia law. Two of them were handled by the End of Life Clinic.

But no legal action will be taken, reported the protestant conservative daily, Trouw. By deciding not to act, the competent authorities appear to be retroactively justifying certain forms of illegal euthanasia - this is exactly how the "slippery slope" concept works.

Smit expounded that in the Netherlands, euthanasia, the deliberate killing of a human being  supposedly at his or her request  is, in principle, a penal offense. Compliance with a "strict" list of criteria, which includes "unbearable suffering," the lack of alternative therapy, and "no possibility" that the patients situation will improve, allows doctors to escape both trial and punishment.

But they are expected to report all acts, with a wealth of details, for them to be vetted by one of the five regional euthanasia supervisory commissions.

Once the commission has studied the case it either approves it as compliant with the law or transmits it to the Health Inspection Service and to the public prosecutor. These can then decide whether to open a judiciary procedure.

Over the years, the regional commissions have accepted more and more dubious cases as legal, so when they decide not to approve an act of euthanasia as compliant, further investigation by a court would appear to be essential.

Not so, decided the Health Inspection and the public prosecutor in two cases that did not make the grade in 2015. The two cases for which End of Life Clinic's doctors were singled out involved psychiatric suffering and advanced dementia.

Smit concluded that the fact that the Justice Ministry's own services have decided not to prosecute in the aforementioned cases, shows the guidelines are being considered as mere indications.

According to a separate report published online recently in timeslive.co.za, euthanasia is deemed a 'good' choice for some. Some observers believe that it is justified in cases of trauma, such as with victims of sexual assault.

In one controversial case, a sexual abuse victim in her 20s was allowed to go ahead with the procedure as she was suffering from "incurable" post-traumatic stress disorder, the Dutch Euthanasia Commission said.

Other countries seem rapidly to be following suit. An example is South Africa, where euthanasia is not legal but a Pretoria High Court ruling recently gave Robyn Stransham-Ford access to assisted suicide. This ruling has now opened the door for people who want assisted suicide approved similarly for them via the court systems.

Paulan Stärcke, who spoke recently at the Euthanasia 2016 conference in Amsterdam, said even children as young as 12 who ask to end their lives should be taken seriously. "Euthanasia is a good death by the wish of the person who dies and no one else," she said.

In India, euthanasia is also well on the path to legal acceptance. Neetu Chandra Sharma for India Today reported lately that the debate over "mercy killing" may soon end as the Union Health Ministry has prepared legislation on the contentious issue of euthanasia.

The Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill patients (protection of patients and medical practitioners) Bill is up for public debate. "Based on the recommendations of the Law Commission, and after examination of the draft Bill in Health Ministry, we are contemplating to enact a law on passive euthanasia," said Dr. Jagdish Prasad, Director General of Health Services (DGHS).

Sharma's report explains that while passive euthanasia entails withholding of common treatments in terminally ill patients such as antibiotics, necessary for the continuance of life, active euthanasia involves the use of lethal substances or forces, such as injections to kill, and is the most controversial.

If approved, the Medical Council of India (MCI) will have an active role in the law. The MCI would prepare and issue guidelines for medical practitioners in the matter of withholding or withdrawing of medical treatment to competent or incompetent patients suffering from terminal illness.

A recent report by the Catholic News Agency stated that Canada's parliament has until June 6 to consider Bill C-14, controversial legislation that, if passed, would legalize euthanasia in the country. But some citizens of Belgium, where euthanasia has been legal since 2002, have a message for Canada: Don't do it.

In a new series of videos, Belgian doctors, lawyers, and family members of the euthanized argue that legalizing euthanasia sets a dangerous precedent that threatens the most vulnerable in society and compromises patient-physician relationships.

The videos are produced by the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and Dunn Media. The group is also producing a documentary on the issue titled "Vulnerable: The Euthanasia Deception" due out in June.

"Don't go there," Hendrik Reitsema, whose grandfather was euthanized in Belgium, said in one of the videos. "Why? You open Pandora's Box to the practice of killing as though it were a normal part of medicine...and we've now arrived at a moment in history where... physicians now become a threat to their patients."

Euthanasia, which Canada's Parliament is considering, differs from physician-assisted suicide in that anyone - a doctor, a family member, the patient - may administer lethal drugs to the patient. Under physician-assisted suicide, the patient's doctor prescribes lethal drugs, but legally only the patient can administer them to themselves.

Proponents of euthanasia laws often argue that safeguards can protect the vulnerable from abuse of these laws. However, Belgian doctors and lawyers in one of the short videos contend that "safeguards are an illusion."

 "For me the only clear safeguard is to say that a doctor cannot kill a patient," Dr. Benoit Beuselinck, a Belgian oncologist and professor, said in the video. "Once you admit that a doctor can kill his patient, even in terminal conditions, it would be very difficult to put a red line and say you cannot go beyond this."

Under Belgian law, any adult with a terminal illness can request euthanasia. But a terminal diagnosis can be deceiving, as many patients survive far past their prognosis.

In another video, Dr. Beuselinck said he has also seen the law go unchecked, with an estimated 30-40 percent of performed cases of euthanasia going unreported. "There is no control of the law," he said. "In Belgium, patients are killed by euthanasia at the first diagnosis of Alzheimer's or of malignant disease of a cancer."

Anti-euthanasia activist Lionel Roosemont said in the "Safeguards" video that once euthanasia becomes enshrined in law, it soon ceases to be a free choice. "The freedom of choice of euthanasia has become the obligation of choice, of having euthanasia," he said.

Etienne Montero, a Belgian lawyer and Dean of Faculty of Law at the University of Namur, said euthanasia laws are also dangerous because of the unclear terms. Belgium has also seen the law stretched beyond its original limits.

Whereas the original law only allowed those 18 years of age or older to request euthanasia, children of any age can now request euthanasia and be given it, if it is approved by doctors, psychologists, and their parents.

Marnix Coelmont, a teacher and advocate, said his advice to Canada would be that if they are going to approve euthanasia, then they also need to invest a lot of money in palliative, end-of-life care that so that people don't feel like they have to choose euthanasia. "Because unbearable pain is a very relative concept," he said.

Dr. Beuselinck said doctors can help their patients at the time of death without killing them.  "We help people to die by controlling their suffering and controlling their symptoms. We don't help them to die by killing them directly."

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=345#drRKZZyue7HPWlmS.99
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8

Social Buttons

Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21338



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2016, 09:06:52 pm »

Shocking Survey Reveals Millions of Americans Embrace Culture of Death

The American Medical Association has described physician-assisted suicide as a serious risk to society and "fundamentally incompatible with a physician's role as healer."

Millions of Americans disagree.

Two-thirds say it is morally acceptable for terminally ill patients to ask their doctors for help in ending their lives, according to a new survey from Nashville-based LifeWay Research. A similar number says doctors should be able to help terminally ill patients die.

Scott McConnell, executive director of LifeWay Research, says Americans want more say over how they die. That's especially true if facing a painful, terminal illness, he says.

"If they are facing a slow, painful death, Americans want options," he says. "Many believe that asking for help in dying is a moral option. They don't believe that suffering until they die of natural causes is the only way out."

Widespread support

Physician-assisted suicide first became legal in the U.S. in 1997 under Oregon's "Death with Dignity" law. Since then, 991 patients in Oregon have ended their lives using medications prescribed by a doctor under the law, according to that state's reports.

Today, six states allow physician-assisted suicide. The latest is Colorado, where voters approved Proposition 106, which allows a terminally ill patient to request a fatal dose of sleeping medication, by a two-to-one margin in November.

Washington, California, Vermont and Montana also allow physician-assisted suicide. The city council in the District of Columbia recently approved a measure allowing the practice—a decision that must be reviewed by Congress.

In LifeWay Research's survey, 67 percent of Americans agree with the statement, "When a person is facing a painful terminal disease, it is morally acceptable to ask for a physician's aid in taking his or her own life." Thirty-three percent disagree.

Where there are differences among demographic groups, most still agree. For example, Americans age 18 to 24 (77 percent) and those 35 to 44 (63 percent) and 55 to 64 (64 percent) agree. So do white Americans (71 percent) and Hispanic Americans (69 percent). Those with some college education (71 percent) or with graduate degrees (73 percent) and those with high school diplomas or less (61 percent) also agree.

Among faith groups, more than half of all Christians (59 percent), Catholics (70 percent), Protestants (53 percent), Nones (84 percent) and those of other religions (70 percent) agree. Most of those who attend religious services less than once a month (76 percent) also agree.

A few demographic groups are skeptical. Fewer than half of those with evangelical beliefs (38 percent), African-Americans (47 percent) or those who attend religious services at least once a month (49 percent) say physician-assisted suicide is morally acceptable.

"Traditional Christian teaching says God holds the keys to life and death," says McConnell. "Those who go to church or hold more traditional beliefs are less likely to see assisted suicide as morally acceptable. Still, a surprising number do."

Few want restrictions on doctors

Researchers also found widespread support for removing restrictions on physician-assisted suicide.

Many Americans (69 percent) say physicians should be allowed to assist terminally ill patients in ending their lives. Thirty-one percent disagree.

Those in the Northeast (73 percent), Catholics (70 percent), white Americans (73 percent), those with graduate degrees (77 percent), Nones (88 percent) and those who skip religious services (78 percent) are among those most likely to agree.

More than half of Southerners (64 percent), African-Americans (53 percent), Protestants (53 percent), those with a high school diploma or less (64 percent) and those who attend services at least once a month (52 percent) also agree.

Again, those with evangelical beliefs (42 percent) do not.

LifeWay Research's findings echo those of other studies. A 2015 Gallup survey found 68 percent of Americans said physician-assisted suicide should be legal, up from 53 percent in 2013. Gallup also found that support for legalized physician-assisted suicide has wavered over the past 20 years. It previously peaked at 68 percent in 2001 before declining to 53 percent.

The debate over physician-assisted suicide is unlikely to go away, says McConnell, and it raises troublesome questions.

"Such requests are asking doctors to betray one of their most sacred oaths—which admits, 'It may also be within my power to take a life,' but concludes, 'I must not play at God,'" says McConnell. "To ask physicians to turn from their task of healing is not a decision to make lightly."

http://www.charismanews.com/culture/61758-shocking-survey-reveals-millions-of-americans-embrace-culture-of-death
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21338



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 07:34:13 pm »

Droves of Canadian Doctors Opt Out of Euthanasia
BreakPoint

Dozens of Canadian doctors who signed up to provide lethal injections have changed their minds, according to medical officials.

At least 24 doctors in Ontario have asked to be removed from a list of physicians willing to participate in Canada’s Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) law, passed in June. Some 30 more have requested their names be put on hold.

Jeff Blackmer, vice president of the Canadian Medical Association, said some doctors initially think they are helping patients end their suffering but find the reality much different.

“We’re seeing doctors who go through one experience and it’s just overwhelming, it’s too difficult,” he said. “And those are the ones who say, ‘Take my name off the list. I can’t do it anymore.’”

Ontario, one of the only provinces so far to track the data, currently has a list of 137 doctors willing to participate in assisted suicide. Of those, 107 are willing to administer a lethal injection or prescribe lethal drugs. The other 30 chose only to assess patients for eligibility.

The doctor opt-outs follow a similar decision by several Canadian hospitals that announced last year they would not participate in the program because of their religious convictions.

To be eligible for assisted suicide in Canada, a patient must have a “grievous and irremediable” illness, be physically or psychologically suffering, and have a “reasonably foreseeable” natural death.

Lawyers recommend doctors use a six-month rule when planning a patient’s death, but the law still leaves a lot of gray area for eligibility.

“That confusion causes great anxiety for physicians, and many just pull back,” said Jonathan Reggler, a doctor on Vancouver Island. “If the doctor doesn’t carry out the medically assisted death according to the law, that doctor is at risk of being prosecuted for murder.”

Alex Schadenberg, director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, said doctors withdrawing from the assisted suicide program is no surprise.

“It’s counter-intuitive to the human person to kill someone,” he said.

Even doctors with no ethical problem with euthanasia have a hard time actually watching someone die following a lethal injection they administer, he said. Those who don’t struggle with conscience qualms will become “euthanasia experts.”

“What I predict will happen is there will only be a few doctors in Ontario doing this euthanasia, or in Canada doing it, and all the other doctors will be forced to refer patients to them,” he said. “And it doesn’t take a lot of doctors to kill people.”

http://www.christianheadlines.com/blog/droves-of-canadian-doctors-opt-out-of-euthanasia.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2017, 05:26:11 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/charlie-gard-story-uk-shows-exactly-america-doesnt-ever-want-socialized-medicine/
Charlie Gard ‘Death Panel’ Saga in UK Shows You Exactly Why America Doesn’t Ever Want Socialized Medicine
As Donald Trump weighed in on the fight to save British baby Charlie Gard, Theresa May was facing pressure to intervene. Her spokesman said yesterday it would be 'inappropriate' to discuss the 'delicate case'. Without her support the US president would not have the authority to go over the European Court of Human Rights to try to keep the boy alive.

7/9/17

The parents of 11-month-old Charlie Gard were joined by an ‘army of supporters’ to deliver a 350,000 signature petition to Great Ormond Street hospital calling for him to go to the US for treatment.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Think you want truly socialized medicine? Think again. Over in England, little Charlie Gard is desperately in need of top-shelf medical care, the kind only available in the United States. President Trump has personally guaranteed the needed care for little Charlie will be 100% without charge to the parents. Sounds great, right? Yeah, it does, except for one little massive problem. The UK ‘death panels’ that decide who lives and who dies have so far ruled against allowing him to travel to the US. In fact, unless a miracle happens, they are getting ready to remove him from life support. That’s right, in the UK the ‘death panel’ and not the family decides when life support is pulled. Still want socialized medicine? Pray that little Charlie Gard will be allowed to escape his UK ‘death panel’ captors and be able to flee to America for his life-saving and free treatment.

Chris Gard and Connie Yates said they were ‘overwhelmed’ by the worldwide support they have had in their battle, with the latest leaders to offer their support including Donald Trump and the Pope.

Today they publicly blasted the court decision to stop them from taking their baby to America for treatment at a protest outside the hospital in London because, they said, Charlie ‘deserves a chance’.
This is what happens when parents are no longer in control of their children’s health choices:

In an emotional speech in front of banners supporting the terminally ill baby at Great Ormond Street Hospital this afternoon, Chris Gard noted that in the seven months his son has been on a ventilator while suffering from his rare genetic condition, he could have had the proposed treatment from American doctors twice over.

Mr Gard said: ‘We just want to thank you all for being here.

‘Over 350,000 people have signed the petition. Our special thanks go to, obviously America, and everyone in Rome, who are supporting us and believe that Charlie deserves this treatment, as he rightly does, as we believe.’

The pair also thanked the British public and the media for their help in the campaign.

Mr Gard said: ‘We are trying to take out son from one hospital, where they, you know, there are a lot of specialities there, and it’s a fantastic hospital, they do great things there. ‘Unfortunately, they are not specialists in Charlie’s condition – the specialists are in America, where we want to go.’

As Donald Trump weighed in on the fight to save British baby Charlie Gard, Theresa May was facing pressure to intervene. Her spokesman said yesterday it would be ‘inappropriate’ to discuss the ‘delicate case’. Without her support the US president would not have the authority to go over the European Court of Human Rights to try to keep the boy alive.

Miss Yates added: ‘There’s now seven doctors supporting us, from all over the world, from Italy, from America, from England as well, that think that this has a chance, you know, (an) up to ten per cent chance of working for Charlie – and we feel that that’s a chance worth taking.

‘We’ve been fighting for his medication since November, we’re now in July.

‘He’s our son, he’s our flesh and blood – we feel that it should be our right as parents to decide to give him a chance at life, for a medication that’s just oral medicine, no known major side effects.

‘There’s nothing to lose, he deserves a chance.’ source
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2017, 09:01:04 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy