A Christian Eye on Politics
British Leftist Liberals 'Up' Support for Euthanasia
A n amazing report which appeared on the BBC News website on 31st January 2010, seems to have gone almost unnoticed. This is how the news item started:
"Almost three-quarters of people support assisted suicide for someone who is terminally ill, a BBC poll suggests.
However if the illness is painful and incurable, but not fatal, then backing falls to slightly under half.
The survey of just over 1,000 people was carried out for Monday's edition of BBC One's Panorama programme.
It features Kay Gilderdale who was cleared last week of attempting to murder her daughter Lynn, who had the chronic fatigue syndrome ME.
Ms Gilderdale admitted aiding and abetting the suicide of her 31-year-old daughter and was given a 12-month conditional discharge. Lynn was found dead at their home on 4 December 2008.
The survey found that 73% of those asked believed that friends or relatives should be able to assist in the suicide of a loved one who is terminally ill. But, if - as in the case of Ms Gilderdale's daughter - the illness is not terminal, support for assisted suicide falls to 48%."Now we must quickly note that this was a BBC survey and the BBC have not been politically unbiased for at least the last 35 years. Flagrantly leftist liberal in general outlook, one has even heard of people being rejected for employment with the corporation because of their support for the Conservative Party (not that this would ever be an official 'reason' for not employing people). "Assisted suicide" - which not very long ago would be deemed blatant manslaughter or murder - is the current leftist 'flavour of the month' here in the UK, that being so, I would like to see exactly how the BBC framed their survey questions. However, if these findings are in any way accurate, it should send chills down all of our spines! This just smacks of the gradual way that euthanasia - oops! I mean "assisted suicide" - became acceptable within Hitler's Third Reich.
One finds it hard to believe that 73% of typical British people truly believe that friends or relatives should be able to 'assist' in the suicide of one who is "terminally ill." Indeed, the very phrase "terminally ill" is very open to debate. Interestingly, in the recent Gilderdale case, the young lady suffered from M.E. and most would not consider that M.E. is even a terminal illness. I know three people who have had this terrible problem for a number of years and not a single one would consider their illness 'terminal.' Interestingly, the British press, though surely well aware that M.E. is not considered 'terminal,' nevertheless, as far as your writer is aware, raised not a single cry of protest about this case.
This should immediately alert one to the dangers of following Nazi Germany down this slippery slope. I used to know a man who was utterly depressed and felt that he wanted to die, following the death of his wife. I have no doubt that some of these people would have considered that man a good candidate for "assisted suicide." Yet - despite being elderly - within another two years this man had successfully remarried and, the last time I heard about him, he was about to go on a Mediterranean cruise!
I know of another man who was told that he was going blind about 25 years ago and his first thought was of 'ending it all.' In fact, he never went blind even to the day of his death. Then again, others have been told of terminal cancer which never actually claimed their lives when expected. One such lady had great pain and seemed to be close to death but then suddenly went into remission. Ten years later she died, not of cancer, but in a car accident. it should be obvious, then, that this is a very tricky area: What if the medical diagnosis is wrong? What if one changes one's mind? What about relatives who stand to inherit in the case of a very sick relative? Would we not all be suspicious if such relatives were keen supporters of "assisted suicide"?
Actually none of this is new, and we need to note what happened in Germany less than a hundred years ago. As P.J. King writes,
In 1920, a book was published, titled, The Permission to Destroy Life Unworthy of Life, by Alfred Hoche, M.D., a professor of psychiatry at the University of Freiburg, and Karl Binding, a professor of law from the University of Leipzig. They argued in their book that patients who ask for "death assistance" should, under very carefully controlled conditions, be able to obtain it from a physician. The conditions were spelled out, and included the submission of the request to a panel of three experts, the right of the patient to withdraw his request at any time, and the legal protection of the physicians who would help him terminate his life. Binding and Hoche explained how death assistance was congruent with the highest medical ethics and was essentially a compassionate solution to a painful problem.
Does this sound familiar? Let us continue,
An opinion poll conducted in 1920 revealed that 72% of the parents and guardians of severely disabled children surveyed would approve of allowing physicians to end the lives of disabled children such as their own. Newspapers, journal articles, and movies joined in shaping the opinion of the German public. The Ministry of Justice described the proposal as one that would make it "possible for physicians to end the tortures of incurable patients, upon request, in the interests of true humanity" (reported in the New York Times, 10/8/33, p. 1, col. 2). And the savings would redound to the German people if money was no longer thrown away on the disabled, the incurable, and "those on the threshold of old age."
Does that sound shocking? Let us all notice than when a morally-dubious principle is accepted, all too often a 'pandora's box' will open. We might also note that it was during the years of the highly liberal German Weimar Republic that euthanasia started to be seen as acceptable.
Over time Hungerhauser (starvation houses) were set up for the elderly within Germany. By the end of 1941, euthanasia was simply "normal hospital routine." And yet, no law had been passed permitting euthanasia. Frankly this should alarm every single one of us who are aware of the liberal left's growing enthusiasm and support for "assisted suicide." That is a highly dangerous precedent to set, as demonstrated within the last 75-80 years within Germany.
The Christian Hawk, February 1st 2010.
You can read the full P.J. King article, 'Lessons From History: Euthanasia in Nazi Germany' here
UK APOLOGETICS HOME