Children are now being considered for euthanasia in some countries where the practice is legal – which a proponent of patients' rights laments is really just a natural extension of euthanasia when it is legalized.
Belgium and Canada are considering including children under existing euthanasia laws. And a LifeNews.com article reports that 84 percent of Dutch pediatricians want the freedom to euthanize children between ages one and 12.
OneNewsNow spoke with Rita Marker of the Patients Rights Council, who explains that the rationale behind the practice is: If it's declared a good medical treatment for the terminally ill, why should it be denied for others?
"If it's a good medical treatment for an adult, why wouldn't someone who is 17 or 16 or 6 be able to get this?" she further explains the philosophy. "And if we look at other medical treatments, parents can authorize medical treatments for their children that the children themselves could not authorize."
Marker describes it as the logical outcome at some point after euthanasia becomes the law of the land.
"This isn't a slippery slope," she continues. "It's the recognition that once you change the law related to euthanasia or assisted suicide that you are transforming a crime into a medical treatment – and then it's treated like any other medical treatment, the only difference being this particular medical treatment is cheaper than any other ways."
Marker has discovered from numerous recent speaking engagements that people simply aren't aware of it – telling her that there's a need for people to be informed so they can take action.
Hip broken? You're outta here …
The Province of Quebec has released its report on euthanasia for a one-year period through March of this year – and evidently, doctors who euthanize some patients under Canadian law cannot be disciplined for not abiding by the law.
Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition reports there were 1,331 reported deaths which, under law, are supposed to be people diagnosed with six months or less to live.
"[But] when you look at the report, you find that 13 of the deaths did not comply with the law," he tells OneNewsNow. "When you look further at the report, you realize that [in] three of those deaths, the person did not have a terminal condition whatsoever. In fact, these were people with hip fractures – so you have then euthanasia for hip fractures."
The problem, says Schadenberg, is that the law is written in such a fashion that doctors get away with it.
"So when we see irregularities in the reporting – such as 13 deaths did not comply with the law – it means … that those people were dead already; they're dead," he states bluntly. "And now in the reporting system, the physician made a comment which uncovers that the death did not comply with the law. But it doesn't really matter because the person's dead already."
Schadenberg also explains that there's no provision for prosecution within the system – and the law makes it virtually impossible to charge the doctor with manslaughter or murder.