Category: Ethics

Help from the government: The introduction of ‘therapeutic nihilism’

TBLeave a comment

Joe Carter, writing last week at his First Things blog, takes a hard look at how the Netherlands has fallen steeply into the pit that is assisted suicide. It’s not a pretty picture, as he examines how the Netherlands has consistently expanded the ways doctors can help you kill yourself — or kill you without your permission — with government approval. The latest foray is legislation that would allow assisted suicide for anyone who has reached the age of 70 and has grown tired of living:

In any other country, such a proposal might be considered radical and shocking. But in the Netherlands—the country that first legalized euthanasia—the change in the law will merely decriminalize a practice that has been occurring for decades. An examination of how this formerly conservative, tradition-bound culture could adopt what the modern Hippocratic Oath refers to as “therapeutic nihilism” is useful for understanding how the other nations will begin to accept euthanasia in the near future.

Carter goes on to explain how this has crept into Dutch law little by little to the point where the medical community has been given the benefit of the doubt to the point where it is the one doing the policing authority when it comes to reporting abuses, if at all.

According to the Dutch Ministry of Justice, of the 135,675 deaths recorded in 1995, 3,600 (2.4%) were the result of a doctor-assisted termination of life while another 238 (0.3%) were cases of assisted suicide. The most disturbing statistic, however, is that 913 (0.7%) were terminations of life without the express request of the patient. For every three lives ended at the request of the patient, one person was killed without consent. While it is assumed that these cases consisted of terminally ill patients with no chance of survival, no one in the Netherlands knows for certain. Because the numbers are based on self-reporting by physicians, no accurate data exists to determine exactly how many Dutch citizens have been killed against their will.

Another comprehensive survey by Dr. Paul J. van der Maas in 1996 showed that the situation had indeed worsened since 1990. The total number of cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide had risen by a third from 2,700 to 3,600, with an estimated 60 percent not being officially reported. The number of cases of euthanasia without request by the patient also remained high, with 900 cases being reported. Although the government passively accepted the practice, doctors were still legally susceptible to prosecution if a disgruntled family member disagreed with the killing of their relative. Legislation to decriminalize euthanasia, which had been repeatedly proposed since 1984, was finally passed on April 10, 2001. A criminal liability exclusion was added for doctors who willingly reported their actions and demonstrated that they have satisfied the criteria of “due care.”

This is the kind of “culture of death” that not only exists, but exists with the approval of the government. If you are shocked by this, then that is good. When “tired of living” — aside from any physical illness — becomes an accepted reason for ending a person’s life, then we know that something has gone horribly wrong.

Useful resources on bioethics from STR: Abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research

TBLeave a comment

Stand To Reason is a great organization that puts out great material to help Christians think more clearly about their faith and give a gracious, even-handed defense of it. This page has some great resources from STR and other places that are useful when talking about issues such as abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia.

Here are just a few of the topics addressed:

Mardy Gilyard: More to the story

TBLeave a comment

One of our favorite football players is Mardy Gilyard because not only does he excel at what he does — catching passes for the University of Cincinnati — he also takes time out to console small children. But now we find that he has a great work ethic to go along with his big heart. So, for the time being, kids: Don’t be the next Tiger Woods, instead be another Mardy Gilyard.

Save rats? Kill people? GE looking for ways to further research

TBLeave a comment

From CNSNews.com comes this story about GE Healthcare, a subsidary of General Electric, and its efforts to use embryonic stem cell research to test drug toxicity and spare poor lab rats:

On June 30, GE Healthcare and Geron Corporation announced a multi-year alliance where Geron will provide GE scientists with an undisclosed amount of human embryonic stem cells.
 
The human cells will be used “to develop and commercialize cellular assay products derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) for use in drug discovery, development and toxicity screening,” according to a news release.
 
GE Healthcare, which is based in Britain, hopes that human embryonic testing will spare lab rats from having potentially toxic drugs in or on the animals.
 
“This could replace, to a large extent, animal trials,” Konstantin Fiedler, general manager of cell technologies at GE Healthcare, told Reuters.
 
“Once you have human cells and you can get them in a standardized way, like you get right now, your lab rats in a standardized way, you can actually do those experiments on those cells,” he added.

But this is all nonsense, says Dr. David Prentice, senior fellow for life science at the Family Research Council:

[Prentice said] that embryos must be killed before stem cells can be derived from them for research purposes.
 
“Human embryonic stem cell research is ethically irresponsible and scientifically unworthy, as well as useless for patients,” Prentice said.
 
Prentice explained that General Electric’s optimism in saving lab animals from testing by using hESCs is also largely unfounded.
 
“There is always going to be a problem on trying to rely just on cultured cells to do drug testing,” Prentice explained.

The problem, he said, is that many drugs are metabolized in the liver and other parts of the body and those metabolized substances then become the active ingredients of the drugs.
 
“Treating just cells in culture will give you some idea of toxicity or perhaps effectiveness on a certain cell type, but will not actually work for the whole organ, or the entire system, or the organism,” Prentice said. “So this is not going to replace all animal testing.

Prentice also pointed out that most of the research involving embryonic stem cells thus far has produced no valid therapies, while successful therapies for several diseases and conditions are already in place using adult stem cells, he said.

But, of course, the problem with adult stem cells, which have no ethical baggage associated with them, is that the president who said we must not put ideology over science has pulled government funding for that research.

Wrongful birth: Parents sue over doctor’s ‘mistake’

TBLeave a comment

From Wesley J. Smith, who has moved his Secondhand Smoke blog to First Things, comes the story of an Oregon couple who are suing because a test during missed that their child had Down syndrome. Had they known, they would have aborted the child. From the story:

In the months before their daughter was born in 2007, Deborah and Ariel Levy worried the baby might have Down syndrome. They say a doctor at the Legacy Center for Maternal-Fetal Medicine assured them that a sample of tissue taken from the placenta early in the pregnancy ruled out the developmental disability, despite the results of later testing that showed the fetus might have it. But within days of the birth of their daughter, the Southwest Portland couple learned the baby did have Down syndrome. Had they known, they say, they would have terminated the pregnancy. Now they’re suing in Multnomah County Circuit Court, seeking more than $14 million to cover the costs of raising her and providing education, medical care, and speech and physical therapy for their daughter, who turned 2 this month. The suit also seeks money to cover her life-long living expenses.

In the story the parents, who declined to be interviewed, say they love their daughter as much as her older siblings. Yet they are also aware of being seen as heartless for wanting to sue because she was born instead of being terminated by abortion. There is an indication that there is something in these people’s souls that tells them what they were seeking was wrong — after all, they realize that killing the child is a heartless act, at least in the eyes of some. However, the idea that suing for a botched test, even if that test would have led to something like killing your own child, supersedes  their moral hesitancy.

Even with tests that are highly accurate, there is no guarantee that parents can definitely know whether their child will have Down syndrome or not. It is not about botched tests all the time. Sometimes you just can’t tell. But where science or medicine falls short, others can step in. Instead of covering doubt with abortions or recommending abortions, perhaps doctors should be pointing parents to places that can help them cope with life with a Down child. In the Oregonian article, a word of hope and of caution is sounded:

The Northwest Down Syndrome Association in Portland encourages doctors to send parents expecting a baby with Down syndrome to her organization, said Executive Director Angela Jarvis-Holland, because it is equipped to answer questions about what life will be like.

“Because what constitutes a good life?” Jarvis-Holland said. “I don’t think doctors can answer that in a two-minute conversation.”

Prenatal tests can’t discern the severity of Down syndrome, and it varies widely by individual. Jarvis-Holland said involved parents with the right resources can greatly improve their child’s development.

She said the ability to test for a growing array of conditions means many more women will be faced with the question of whether they want to be tested for everything from autism to an alcoholism gene (tests are in the works), and what they’ll do if the results come back positive.

“Down syndrome is really the canary in the coal mine,” Jarvis-Holland said. “It will be everybody’s question before we know it.”

Jarvis-Holland, who has a 10-year-old son with Down syndrome, worries about what she calls the “tyranny of perfection” if parents one day will be able to test for virtually every conceivable disadvantage facing their fetus.

“If you keep growing the list, where and when do we grow uncomfortable about that list?” Jarvis-Holland said. “I’m not sure where this is taking us.”

HT: Zach Nielsen

The chilling words recounted

TBLeave a comment

ultrasoundGretchen Naugle, wife of Desiring God resources director Lukas Naugle, recounts at A Beautiful Work a disturbing episode in her life:

This month marks a strange anniversary of sorts for me. It was 2 years ago this month that I was sitting in a chair looking at my unborn baby in 4D. She was precious! We had previously found out that our baby had several “markers” for down syndrome and had enlarged kidneys which may have required surgery upon birth. Thus we were monitored more carefully and had a ton more ultrasound shots at a hospital. This was the first level 3 ultrasound with this pregnancy (I had had one with my 3rd with no problems). I got to gaze upon my baby for almost a full hour – it was wonderful! I was there alone as my husband was out of town. The specialist doctor called me in after the ultrasound to go over the findings. The first words out of his mouth to me were “Well you will have to come in tomorrow for your abortion because of how far along you are.” I was utterly shocked and devastated. All I could do was mutter “What??????” He then proceeded to tell me that my baby had more “markers” for down syndrome and it didn’t look good. I was more shocked that his automatic assumption was that I would abort my baby. I almost couldn’t comprehend what he was telling me in that office. All I wanted to do was run as far away from that man as possible.

Read the rest of the post to see that, unfortunately, Gretchen’s encounter is not that uncommon for women with babies diagnosed with Down syndrome.

Mohler: Obama avoids the issue of abortion itself

TBLeave a comment

Alber Mohler says that President Obama, in his address at Notre Dame, talked about talking about abortion but never addressed the issue itself. Rather, he gave some evasive phrases:

Mr. Obama went on to call for “Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.” In the end, the President’s comments were entirely about how Americans should discuss or debate abortion. There was no serious consideration of abortion itself. President Obama merely talked about talking about abortion.

This was a moral evasion and an insult to the importance of the issue. If the President had actually addressed the issue of abortion — if he had actually even offered a defense or rationale for his own position — he would have dignified the issue. Instead, Mr. Obama issued what amounted to a call for civility.

When the President called for Americans to agree that, while differing on abortion, “we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually,” he failed to make clear why this is so. If the unborn baby is not a person who possesses an intrinsic right to life, why is the decision to abort so “heart-wrenching?” If the fetus is just a collection of cells, why the angst? Furthermore, does the fact that a decision is “heart-wrenching” make it right or rational?

No, Mr. President. Killing is killing

TBLeave a comment

As the president comes out today to tell us that we need comprehensive health care reform in our nation, I think this is something we should think on. Who will make reforms for the most defenseless in our country?

John Piper’s response to President Obama on abortion

On the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, he released this statement,
We are reminded that this decision not only protects women’s health and reproductive freedom, but stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters.
To which I say:
* No, Mr. President, you are not protecting women; you are authorizing the destruction of 500,000 little women every year.
* No, Mr. President, you are not protecting reproductive freedom; you are authorizing the destruction of freedom for one million little human beings every year.
* No, Mr. President, killing our children is killing our children no matter how many times you call it a private family matter. You may say it is a private family matter over and over and over, and still they are dead. And we killed them. And you, would have it remain legal.
Mr. President, some of us wept for joy at your inauguration. And we pledge that we will pray for you.
We have hope in our sovereign God.

From the transcript:

On the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, [President Obama] released this statement,

We are reminded that this decision not only protects women’s health and reproductive freedom, but stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters.

To which I say:

* No, Mr. President, you are not protecting women; you are authorizing the destruction of 500,000 little women every year.

* No, Mr. President, you are not protecting reproductive freedom; you are authorizing the destruction of freedom for one million little human beings every year.

* No, Mr. President, killing our children is killing our children no matter how many times you call it a private family matter. You may say it is a private family matter over and over and over, and still they are dead. And we killed them. And you, would have it remain legal.

Mr. President, some of us wept for joy at your inauguration. And we pledge that we will pray for you.

We have hope in our sovereign God.

Millions protest abortion. News? What news?

TBLeave a comment

Red Envelope Project World Net Daily got the scoop on The Associated Press and countless other “big” news organizations with this story which you probably didn’t hear about:

The White House mail office has confirmed it received a “deluge” of as many as 2.25 million red envelopes symbolizing the empty promise of lives snuffed out in abortion in a massive campaign that was larger than most White House mailing movements in the last 35 years.

White House mail worker “Steve” has handled letters for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. for more than three decades. Every single package and letter destined for the White House goes through his office.

Asked if he has seen a flood of red envelopes bound for the White House, Steve chuckled.

“Uh, yes,” he said emphatically. “Believe me, they made it here.”

Steve said while Obama has been occupied in Europe, his administration has noticed millions of red envelopes on behalf of aborted children.

“Quite frankly, there was definitely a deluge of mail coming through,” he laughed. “I had to handle them all.”

“I’ve been here 35 years, so I’ve seen presidents come and go,” Steve told WND. “This campaign ranks up there with the big ones.”

The Red Envelope Project is an idea sparked in the mind and prayers of a Massachusetts man, Christ Otto, who envisioned in January thousands of red envelopes sent to the White House, a visual expression of moral outrage over the president’s position on abortion.

On the backs of the envelopes, senders wrote a message Otto composed: “This envelope represents one child who died in abortion. It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world. Responsibility begins with conception.”