Wednesday, July 29, 2009

New Hampshire: En Route to Mass Murder?

For the Nazis, "euthanasia" (which is translated as "good death") represented a euphemistic term for a clandestine murder program created for the systematic killing of mentally and physically disabled patients living in institutional settings throughout Germany. The National Socialist's "Euthanasia" program would set the stage for the Holocaust: the mass murder of Jews and others who were deemed either racially inferior or ideologically unsuitable. In the words of Dr. Leo Alexander, Chief U.S. Medical Consultant at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials: 'Whatever proportions these crimes finally assumed, it became evident to all who investigated them that they had started from small beginnings."

Dr. Alexander referred to "a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of physicians." These physicians came to accept the notion that there is such a thing as a life not worthy to be lived. We are witnessing what appears to be a similar "subtle shift in emphasis" with regard to human life in the state of New Hampshire. New Hampshire House Bill 304 (HB304), which was introduced on January 8, 2009 and is currently retained in committee (read the proposed bill here), would radically redefine who is eligible for "assisted suicide." See here.

Is it a coincidence that the four sponsors of HB304 (Charles Weed, Barbara Richardson, Rick Watrous and Bonnie Mitchell) are all Democrats with no religious affiliation?

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II reminded us that:

"Authentic democracy is possible only in a State ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person. It requires that the necessary conditions be present for the advancement both of the individual through education and formation in true ideals, and of the "subjectivity" of society through the creation of structures of participation and shared responsibility. Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and sceptical relativism are the philosophy and the basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority, or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends. It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism."

We ignore this warning at our own peril.

Related reading here and here.


Michael Cole said...

Make note of section XIII: "'Terminal condition' means an incurable and irreversible condition, for the end stage of which there is no known treatment which will alter its course to death, and which, in the opinion of the attending physician and consulting physician competent in that disease category, will result in premature death."

Notice how broad the wording is? absolutely chilling.

Michelle said...

Terri Schiavo, pray for New Hampshire. Pope John Paul II, intercede for us.

Stewart said...

The Nazis hated the developmentally-disabled:

Jocelyn said...

Definition of "terminal condition":

XIII. “Terminal condition” means an incurable and irreversible condition, for the end stage of which there is no known treatment which will alter its course to death, and which, in the opinion of the attending physician and consulting physician competent in that disease category, will result in premature death.

I am a resident of New Hampshire. I'm also a diabetic. There is no known treatment to alter my disease.

This definition is frightening. Think about it.

Marie Tremblay said...

Massachusetts may be heading down this slippery slope as well:

Right-to-die bill leaves most doctors speechless.

By Nancy Reardon
Patriot Ledger State House Bureau
Posted May 23, 2009 @ 03:40 AM

BOSTON — Hospitals and many local physicians aren’t interested in commenting publicly on proposed law

Dr. Anna Sinclair has seen firsthand how agonizing a “do not resuscitate” request can be for doctors.

They must watch EKG rhythms fall and the patient slip way, knowing that they have drugs and treatments that could prolong the person’s life.

“It’s really hard to stand back and do nothing,” Sinclair said. “You need to turn off the machine and let them die quietly.”

For a doctor to medicate a patient so he or she dies faster and with less pain would be even harder, she said, but that doesn’t mean she thinks it would be wrong.

“We treat animals better than we treat humans,” she said.

Sinclair, a doctor of 26 years who works in the emergency department at Quincy Medical Center, fully supports the right-to-die movement, which has come to Massachusetts through Al Lipkind, a terminally ill Stoughton man fighting for passage of the “Death with Dignity Act.”

The bill would allow a mentally competent, terminally ill person to get a lethal dose of medication from his or her doctor.

Locally, many doctors were reluctant to speak on this topic. A spokesman for Jordan Hospital in Plymouth said he couldn’t find any doctor willing to go on the record, and a spokeswoman at South Shore Hospital said that hospital has no official comment.

Historically, medical organizations oppose the right-to-die movement, saying it presents a huge ethical dilemma for doctors trained to save lives, not end them.

The fine line between assisted suicide and murder is what scares many of them, experts in health law and bioethics say.

But Sinclair believes doctors need to be better trained in how to balance their drive to cure and to prolong life with the well-being of a suffering patient..."

Read the rest of this troubling article at The Patriot Ledger.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

I'm sure many will dismiss me as alarmist, but in an article entitled "Euthanasia, Medical Science, and the Road to Genocide," Dr. Miguel A. Faria, Jr writes: "A momentous article, 'Medical Science Under Dictatorship,' by Dr. Leo Alexander, the Chief U.S. Medical Consultant at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, first printed in the July 14, 1949 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine, has been reprinted as a monograph, and it could not have been reprinted at a more opportune moment.

Today, the concept of managed care, cost containment, and rationing threatens to eradicate the ethics of Hippocrates in medical practice, with the physician less beholden to his individual patient than to the managed care entity which employs him or pays his salary. In fact, many leaders of organized medicine (i.e., the medical politicians) are even questioning whether the ethics of medical care in the tradition of Hippocrates (and putting patients first) are a relic of the past.

And now you ask, 'What does Nazi medicine have to do with managed care today?' For one thing, Dr. Alexander not only examined 'the process by which the German medical profession became a willing and unquestioning collaborator with the Nazis,' but also noted the early changes in medical attitudes that predisposed German physicians to first collect data on their patients as to conduct what today we call 'cost-effective analysis,' and then use the latter information as a vehicle to commit (passive then active) euthanasia, forced sterilizations, ghastly experimentations, and even medical genocide under the auspices of the totalitarianism of National Socialism.

In 'Medical Science Under Dictatorship,' Dr. Alexander, a distinguished American psychiatrist, warns us, 'from small beginnings' the values of an entire society may be subverted and led to the horrors of (active) euthanasia, gruesome and unscientific medical experimentation, and ultimately, death in government clinics, and later - in concentration camps."

Anonymous said...

Traditional marriage group assaulted by pro-homosexual activists: police report filed

The American TFP
Wednesday, July 29, 2009

HANOVER, PA (July 29, 2009) -- Volunteers from the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP) were assaulted by pro-homosexual activists yesterday in Warwick, Rhode Island, as they peacefully held signs in support of traditional marriage.

Volunteer, Rex Teodosio described the scene: “We were at a busy intersection, getting strong support for traditional marriage. Three women approached us -- one threw mayonnaise, while the other two grappled with our photographer.

“Then we were sprayed with mace. Finally, a burly woman got out of a car and punched our photographer in the face. They shouted obscenities the whole time.

“It happened suddenly. But we got the license plate number of the second car; someone in the first car had covered its license plate with a shirt. We filed a report with the police.”

Pro-homosexual individuals have thrown water bottles, pesticide, rotten eggs and soda at TFP volunteers. But this is the first time the Catholic group was pepper sprayed, punched and sustained head injuries.

Police at Warwick station responded promptly and have opened a case. Pictures and video footage of the assault are helping the investigation.

“So much for tolerance,” said Joseph Ferrara who was hit by the attackers. “Homosexual activists talk about tolerance, but everyone who saw the attack, saw their ‘tolerance’ in action. For me, these attacks reinforced my resolve to defend traditional family values. It’s so important” he added.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...


July 29, 2009

Catholic League president Bill Donohue discusses Section 1233 of H.R. 3200, the health care reform bill that was introduced in the House:

There is language in this section of the bill that implies that the federal government may become involved in euthanasia. So over the past two days, July 27-28, Catholic League staff contacted the following persons, committees or offices looking for clarification:

Rep. Nancy Pelosi; Rep. John Dingell; Rep. Rob Andrews; Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr.; Rep. Charles Rangel; Rep. Pete Stark; Rep. Henry Waxman; Rep. George Miller; Rep. Dale Kildee; Rep. Carolyn Maloney; Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius; HHS Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives; HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aging; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Discretionary Health Programs; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Mandatory Health Programs; HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; HHS Congressional Liaison Office; HHS Office of Human Services Policy; HHS Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy; HHS Office of Planning and Policy Support; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Human Services; Ways and Means Committee; Education and Labor Committee; Energy and Commerce Committee; Oversight and Government Reform Committee; Budget Committee; White House Health Reform Office.

No one with whom we spoke said the government is entering the business of euthanasia. But this is not enough. We need to know exactly what is meant by the following: “An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available….” We also need to know exactly what is meant by “The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning….” The public has a right to know exactly what is meant by terms like “end-of-life services” and “quality measures.” Now is the time to settle this issue.


Site Meter