Friday, July 29, 2011

UK Judge agrees to dehydration death of woman with cognitive disability

A High Court in the UK has decided to withdraw fluids from a woman who is believed to be in a PVS state.

This woman, (54) only known as "M" is a different case than the other debated case of a woman known as "M" who is in a minimally conscious state and whose parents have requested permission to have fluids and food withdrawn in order to cause her death.

Mr. Justice Charles decision will cause the death of "M" by dehydration, which is also known as euthanasia by dehydration or "slow euthanasia".

Justice Charles was reported to have stated:
"... the application by a NHS trust, which also cannot be named, was for a declaration “to render lawful” the withdrawal of hydration, nutrition and medication for a heart condition.

He said: “The consequence of that is that very sadly the patient will die.”

The judge said he was “satisfied that appropriate testing and observations have been carried out by the appropriate qualified professionals” over a significant period of time.

He concluded: “In my judgement this patient has permanent extensive brain damage and is in a permanent vegetative state. Further treatment would be futile.”

The declaration sought was “in her best interests”.

Euthanasia promoter Helga Kuhse stated in her speech to the World Federation of Right to Die Societies Conference in France - Sept 1984:
"If we can get people to accept the removal of all treatment and care – especially the removal of food and fluids – they will see what a painful way this is to die, and then, in the patient’s best interests, they will accept the lethal injection."

3 comments:

Jemima Miah said...

I've done a survey to get peoples views and attitudes on Euthanasia.
If you could spare some time and take part in it then that would be great.

This is the link: https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?hl=en_US&formkey=dDFTQUwyTEo3MU9tSXlQOGtqWlJIY1E6MQ#gid=0

I don't support Euthanasia as I think it is wrong because God gave us life and only God should have the ability to take it away.

Simon Tang said...

I honestly don't feel that this is at all a valid argument.

How would we get people to accept euthanasia by imposing a painful form of it on a person who can't approve OR disapprove of it?

What was the judge's rationale for choosing the suffering version? Did the judge try to make "M" a "euthanasia martyr" or something, in the hopes that "She would die and suffer for our right to die?"

Tom Diorio said...

He concluded: “In my judgement this patient has permanent extensive brain damage and is in a permanent vegetative state. Further treatment would be futile.”

Futile? To whose end and benefit Judge. Why don't you volunteer for a slow, painful, terror inducing, man caused slow death by dehydration, judge. Just a few days anyway before you get too comfortable playing God.

Printfriendly