Monday, May 13, 2019

Nine Elderly Couples Were Euthanized in the Netherlands

This article was published by Wesley Smith on May 8, 2019.

Wesley Smith
By Wesley Smith

Joint suicides by elderly couples used to be considered a tragedy. In the Netherlands, doctors killing elderly couples together is a considered medical treatment (Belgium too, and at least once in Canada).
Last year there were nine such killings. Details were not available on most, but one involved a husband dying of cancer. His wife had MS. She asked to die with him because she would be unable to live independently and didn’t want to be cared for by strangers.

The Dutch believe that transparency is more important than right and wrong. So, they allow a continually expanding euthanasia license — but are careful to make sure they report later on what death doctors are doing. Hence, the government publishes a yearly, coldly statistical report about how many of their citizens were killed by doctors and why.

The 2018 numbers are alarming:
  • 6,126 deaths caused by euthanasia or assisted suicide — down 7 percent from last year’s toll — but when you consider other forms of patient eradication, such as terminal sedation (putting in a coma until the patient dehydrates to death), about 25 percent of deaths in the Netherlands are “induced.”
  • 67 patients were killed by psychiatrists and other doctors for mental illness. (The statistics don’t reveal how many of these were harvested for their organs afterward, an ongoing feature of Dutch euthanasia killings when the patient has “good” organs.)
  • Three children between the ages of 12 and 17 were put down.
  • There were 205 cases of homicide by doctors as a supposed treatment for two or more “elderly disorders,”i.e. issues such as hearing loss, balance issues, cognitive decline, etc.
Once euthanasia consciousness grabs a culture by the throat, it never stops squeezing.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

If we wish to have more credibility, we should state the title of the writer and the name of the journal/report/newspaper,etc, from which it came. LJ, Dartmouth,NS

Alex Schadenberg said...

Dear LJ:

Wesley had a link to a previous article. The previous article had a link to the report.
Nonetheless, Wesley should have linked to the original article in this article. I often do the same thing, though, I link to a previous article about the same issue and the previous article contains the links and the data.

Printfriendly