From chn@intergate.bc.ca Wed Nov 19 07:36:31 1997 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:56:48 From: "chn@intergate.bc.ca" [The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] http://www.oregonlive.com/votersguide/index.html http://www.oregonlive.com/todaysnews/st11124.html November 12, 1997 Doctors get advice on suicide questions Two physicians' groups offer guidelines on reconciling personal beliefs and patients' rights Dave Hogan of The Oregonian staff Doctors grappling with physician-assisted suicide are beginning to get written guidance. The Oregon Medical Association on Tuesday started offering doctors a "Compliance Checklist" outlining their rights and responsibilities under the law. And Physicians for Compassionate Care, which opposes assisted suicide, will send a letter Thursday to its 1,000 Oregon members giving recommendations on how to refuse to participate in the state's Death With Dignity Act. "Our members need to feel they have some guidelines from a larger group that they belong to, to help validate what they're doing, so that they don't feel all alone," said Dr. Greg Hamilton, a board member of Physicians for Compassionate Care. Hamilton signed the letter along with Drs. William Toffler and William Petty, other leaders of the organization. Both the letter and the checklist demonstrate doctors' efforts to collectively come to terms with how to proceed through the legal and ethical thicket of the new law. But whether asking doctors to state their position on assisted suicide -- as the Physicians for Compassionate Care letter urges -- will polarize them remains to be seen. "We all want to do the right thing for our patients at the end of life. We're all trying to help our patients," said Dr. Leigh Dolin, a Portland internist who voted for the law but worries about the intense scrutiny such a process brings. "It's scary for a physician to be in this position." The Oregon Medical Association checklist addresses all doctors, whatever their position on assisted suicide. Though the 5,700-member organization views the Death With Dignity Act as seriously flawed, it remains neutral on the issue of assisted suicide itself and has promised to strictly observe provisions of the law. The Compliance Checklist tells doctors they have a right to refuse a request to participate in an assisted suicide but warns them that they "may not abandon the patient." It advises such doctors to cooperate in referring patients to other physicians who will help them carry out the suicide. Physicians for Compassionate Care, on the other hand, advises its members that they can choose not to mention assisted suicide as an option for a patient and can decline to make a referral. Patients would be on their own to choose another doctor. Much of the OMA checklist reminds doctors who participate in the assisted suicide process to carefully document each step of the way and to make certain the suicide is voluntary. The OMA document contains a copy of the form that a patient requesting suicide is required to sign as part of the law. James Kronenberg, association spokesman, said the organization sees no reason why a physician cannot now start the assisted suicide process. The Physicians for Compassionate Care letter describes its recommendations to doctors who oppose assisted suicide as "intended to protect our patients and maintain our moral integrity." The letter recommends that doctors post in their waiting rooms a statement of their views on patient care, including their refusal to write a lethal prescription. The letter suggests treating the desire for suicide as a symptom requiring diagnosis and treatment. Physicians who support assisted suicide spoke favorably about the Physicians for Compassionate Care letter, provided the recommendations do not block patients' rights to receive aid in dying. "It is very appropriate and I think it's very necessary for physicians ... to let their patients know very early what their position is, so that if the patient feels very strongly, they can find a new primary care physician in a timely manner," said Dr. Peter Goodwin, a leader of Physicians for Death With Dignity. Goodwin said physicians willing to participate in assisted suicide are more likely to discuss the issue privately with their patients rather than posting their position. Dr. Patrick Dunn, who leads The Task Force to Improve the Care of Terminally Ill Oregonians, also spoke supportively of doctors' efforts to sort out how to proceed. "A physician or provider should have a means by which you would let your patient know that you are willing or not willing to participate, should events come to pass," said Dunn, whose task force is neutral on assisted suidice. The task force will explore the issue of doctors as "conscientious objectors" in an ethical guidebook on assisted suicide that it is completing. The issue of assisted suicide is particularly divisive for doctors who feel passionately one way or the other. But many doctors are somewhere in the middle, going about their business and trying to determine how best to proceed. Dolin says despite differences in opinion on assisted suicide, some unifying themes remain. "Everybody should have a comfortable end-of-life experience to where they never get to the point of wanting assisted suicide," he said. "We've failed our patients if they have to ask for assisted suicide. So there is common ground and I think it's important for us to try to focus on that." Even doctors who have staked out strong positions tend to agree that the main place their differences would play out is in the area of referrals. Doctors may be less likely to refer patients to doctors who disagree with them. Some doctors wonder to what extent doctors will become known as participants or nonparticipants in assisted suicide, much like doctors who perform abortions. That doctors may be as deeply divided as the public in general on this issue should not be surprising, said Dr. Charles Hofmann, OMA president. Hofmann says doctors' medical training doesn't give them any greater insight into the ethics of assisted suicide than anyone else. "Physician-assisted suicide isn't a medical matter," he said. "Whether a person is in favor or not isn't a medical matter." Hofmann says doctors can't use the same analytical processes in evaluating the ethics of assisted suicide as they do with medical procedures. In medical school, Hofmann said, doctors learn to evaluate medical procedures by balancing the benefit of the procedure against the possible harm it could cause. But in assisted suicide, he said, the balancing act is quite different. "You can't balance improvement versus harm with assisted suicide," he said. With a medical procedure, he said, the result is that a patient may recover from an illness. But with assisted suicide, the result is always death. Because of that difference, Hofmann said, "you have to balance personal choice." In that respect, he said, physicians mirror society as a whole in in their division over the issue. This week from The Oregonian Today from The Oregonian ©1997 Oregon Live LLC CHERYL ECKSTEIN Founder & President, CHN NEWSBYTES researched reports compliments of CHN please report any problems to CHN: chn@intergate.bc.ca _____________________________________________________ The Compassionate Healthcare Network (CHN) Canada's International Anti-euthanasia Network - CHN is an affiliated member of The World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life * * * * * Address "CHN DIGEST ONLINE" at: http://www.awinc.com/partners/bc/commpass/lifenet/euthan1.htm CHN'S NEW ADDRESS ... SOON TO BE IN OPERATION: www.chninternational.com --------------------------------------------------- Tel: (604) 582 8687 Fax: (604) 582 7690 From chn@intergate.bc.ca Wed Nov 19 09:12:14 1997 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 21:16:03 From: "chn@intergate.bc.ca" Subject: ABUSIVE HOME NURSE SECRETLY TAPED LATER JAILED ABUSIVE HOME NURSE SECRETLY TAPED LATER JAILED By GREG BEACHAM Associated Press Writer SALT LAKE CITY (AP)11/19/97 -- A live-in caregiver who was secretly tape-recorded calling her 80-year-old patient a "fat cow" and a "retard" amid slapping sounds was sentenced to a year in jail. Barbara Ellen Folsom, 55, received the maximum allowable sentence Tuesday. She had pleaded guilty Oct. 14 to a misdemeanor charge of abusing an elderly person. "This case is particularly troubling to me because it appears that violence was involved," Third District Judge Anthony B. Quinn said. "It was committed against a victim who had no chance to defend herself." Wita Jensen, the patient, died Nov. 3 after a series of strokes. Her death was not related to abuse. She had suffered from arthritis and other ailments. Folsom "got what she deserved," said Wita Jensen's son, Vaughn Jensen. "I just wish my mom had been around to see this." In exchange for her plea, prosecutors dropped a second-degree felony charge of aggravated abuse of a disabled or elderly adult, an offense punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Prosecutors said the recorded diatribe -- made Sept. 5 with a tape recorder that Mrs. Jensen's children hid under her bed -- revealed slapping noises and Folsom shouting, "Get up, you fat cow!" and "Oh, you retard!" The children said their mother had complained that Folsom was mean to her. Quinn suspended 30 days of the jail sentence, enabling him to impose three years of probation upon Folsom's release. She must also pay a $500 fine and receive anger management counseling. CHERYL ECKSTEIN Founder & President, CHN NEWSBYTES researched reports compliments of CHN please report any problems to CHN: chn@intergate.bc.ca _____________________________________________________ The Compassionate Healthcare Network (CHN) Canada's International Anti-euthanasia Network - CHN is an affiliated member of The World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life * * * * * Address "CHN DIGEST ONLINE" at: http://www.awinc.com/partners/bc/commpass/lifenet/euthan1.htm CHN'S NEW ADDRESS ... SOON TO BE IN OPERATION: www.chninternational.com --------------------------------------------------- Tel: (604) 582 8687 Fax: (604) 582 7690 From chn@intergate.bc.ca Wed Nov 19 09:20:04 1997 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 21:40:35 From: "chn@intergate.bc.ca" Subject: 4 SEPERATE REPORTS FROM OREGON, EACH NAMED AT BEGINNING OF POST 1. ASSISTED SUICIDE (OREGON) 2. SUPPORTERS HAIL ASSISTED - SUICIDE LAW (but don't like being called "culture of death") 3. Statement By Detroit Cardinal Adam Maida 4. STATEMENT FROM AMA: OREGON SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of the Associated Press. ASSISTED SUICIDE By BRAD CAIN Associated Press Writer SALEM, Ore. (AP) -- Now that Oregon voters have upheld the state's assisted-suicide law, doctors face some vexing questions: How can they determine that someone has less than six months to live, as the law requires? Can they say with certainty that a patient is free of depression and able to make a rational decision to ask for suicide pills? Will the terminally ill feel pressure to end their lives because they lack adequate care? "This is new for everybody," said James Kronenberg of the Oregon Medical Association. "Would the typical physician be prepared to proceed with this today? I think the answer is probably no." Ready or not, doctors face the dilemma of being asked not only to heal people but also to help the terminally ill kill themselves. Three years ago Oregon became the first state to approve a death-by-prescription law, but legal challenges had kept the law from being used. The U.S. Supreme Court threw out a challenge to Oregon's law, and last week voters defeated a measure to repeal it. The state claims the law is in effect. The law says terminally ill people can ask their doctors for prescriptions for lethal medicine. A 15-day waiting period is required between a patient's first request for the drugs and the time the pills can be obtained from a pharmacist. The law specifically forbids lethal injections, a provision that sponsors included to make sure voters didn't see assisted suicide as a form of euthanasia, or so-called mercy killings in which one person takes another's life. Before a prescription could be written, two doctors would have to determine that the patient has less than six months to live. "That's the area that seems to be causing the most discomfort," Kronenberg said. "Many physicians have serious concerns about their ability to make an accurate prognosis about how long someone has to live." Some doctors also have expressed doubts about being able to recognize clinical depression in terminally ill patients. The law says doctors must order counseling for patients who appear to have impaired judgment. Representatives of 25 hospitals and medical groups have formed a task force in hopes of giving guidance about medical and ethical issues. "It's fair to say that we have a number of concerns about this, and we don't have the answers," said Dr. Patrick Dunn, the task force chairman. Opponents of assisted suicide have warned that health maintenance organizations might pressure patients to commit suicide as a way to avoid the high cost of end-of-life care. The state's largest insurer, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon, rejects that notion, saying the decision whether to commit suicide will be made solely by patients and their doctors. "People who would take this would only have days to live," company spokesman Ken Strobeck said. "When they choose to go this route, there would be virtually no change in the cost of their treatment." Dunn said he's more worried about whether some terminally ill people will lack access to hospice care and pain treatment programs. In the Netherlands, where euthanasia is practiced, universal health care exists, meaning that the terminally ill are not forced to choose suicide if they can't afford hospice care or pain treatment, Dunn said. Other questions have been raised, including whether Oregon will become a suicide "resort" for terminally ill people from other places. The law refers to "Oregon residents" but doesn't set residency requirements. Barbara Coombs Lee, the law's chief sponsor, said she doubts doctors would be willing to prescribe lethal drugs to someone who shows up out of the blue. The law will work fine once people get used to it, she said, adding: "There has never been a medical treatment that has been so carefully detailed as this one." Copyright 1997 Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The following news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of Reuters Ltd. (Updates with comments from lawyer, grafs 12-15) SUPPORTERS HAIL ASSISTED - SUICIDE LAW By Todd Murphy PORTLAND, Ore. (Reuters) - Supporters of Oregon's assisted-suicide law Wednesday hailed a vote upholding the measure, while opponents denounced the state's embrace of "the culture of death." "People can start having conversations with their doctors" about the assisted suicide option, said Barbara Coombs Lee, who helped write the 1994 initiative and who led the successful campaign rejecting its repeal by a 60-40 percent margin Tuesday. "There are terminally ill patients who have taken heart and are comforted," she said. But the Oregon Catholic Conference, which spearheaded the nearly $4 million campaign to terminate the law, called Tuesday "a tragic day for Oregon, the nation and the world." "Oregon has become the first jurisdiction in the world to fully embrace the culture of death," the conference said in a statement. "May God have mercy on us and our nation." The vote reaffirmed a law that technically went into effect last week when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals quietly lifted an injunction, according to a spokesman for state Attorney General Hardy Myers. The action came after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a final appeal, ending three years of litigation. The law permits doctors to legally prescribe a lethal dose of barbiturates for patients who are certified by two doctors to have less than six months to live. It was unclear whether anyone has started the formal process to commit suicide, which includes a 15-day waiting period after obtaining a prescription for a lethal dose. "We won't know that," Coombs Lee said. "It's very personal and private. We would not expect to know." Opponents of the law have said they might file further challenges to the law, although they will be limited by previous decisions that have rejected challenges because plaintiffs could not show how they might be harmed by the law. "Certainly if the law goes into effect people threatened with immediate danger would have standing to challenge the law, and I would certainly consider representing them," said James Bopp, a lawyer active in the anti-abortion movement who has taken the lead in litigation against the law. Bopp said the ideal plaintiff would be a daughter or son who fears one of their parents is suicidal. "Hopefully one of these days we get a ruling on the merits" of the law, he said. Bopp also raised doubts about whether the law technically has gone into effect and said he plans to raise new issues at a status hearing scheduled for Nov. 25 before U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan in Eugene. Meanwhile, some state leaders said the Legislature might need to convene a special session to make changes in the law that would help its implementation. Coombs Lee said she does not believe any changes need to be made. "Our position is that the Death with Dignity Act is workable just as it is," she said. REUTERS Statement By Detroit Cardinal Adam Maida On the Oregon Vote on Assisted Suicide DETROIT, Nov. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- The following was released by Detroit Cardinal Adam Maida: "The decision of the Oregon voters to retain their state law authorizing assisted suicide opens a new and very tragic chapter in the moral and cultural history of our country. "I join my voice to the many thousands, even millions of Americans and indeed, people of good will throughout the world, to express dismay and sorrow at the results of the November 4, 1997, vote in Oregon. "The voters have chosen to legalize assisted suicide, thus putting at risk the lives of many vulnerable persons, especially the elderly, the mentally and physically challenged and those with chronic diseases. "For Catholics, Christians and people of religious conviction, the results of this election must be seen against the backdrop of God's law: the legal toleration of euthanasia in no way makes it morally acceptable. "Here in Michigan, I invite all my fellow citizens to join me in seeking to affirm the dignity of life and death by saying 'no' to assisted suicide. I urge you to work with me in promoting a society which provides compassionate care to the dying through pain management, support and dialogue with family and friends. In such a society, where all human lives are respected, physician assisted suicide would be unnecessary. "There are options. Here in Detroit, we have Project Life (313-237-5755), where Catholic social service agencies, health care providers and hospices stand ready to do whatever it takes to counsel and guide someone not to take the step of assisted suicide or having an abortion. "Recently, the Bishops of Michigan took the unprecedented action of writing 'Living and Dying According to the Voice of Faith,' a joint Pastoral Letter on assisted suicide and the meaning of genuine compassion. "As noted in the letter '... our Great Lakes State has acquired a dubious distinction as a high-profile, publicity-driven laboratory for assisted suicide' ... but 'our Christian consciences compel us to act in accord with God's will, with His plan for our well-being ... we are at a defining moment ... our situation challenges us to remain true to the values of life and faith.'" Cardinal Adam Maida Archbishop of Detroit November 5, 1997 SOURCE Archdiocese of Detroit -0- 11/05/97 /CONTACT: Ned McGrath, Communications Director of Archdiocese of Detroit, 313-237-5943, or home, 313-886-4114; or Paul Long, V.P. of Public Policy of Michigan Catholic Conference, 517-372-9310, or home 517-485-9420/ CO: Archdiocese of Detroit ST: Michigan IN: SU: Copyright 1997 PR Newswire. All rights reserved STATEMENT FROM AMA: OREGON SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT CHICAGO, Nov. 5 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement by Thomas Reardon, M.D., chairman of the AMA Board of Trustees: "The announcement today of the decision by the citizens of Oregon to let stand its 'Physician-Assisted Suicide Law' is a serious blow to their health and safety. Further, it sets a dangerous precedent for other states considering similar initiatives that physician-assisted suicide is an acceptable option for patients in the last phase of life. "We all have rights at the end of life that preclude us from having to resort to physician-assisted suicide. Not only is it our duty to educate ourselves, our loved ones and the public regarding these existing rights, it is our obligation to ensure that these rights are honored. "The American Medical Association is committed to making sure that the wishes of individuals with terminal and advanced chronic illness are carried out with compassion, comfort and dignity. In June 1997, the American Medical Association affirmed 'The Elements of Quality Care at the End of Life,' a set of eight principles that all patients should reasonably expect when faced with death. "As the beacon for protecting patients and the ethics of the medical profession, the AMA will continue its unyielding opposition to physician-assisted suicide. We will do everything in our power to see that this practice never becomes a generally-accepted option to quality patient care." ------ For informational purposes, a copy of "The Elements of Quality Care at the End of Life" follows. ------ ELEMENTS OF QUALITY CARE FOR PATIENTS IN THE LAST PHASE OF LIFE Preamble: In the last phase of life people seek peace and dignity. To help realize this, every person should be able to fairly expect the following elements of care from physicians, health care institutions and the community. Elements: 1. The opportunity to discuss and plan for end-of-life care. This should include: the opportunity to discuss scenarios and treatment preferences with the physician and health care proxy, the chance for discussion with others, the chance to make a formal "living will" and proxy designation, and help with filing these documents in such a way that they are likely to be available and useful when needed. 2. Trustworthy assurance that physical and mental suffering will be carefully attended to and comfort measures intently secured. Physicians should be skilled in the detection and management of terminal symptoms, such as pain, fatigue and depression, and able to obtain the assistance of specialty colleagues when needed. 3. Trustworthy assurance that preferences for withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining intervention will be honored. Whether the intervention be less complex (such as antibiotics or artificial nutrition and hydration) or complex and more invasive (such as dialysis or mechanical respiration), and whether the situation involves imminent or more distant dying, patients' preferences regarding withholding or withdrawing intervention should be honored in accordance with the legally and ethically established rights of patients. 4. Trustworthy assurance that there will be no abandonment by the physician. Patients should be able to trust that their physician will continue to care for them when dying. If a physician must transfer the patient in order to provide quality care, that physician should make every reasonable effort to continue to visit the patient with regularity, and institutional systems should try to accommodate this. 5. Trustworthy assurance that dignity will be a priority. Patients should be treated in a dignified and respected manner at all times. 6. Trustworthy assurance that burden to family and others will be minimized. Patients should be able to expect sufficient medical resources and community support, such as palliative care, hospice or home care, so that the burden of illness need not overwhelm caring relationships. 7. Attention to the personal goals of the dying person. Patients should be able to trust that their personal goals will have reasonable priority whether it be: to communicate with family and friends, to attend to spiritual needs, to take one last trip, to finish a major unfinished task in life, or to die at home or at another place of personal meaning. 8. Trustworthy assurance that care providers will assist the bereaved through early stages of mourning and adjustment. Patients and their loved ones should be able to trust that some support continues after bereavement. This may be by supportive gestures, such as a bereavement letter, and by appropriate attention to/referral for care of the increased physical and mental health needs that occur among the recently bereaved. ------ For more information, contact the Ethics Standards Division, 515 N. State St., Chicago, Ill., 60610, 312-464-5619/4075 or 312-464-4613 (fax). Copyright 1997 CHERYL ECKSTEIN Founder & President, CHN NEWSBYTES researched reports compliments of CHN please report any problems to CHN: chn@intergate.bc.ca _____________________________________________________ The Compassionate Healthcare Network (CHN) Canada's International Anti-euthanasia Network - CHN is an affiliated member of The World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life * * * * * Address "CHN DIGEST ONLINE" at: http://www.awinc.com/partners/bc/commpass/lifenet/euthan1.htm CHN'S NEW ADDRESS ... SOON TO BE IN OPERATION: www.chninternational.com --------------------------------------------------- Tel: (604) 582 8687 Fax: (604) 582 7690 From sndrake@MAILBOX.SYR.EDU Wed Nov 19 09:59:16 1997 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:45:34 -0500 From: "Stephen N. Drake" To: NDY@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU Subject: Talk.Euthanasia Hi all, Talk.euthanasia, a newsgroup devoted to discussion of euthanasia and asssisted suicide has become active again. Three factors seem to account for this. 1. The conviction of Robert Latimer. 2. The re-emergence of an old player (more on this below). 3. My own responses to some of the posts. The old player who has re-emerged is none other than Lavinia Rojas, who (I believe) has come back on under the name of "Seopa". Lavinia is a woman who has been crusading for a long time for the legal right to have her daughter killed - her daughter has severe disabiities. A player who needs responding to is Frank Weaver, who is very good at having enough facts on hand to convincingly distort them - and he is a prolific writer. To get on talk.euthanasia, you have at least three options: 1. Subscribe to the group through whatever newsreader you have - including Netscape. 2. Go to deja news (http://www.dejanews.com) and search for "talk.euthanasia" - this should give you access to at least the last few weeks worth of posts to the newsgroup. Deja News allows you to post replies through their service. 3. Go to http://www.reference.com - follow the same search instructions that you followed for deja news. You can also post replies to the newsgroup through this service. There were a number of people here who did a very good job of making things uncomfortable for pro-euthanasia people in Derek Humphry's mailing list. It would be great if you could do the same thing on talk.euthanasia. Thanks. -Steve- From sndrake@aol.com Wed Nov 19 10:05:06 1997 Date: 18 Nov 1997 03:25:47 GMT From: Sndrake Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia Subject: Re: Response to Jerry Topolski >In fact I want to add that it is likely that with the legalization of >euthanasia the incidence mentioned in your last post could perhaps be >avoided. This is because with the legalization voluntary euthanasia, >patients who cannot stand their pains can request doctors to help them to >perform assisted suicide, and thus blocking third parties from using pain >relief as a pretext to kill them. > That's an, um, interesting take on things. How do you figure this would have *any* impact on a case like the murder of Tracy Latimer. Legalization of euthanasia would be (if we are to believe the current line) would apply *only* to competent adults. Tracy Latimer was a *child* and unable to communicate. It would still be illegal - but is your suggestion to just "give it a go" and see if your belief pans out? There is a lot of bashing of the "slippery slope"- saying that anti-euthanasia people make unfounded assumptions about how things will get worse through legalization. Isn't what you are saying a variant of that? Kind of a "helium balloon" of wishful thinking? Asserting that injustices will decrease when in fact there is no data to support that assertion? S'all for now. Stephen Drake From sndrake@aol.com Wed Nov 19 10:05:24 1997 Date: 18 Nov 1997 03:40:03 GMT From: Sndrake Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia Subject: Re: Euthanasia >I won't go into any details, but recent backfilps by senior Australian >politicians, >based soley on voter perception, may help here. Unfortunately we need >something >like the Tracy Latimer or Annie Lindsell case here to wake these people >up to >reality. I wouldn't want anyone to go through what these people have >gone through, >but it seems, thanks to the ignorance of those in power, we need >something extreme. > You want to explain to me, very carefully, just how the killing of a *child* who never expressed the wish to die, whose own mother described as "alert" and "happy" in a notebook to the school a few days before she died, serves as a "wake-up call" for the need to legalize euthanasia for competent adults with terminal illness? Something resembling logic would be appreciated. Stephen Drake From seopa@pacificcoast.net Wed Nov 19 10:07:18 1997 Date: 18 Nov 97 23:23:31 GMT From: seopa Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia Subject: SDrake from Syracuse Univ NY "This would appear to be a change in heart. Seems to me that Lavinia Rojas spent a lot of time and energy declaring how unfair it was that she could not kill her daughter legally" If this makes you happy... and you like the name of L Rojas... please yourself! I'm sorry to tell you drake, that Rojas has not changed her mind about legalizing euthanasia for those who cannot communicate their wishes. It is not a secret--she has stated that many, many times publicly. What is the plan? Very simply applying to the courts with a proxy composed of doctors, nurses, someone from the disabled community, etc. Rojas expects someday, when euthanasia is legalized and IF her daughter is in pain, and the pain cannot be controlled be able to apply to the courts. She will NOT do "something" herself. With permission of the person who posted the following, Rojas is sending the following: "The Kluge amendments to Canada's Criminal Code provide a legal mechanism through which tragic situations such as relatives find themselves can have a full and objective hearing. There is nothing in the Kluge amendments which *guarantee* any particular remedy. But it is a way of searching for answers to *specific* individual cases - rather than having people take "the law in their own hands" out of sheer desperation. Some people on the other hand (apparently) wishes everyone to say that under no circumstances is proxy-decision making to be allowed in the procedure of euthanasia - a restriction which would rule out relatives applying to a court on behalf of the relative. The Kluge approach is flexible and attuned to individual circumstances. It is up to the Courts to decide based on all the evidence submitted. It is not up to any government to impose an inflexible rule upon everyone. Since Stephen Drake is so obsessed with Lavinia Rojas he may buy her book which is being made into a film. Anyone interested in finding out when the book will be available, and who want to find the facts about what is "really going on", and learn about this parent who has devoted her life to her profoundly disabled 19 y old, may contact me. In Canada the book will be in the shelves soon, and will be advertise by the Media. So drake, see ya "Seopa" From weaver1@world.std.com Wed Nov 19 10:08:30 1997 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 05:23:08 GMT From: Frank Weaver Newsgroups: talk.euthanasia Subject: Re: Response to Jerry Topolski [The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set] [Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set] [Some characters may be displayed incorrectly] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <19971116002600.TAA28512@ladder01.news.aol.com>, sndrake@aol.com (Sndrake) wrote: [snip] >As to the "loving" Robert Latimer, here's a little additional info on this > "wonderful" man. This was written by Dick Sobsey, who has published much on > the abuse that people with disabilities experience: How interesting to see anything written by Mr. Sobsey in t.e. Though he has full net access and is quite capable of posting here himself, he seems to prefer to restrict himself to forums controlled either by himself or another person who wil block any criticism of his misrepresentations from being distributed. > "The bad news is that naive manner in which the vast majority of people > have accepted this unquestionable murder of a twelve-year-old girl amkes it > absolutely clear that most Canadians believe or are willing to believe that > its better to be dead than disabled. They keep talking about the terrible > suffering that she experienced but in fact the defense had no evidence of >significant suffering to present at the trial. Then it is most remarkable that the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals wrote under "The Facts": '4 It is undisputed that Tracy was in constant pain. The evidence traces this pain to an operation that Tracy underwent in 1990 to [content deleted] surgery was successful, it led to the dislocation of her right hip, which caused considerable discomfort. As well, despite the administration of medication, Tracy experienced five to six seizures every day.' -- [1997] 1 S.C.R. R. v. Latimer 217 [snip] > had not been taken to the family doctor for 10 months, and was never > given medication stronger than tylenol to help her with her pain. Can't bother to maintain consistency with that "no significant suffering" line, can we? These are very finely calculated partial truths. Despite what Mr. Sobsey is trying to insinuate, her mother took Tracy to an appointment with an orthopedist less than two weeks before her death. OOPS! -- I guess a specialist isn't the "family" doctor, though! She also received whatever analgesic her system could handle without (a) interfering with her anti-seizure medication, (b) suppressing her breathing, or (c) suppressing her gag reflex (leading to choking). [snip] > was previously convicted for taking part in a sexual assult Character assasination. > the fact that he was not allowed to attack her sexual history. Mr. Latimer's > assertion that this was a mercy killing are rediculous. In fact, its the just > anotyher version of the the same defense: she wanted it and I gave her what > she deserved. The greater horror, however, is that people believe him because > Tracy had a severe disability and that is all they need >to know." > >Great "heroes" you pro-euthanasia folks have. Attempted guilt by association. I searched through the right-to-die websites looking for something that might substantiate this attempt and found exactly 4 items that mention Latimer. Two of them are clippings from the news services. Salient portions from the other two: 'While all of us must grant that "assisted suicide" and "euthanasia" are points on a "choice-in- dying" continuum, we do ourselves a disservice, intellectually and legally, to place them close together. The ethical complexities of deciding a case such as that posed by Robert Latimer and his brain-damaged daughter, Tracy, require quite a different form of legal machinery and safeguards than, say, one [content deleted] whose need for "assistance" is minimal.' -- http://www.rights.org/deathnet/born_free.html And this comes from a Globe and Mail editorial reprinted by Dying with Dignity in its newsletter: 'Whether Mr. Latimer should be found guilty and sentenced anew is up to the judge and jury. But we can surely say the case bears little relation to that of a conscious yet terminally ill adult who clearly and sincerely expresses a wish to die. [content deleted] Adults of sound mind but unsound body who repeatedly and forcefully express a wish to die because of a debilitating, terminal illness should be able to seek and receive the assistance of qualified medical doctors to help them in ending their lives. As for cases of assisted suicide or euthanasia not satisfying that strict set of criteria, they should be treated as crimes. -- http://www.web.apc.org/dwd/14-2-1.html It's a funny kind of 'hero worship' that: all distancing and condemnation. Then again, Stephen, you've never been one to let mere evidence get in the way of one of your slurs. >It's interesting how popular Latimer is with pro-euthanasia folks, when they > claim that they aren't fighting for the "right" to kill kids. [snip] - -- Frank Weaver Blessed is the Water of Life, by the grace weaver1@world.std.com of the holy trinity: yeast, malt and hops Encrypted email preferred. PGP KeyID: 33935039, on a keyserver near you Key 0AAE84B5 revoked! Get your genuine key revocation certificate today -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNHJ5UqyjdWYzk1A5AQGHzgf+Lw2F5GA1xPpEZPk6nhjuTfZe19uXUBY7 vlsYevoEHB+i0pf8FTEQ2da7BNUy/FDua6BRpVYQmKMMz/G5Q8nMQizETDPpf5Bx cE8BjGdpSuPgRD9Qu3QpMRXydnFyytXm+p0XEeemk/Z/JFUY/bfjKpO7bLbRyCwJ TcBR5YiuYXMjPef4PG09NBrAkJcHCwGFYN14s5K6sxKSBa7wV/x8twb4Uy0TQhgc kZu55kY79c3fdhU+sFLCCZYYXQ9g6tyk8tkoGrubagKk1P0hdWvJzQsv4aBfAYSq AILPgHMC7PK9qxBg0siqEXbLQr8tPq8g3+qBLhD9sASvBOyo0e6+Vw== =2U4X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From icad_editors@psych.educ.ualberta.ca Wed Nov 19 10:35:46 1997 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:08:58 -0700 From: ICAD Editors Subject: REVIEW:[Nazi eugenics] > Sender: owner-icad@majordomo.srv.ualberta.ca Precedence: bulk >Reviewed by Alan E. Steinweis University of Nebraska, Lincoln. > >Published by H-German (September, 1996) > > > Michael Burleigh, Death and Deliverance: "Euthanasia" in >Germany, c.1900-1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, >1994. xvii + 382 pp. Illustrations, bibliographical references, >index $59.95 (cloth), ISBN 0-521-41613-2; $19.95 (paper). ISBN >0-521-47769-7. > > Henry Friedlander. The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From >Euthanasia to the Final Solution. Chapel Hill: University of >North Carolina Press, 1995. xxiii + 421 pp. Bibliographical >references and index $34.95 (cloth). ISBN 0-8078-2208-6.

> > > One of the salient features of Holocaust historiography in >recent years has been a divergence between an essentially >Judeocentric approach that pays relatively little attention to >the non-Jewish victims of Nazi Germany, and an approach that >endeavors to contextualize the persecution and murder of the >Jews as a part of a broader Nazi program of racial purification >and territorial aggrandizement. The two studies under review >fall into the latter category. Both posit a close connection, >ideologically and even organizationally, between the notorious >Nazi "euthanasia" policy and the "Final Solution" of the >"Jewish Question." But, even more significantly, both works >place their primary focus on Nazi eugenics measures targeted at >the disabled, emphasizing the point that Nazi "euthanasia" can >no longer be understood as a mere preface to the Final >Solution. The murder of the disabled was, according to these >books, an integral part of the Holocaust. Nazi "euthanasia" was >a human tragedy of immense proportions and terrifying cruelty, >one that ought to prove instructive to a society such as ours >in which efficiency is often placed before human compassion, >and in which hereditarian notions of human worth and >achievement are enjoying renewed legitimacy. > > The attention focused on Daniel J. Goldhagen's *Hitler's >Willing Executioners* in recent months has generated what we >can only hope will prove to be a productive debate about the >ideological and social origins of the Holocaust. One very >unfortunate result of the Goldhagen debate, however, has been >the relative neglect of another highly consequential book that >deals with the same fundamental question of Holocaust origins, >although from a much different perspective, and in a far more >sober, balanced, and intellectually responsible manner. Henry >Friedlander's *Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to >the Final Solution* is not only the most formidable study to >date of the Nazi regime's murder of the disabled; it also is >one of the most compelling statements in favor of an expansive >conceptualization of the Holocaust. > > Most Holocaust historiography treats the Nazi >"euthanasia" program as a step along the path to the "Final >Solution," or in Friedlander's formulation, as a "prologue" to >the Holocaust rather than as an actual "chapter" of that event. >Friedlander, himself a survivor of Auschwitz who is a professor >of Judaic Studies at Brooklyn College, maintains that Nazi >policy aimed at the physical destruction of three groups: Jews, >Gypsies, and the disabled. The genocide of all three grew out >of the same racist biomedical vision, although the timetables, >modalities, and dimensions of the murder of each group differed >significantly. The contrast between this view and that of >Goldhagen could not be more stark. Goldhagen, whose concern is >almost exclusively on the war against the Jews, radically >disassociates the murder of the disabled from that of the Jews >in order to buttress his argument about the universality and >intensity of German anti-Semitism; he repeatedly points out >that the "euthanasia," based on a cold, calculated biomedical >vision, generated protests from the German population, whereas >the killing of the Jews, based on anti-Semitism, produced no >such reaction. > > Instead of emphasizing the role of anti-Semitism as the >engine of official Nazi policy, and as the personal motive of >those individuals who carried out genocidal policy on a daily >basis, Friedlander does indeed underscore the centrality of >eugenics and a biomedical sensibility. But it would be unfair >to suggest that Friedlander discounts the importance of >anti-Semitism. This point must be emphasized in view of the >accusation, which can be heard nowadays at Holocaust and German >Studies conferences, that anti-Semitism has been written out of >the Holocaust by scholars who seek to interpret the genocide in >a more universal framework. Friedlander makes clear early in >the book that racial anti-Semitism was an integral component of >the eugenicism that had come to hold sway in Germany by 1933. >Throughout his study, Friedlander traces how the evolution of >Nazi anti-Jewish policy was intertwined with eugenicist >measures targeted at "Aryan" Germans, at Poles, and at Gypsies >(evidence entirely ignored by Goldhagen). He also discusses the >fate of individual Jews who fell victim to the "euthanasia" >program, an often overlooked dimension of the Jewish experience >under Nazi rule. > > In one short opening chapter Friedlander recapitulates >the development of eugenicist and racist thinking before 1933, >a subject that has already been adequately examined by several >scholars. Friedlander moves quickly through the 1933-1939 >period in a second chapter, devoting the remaining twelve >chapters to an extremely thorough account of events during the >war. Some readers might be disappointed that the sterilization >measures of the 1930s are not examined in greater depth, but a >detailed analysis of this earlier phase is not Friedlander's >intention. > > Readers who have kept up with the field will be familiar >with the key events of the story Friedlander tells: the >initiation of the "children's euthanasia" program, the >expansion of that program to encompass adults, Hitler's >personal role in making key decisions, the structure and >procedures of "T-4", the killing "pause" of 1941, the >subsequent continuation of the systematic murder outside the >notorious killing centers, the transfer of personnel and >know-how from the "euthanasia" operation to the Final Solution, >and so forth. In several respects, however, the book does >present heretofore unfamiliar material. The book's analysis of >the "pause" of 1941 stands as the most authoritative >explanation of how the killing was continued under altered >circumstances rather than halted. The chapter on "Killing >Handicapped Jews" should prove most illuminating even to >erudite students of the Jewish dimension of the Holocaust. >Friedlander's account of how the killing centers functioned >conveys a great deal of new, often gut-wrenching detail, >gleaned from judicial records. We should be particularly >grateful to the author for his effort to convey the humanity >and individuality of the victims themselves, qualities that >most often tend to become lost in academic studies of Nazis and >their crimes. > > This is a remarkably well-researched book. Friedlander has >examined materials from over two dozen archives and has made >extensive use of judicial records from roughly three dozen >courts and state prosecutors. This massive original research >has been synthesized into a work that also makes very >effective use of previous studies of the subject by Ernst Klee, >Benno Mueller-Hill, Goetz Aly, and many others. Its original >contributions notwithstanding, the brilliance of the book lies >not in the disclosure of shocking revelations or dramatic new >evidence, but rather in the combination of rich detail and >moral force. The latter quality is especially worthy of note, >for here is an example of a compelling, at times gripping, work >of scholarship that does not sacrifice precision or >intellectual rigor. As it assumes its rightful place as a >standard work, let us hope that *The Origins of Nazi Genocide* >attains the wide audience it deserves. > > Michael Burleigh's *Death and Deliverance* is a less >polished, although altogether worthwhile study that covers much >of the same ground. Burleigh's account of the years before >1939, and especially of the period 1933-1939, is fuller than >Friedlander's. Burleigh also deals more extensively with >developments after 1945. Burleigh's primary source research >base, though considerably narrower than Friedlander's, is >impressive in its own right. > > Burleigh is less successful than Friedlander in his >attempts to move back and forth between the levels of policy >formulation and implementation. This is particularly >problematic when Burleigh neglects to undertake a patient, >careful analysis of an interpretive issue that is central to >Friedlander's study, namely the connection between >"euthanasia" and the broader program of Nazi genocide. "On the >ground" is where Burleigh places his emphasis, and it must be >said that he does excel at evoking the mood of the time and at >reconstructing the rich texture of specific events. Numerous >photographs and extended quotations from primary sources endow >many sections of the book with a documentary quality, which >students especially might appreciate, although scholars who are >better versed in the material might consider such passages >insufficiently digested. > > Burleigh gives considerably more attention than does >Friedlander to the Nazi regime's efforts to legitimize eugenics >measures within German society. Particularly useful is a long >chapter called "Selling Murder: The Killing Films of the Third >Reich," a title identical to that of a fine documentary film >produced by Burleigh on this very subject. This chapter >analyzes at length the notorious Ich klage an, as one might >expect, but also describes a host of other films that have >remained obscure. I have found this chapter quite useful in my >own teaching. I tend to devote considerable class time to >German propaganda efforts of this sort, which students find >compelling, deeply troubling, and frighteningly relevant in our >own age of mass manipulation. > > Copyright 1996 by H-Net, all rights reserved. This work >may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit >is given to the author and the list. For other permission, >please contact H-Net@H-Net.MSU.EDU > WR.Albusry@unsw.edu.au