Swiss Allow Assisted Suicide Virtually on Demand
The Swiss assisted suicide facilitating organization Dignitas, has issued a euphoric notice to the death on demand crowd with news that a Swiss court has apparently accepted that the group can help kill the mentally ill as a matter of human rights. I have seen the below quoted memo from two separate sources--one an assisted suicide advocacy organization--so I regard it as a bona fide Dignitas communication issued to co-believers around the world. (It is, however, possible that the memo misstates the court ruling and indeed, this ruling hasn't hit the news yet, so it might not be true.)
The memo is too long to print in full, (it can be linked above), but here is the gist:
"Dignitas in Switzerland issued this bulletin on 1 February 2007: The Swiss Federal Court has acknowledged the right of a person to determine the way and the point in time of his/hers end of life as a guaranteed European human right and at the same time basically granted mentally ill this right just like everyone else, if they have capacity of discernment...
The Federal Court stated as follows:
*The right of self-determination in the sense of article 8 ยง 1 ECHR includes the right to decide on the way and the point in time of ending ones own life; providing the affected person is able to form his/her will freely and act thereafter.
*It cannot be denied that an incurable, long-lasting, severe mental impairment similar to a somatic one can create a suffering out of which a patient would find his/her life in the long run not worth living anymore...However, utmost restraint needs to be exercised: It has to be distinguished between the wish to die that is expression of a curable psychic distortion and which calls for treatment, and the wish to die that bases on a self-determined, carefully considered and lasting decision of a lucid person ("balance suicide") which possibly needs to be respected...
* [T]he appropriate assessment requires the presentation of a special in-depth psychiatric opinion.
On Thursday, the General Secretary of DIGNITAS, Ludwig A. Minelli, explained that with the acknowledgement of the right to an accompanied suicide as an ECHR-right all intentions to prevent with special "rules" people from other countries to come to Switzerland for an accompanied suicide to have no more grounds."
If the court did indeed rule as claimed, death on demand--the ultimate destination of the nihilistic euthanasia movement--has come to Europe. And lest one tut-tut and say such things could not happen here, that mentally ill people can't get assisted suicide--they may have already. Recall that Oregon does not explicitly require competence or mental health to qualify for assisted suicide, but rather, that the patient merely be "capable," meaning able to communicate a medical decision. (Many depressed and otherwise mentally ill people can communicate medical decisions.) Indeed, we have seen in the Michael P. Freeland case, an Oregon man permitted by psychiatrists to keep the his lethal prescription of poison pills even after he was hospitalized for psychotic delusions and required a court-appointed guardian.
And as for the concept of a "balanced suicide," it is being promoted in US mental health journals under the category of "rational suicide."
What it is, of course, is utter abandonment.


6 Comments:
"However, utmost restraint needs to be exercised: It has to be distinguished between the wish to die that is expression of a curable psychic distortion and which calls for treatment, and the wish to die that bases on a self-determined, carefully considered and lasting decision of a lucid person ("balance suicide") which possibly needs to be respected... "
FAC! Bloody effin- Okay.
How the hell can you, with an ambiguous statement like that, "distinguish" as they so quaintly put it, between a curable disorder and thoughtful decisions to die, especially amongst those who are mentally ill and don't have the ability to distinguish in all circumstances what is right and wrong?
I brooded about death for three days straight, thinking very rationally and calmly with the outside of my brain while the inside of my brain was screaming in terror and running around biting itself in the small of the back. Had anyone asked me, I could have been quite persuasive about my reasons for wanting to die. Three things kept me from death - 1) I love my family too much to do that to them, 2) My Catholicness kept kicking me in the butt every time I considered it, and 3) I had enough brain cells left to realize that I didn't *really* want to die.
So what about those folks who don't have those three defenses against what is really a mental disorder? What about those people who don't have something to fall back on to keep themselves alive?
This is a bloody effen crock, with the least specific wording they could come up with, on purpose.
Yes. The death on demand movement is postmodern, if that is the right term. It wants permissiveness based on narratives, not precise definitions. Or to put it another way, they will countenance almost no limits.
Sigh......
From someone who gets depressed..
A lot....
And who knows firsthand how easy it is to mask the "n" word, normalcy, to seemingly function out there with the rest of the World 'pon occasion..
This bytes..
MHO: Like a few other things lately, smacks of near blatant eugenics...... :\
Cindy Sue: Thanks for coming by. It is also abandonment of our brothers and sisters when they need our love the most.
But what we have to realize, Tabs, is that the death-on-demand people really probably would think it would have been just fine for you to have killed yourself during that time. From their perspective, your having come out of it and being glad now that you didn't commit suicide counts for nothing, evidentially. If you had exercised your "choice" to die during that time, then they would have thought that perfectly okay.
Y'know, I studied post-modernism in Literature and decided that it wasn't worth my time. It was full of self-pity, self-service, and existential failure. I got very tired of reading people whining about how horrible everything is and how futile the world is. I got tired of reading about people who intentionally made bad decisions because they couldn't bring themselves to fight to do the right thing.
I drowned in SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION and dispaired over SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE. Kesey and Vonnegut Jr. will never be on the top of my favorites list.
I came to this conclusion: post-modernism glories in futility. It's practically a religon of failure. The world is doomed. All that is, is rot.
I like the Romantics. Their dreamy way of worshiping nature did bring them to confront dismay in their own lives, but there was so much more power in them - Byron, a deist with a dim view of humanity, still had moments when he gloried in life and the mystery of living. Blake, whose MARRIAGE OF HEAVEN AND HELL made me cheer, burned like a star in his descent. Mad or inspired, I cannot say, but whatever, they're both a hell of a lot better than the post-modernists who look at life as a shallow teaspoon and refuse to get into any depths.
Even more than the Romantics, I love Swift and Pope. Satire, my friends, bluntly pointing out the errors of our ways in order to correct them - that's what I admire.
This passion for death that the current world has is unwholesome. It's like nobody wants to see anything beautiful in even the darkest hardships. A man murders his young daughter because she has cerebral palsey and is pitied - his act called a "mercy killing" because nobody wants to believe it's possible for a girl like that to have a happy, "normal" life. What he did was a "kindness."
Makes me wonder how long it'll be before folks like Andrea Yates start receiving gold metals instead of jail sentences.
I'll stick to the Romantics, thanks.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home