Mike Wallace's Kiss Up Interview of Kevorkian: The Corruption of Journalism
I just watched the 60 Minutes interview of Kevorkian, and it was everything I expected it wouldn't be. First, "the hug" is not shown. The video of Kevorkian's release is shown, and when Wallace is meeting Kevorkian, the video cuts just before Wallace's infamous smiling bear hug of his pal. Second, Wallace does not disclose that he too, is an avid euthanasia proponent. Third, Wallace never brooks Kevorkian's obsession with "obitiatry," Kevorkian's word for human vivisection. Nor did Wallace mention or ask Kevorkian about tearing out the kidneys of Joseph Tushkowski and offering them for transplant "first come, first served." He did not mention nor ask Kevorkian about the undisputed fact that most of Kevorkian's "patients" were not terminally ill. He did not mention nor ask Kevorkian about the fact that Kevorkian has never advocated that euthanasia be limited to the terminally ill. Etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Kevorkian speaks about Youk being "terrified of choking to death." Kevorkian says, "It is up to me to dispel that terror." But he promotes terror by reinforcing the fears of ALS patients and their families that they will die by choking. I researched this matter carefully, speaking with 
some of the top hospice doctors in the world. I discovered that with proper medical interventions, people with ALS do not choke to death. Indeed, I carefully examined this matter with Dame Cecily Saunders, the founder of the modern hospice movement. She told me that in decades of hospice practice, not one of the thousands of ALS patient under her care ever died of choking. Not only did Kevorkian not tell Youk that, but 60 Minutes permitted the fear to be broadcast once again.
Kevorkian even had to ask Wallace to be a little tough in the interview. Scandalous. Irresponsible. Journalism at its most unjournalistic.
Labels: Mike Wallace. Jack Kevorkian.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 6:41 PM
17 Comments
17 Comments:
(I discovered that with proper medical interventions, people with ALS do not choke to death. Indeed, I carefully examined this matter with Dame Cecily Saunders, the founder of the modern hospice movement. She told me that in decades of hospice practice, not one of the thousands of ALS patient under her care ever died of choking.)
Perhaps that's because the instant they start choking, they get hooked up to a respirator and sedated until they die 'naturally.'
(I discovered that with proper medical interventions, people with ALS do not choke to death. Indeed, I carefully examined this matter with Dame Cecily Saunders, the founder of the modern hospice movement. She told me that in decades of hospice practice, not one of the thousands of ALS patient under her care ever died of choking.)
Perhaps that's because the instant they start choking, they get hooked up to a respirator and sedated until they die 'naturally.'
A respirator in hospice?
Come on. Do you know anything at all about the hospice movement? Anything?
Start letting reality impinge upon ideology.
Gregory, I know that hospices are designed to 'neither prolong nor shorten life' and merely keep the patient comfortable, but how can they do that without massive doses of opiates if patients start choking?
Tony: Medication keeps too much saliva from being generated. The patient's family can suction also to make sure the problem doesn't get out of hand. They receive Bi-pap machines to keep them from feeling breathless. They eventually die in their sleep from a build up of carbon dioxide.
If necessary, medications can be given, for example, if there is extreme agitation, that causes unconsciousness.
To claim that they choke to death is cruel. That disease is cruel enough without that as an added worry.
Interesting. I respect the work that hospice volunteers do. However, a build-up of carbon dioxide doesn't seem to be a 'natural death.' Should patients with other terminal diseases be allowed to die in a similar manner?
?????? So, the way they die naturally isn't really natural. Good logic.
I wasn't aware that ALS naturally causes a buildup of CO2.
Anyway, when patients are drugged up on morphine for other illnesses, it's impossible to prove one way or the other whether they died naturally.
I digested this a day to weigh in.
Although I think euthanasia may be appropriate in certain, narrow circumstances (and subjective to the euthanasia/LST withdraw line), I think Dr. K. crossed the line in 1998. As such, I think he belonged in jail.
ALS patients afraid of choking to death? Nah.
That said, a part of me admires anyone who believes strongly enough for their political crusade to spend hard jail time, be it Martha Stewart, Ghandi, or Henry David Thoreau (I mean no analogy between them other than that).
Now, weighing the 5 rationales of penal system against him, I think 8-9 years was enough. Actually, 6-12 months plus probation.
Why so little? I'm strongly influenced by the victim's subjective view of harm and I think the conviction alone proved the point that he crossed the line.
That's an interesting point you made there, Royale.
From what I know of the case, Kevorkian was convicted primarily because the judge instructed the jury to ignore the issue of 'intent' and 'motive'.
And I completely agree with your last point. Harm is completely subjective, at least in competent, rational adults. To some people, going into a nursing home or hospice at the end of life is undignified, and so it causes them a lot of harm.
If it weren't for the fact the victims were disabled/ill, Kevorkian would be seen as the serial killer he is, just like Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgway.
The whole argument in favor of legalized murder, er, "assisted suicide," is based upon prejudice against the disabled/ill. After all, people already have the right to kill themselves. Just don't ask doctors or others to do their dirty work.
Well, Susan, I'd have to say that you are one of the most callous people I've read.
Anyone who says 'You don't need a doctor to commit suicide. Just do it yourself' is essentially saying 'You don't need a doctor to perform an abortion. Just do it yourself.'
Such an attitude is callous and inhumane. Why should people be limited to jumping in front of a train, off a building, shooting themselves, cutting their wrists, bringing a toaster into the bath, or a combination of these methods, among many others, to kill themselves?.
Now, they certainly can't tell their family or friends about their plans, because that could leave them open to charges: 'Why didn't you stop them?' And when they come back and see their loved one with a plastic bag over their head, or blood all over the room, they are shocked and scarred, possibly for life. And on top of this, they can't even *be* with their loved one during their final moments.
I'm still not sure why anyone thinks it's the job of doctors, whose proper business is healing, to kill people. The Netherlands show us that once the distinction between healer and killer is blurred, you can't trust the doctor not to kill on his own authority. Since it is permissible to do so in some cases, it becomes permissible to do so -- whenever the doctor thinks it is. The danger to the disabled, especially, is real.
And doesn't the Hemlock Society -- excuse me, "Compassion & Choices" -- give instructions on how to off yourself with a plastic bag and some pills? Nothing callous about that, eh? Death with dignity indeed.
A plastic bag and sleeping pills is better than a terminally ill suicide bomber. That would be better for EVERYONE involved.
Suicide bomber? What?
Gregory - when was the last time suicide bombing failed to kill the bomber? Never, making it a great way to commit suicide without failing. Suicide bombing is an instantanenous death, which prevents anyone coming to 'rescue' the so-called 'victim.'
Actually, suicide bomb attempts fail all the time. Just search "failed suicide bomber" (without the q. marks).
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home