Dragon with a heartache ([info]shadur) wrote,
@ 2005-03-10 13:13:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Next Entry
Current mood: irate
Current music:Disposable Heroes

Grah.
Now a while ago I decided to show a little consideration for those americans in my audience that didn't like some darn furrner bitch about their country and use LJ-cuts and proper disclaimers to warn them when something pissed me off.

However, after reading this particular piece of hypocritical bullshit, I've decided to dispence with the niceties for a change.

Let me spell it out for you: Yes, the Netherlands does indeed have laws defining under which circumstances the euthanasia of infants is permissible. From memory, those circumstances have to include multiple expert opinions that yes, this child is suffering from terminal, painful and above all, incurable ailments (usually birth defects so catastrophic that they defy surgical correction and severely impair the child's ability to live independent of life support for any length of time) as well as informed consent of the child's parents. And even then, every single detail that could possibly be relevant to the case has to be documented and the doctor that performed the euthanasia has to explain the case to a review board afterwards.

This is done so that when a child doctor is faced with two emotional shipwrecks and a baby that more closely requires an abstract clay sculpture done by picasso on an LSD trip that needs to be permanently hooked up to five machines just to live for more than a handful of minutes, has a set of guidelines to steer by and decide when the part of his Hippocratic oath where he swore to preserve life stops taking precedence over the part of that oath where he also swore to alleviate suffering wherever he could, and to not make that kind of terrible choice any more diffucult and painful than it already is by automatically slapping him with a murder charge.

Now, of course, as was recently proven, a majority of Americans has no patience with anything that isn't perfectly black and white and doesn't want to believe in the possibility that some issues are more complex than can be fitted into a five-word catch phrase that sounds good as a headline. So I really shouldn't be surprised that the bigot-and-imbecile brigades of Focus On The Family (Or as I'm starting to refer to them, Fart on the Facts) jumped on this in full hysteria mode and got it wrong.

Here's a quote from one of their resident "experts":

Carrie Gordon Earll, bioethics policy analyst at Focus on the Family, said she thinks the U.S. medical community strongly opposes newborn euthanasia but that some cases have occurred.

"If they're done under cover and secret ... they should be prosecuted," she said. "This is not the Netherlands and we should not be on a slippery slope to baby infanticide."


I shouldn't bother to poke fun at the redundancy in "baby infanticide" when I have a larger issue to address, but what kind of 'policy analyst' can you be if you can't even get your terminology straight?

Besides, that's not what I'm upset about. Allow me to lift another quote from the same article to illustrate:

In the United States, some doctors and ethicists -- both supporters and opponents of euthanasia -- say newborn euthanasia has happened occasionally for decades, although it is much more common, and accepted, to withhold or stop intensive treatment and let the baby die.


So to summarize: It's aborrent and immoral and vile to quickly and painlessly end a life that was doomed to know nothing but pain and suffering, but it's perfectly acceptable to turn away and tell a pair of already-greaving parents that you're going to leave their child to slowly starve and/or suffocate in its own time?

I guess I was mistaken. This isn't about the bible (with the possible exception of Matthew 27:24)so much as it is about hypocrisy covering up moral cowardice. Of course, it's your country, and far be it from me to tell you how to live your life, but kindly shut the fuck up with the "culture of death" hysteric hyperbole just because our political leaders can at least occasionally get their heads out of their asses far enough to recognize that inaction is also an action and when to let people who have spent a significant amount of their lives training do the job they trained for the best they know how.

I think that pretty much covers what I had to say about this.

Peace, all.


(Post a new comment)


[info]schneeble
2005-03-10 13:19 (link)
Sometimes you seem to forget that the U.S. has more than 290 million residents and flourishing journalist media. You could find pretty much any quote you wanted that has been uttered from an American mouth and recorded in some paper or news broadcast of magazine or whatever. I noticed that you failed to quote William Duncan McKim, Charles Davenport, Food and Drug Administrator Harvey Wiley, Margaret Sanger, Helen Keller, or civil rights lawyer Clarence Darrow.

Granted, not all of those individuals are contemporaries, but I suppose that since they actually have opinions that don't bother you they aren't really worth mentioning. I suspect that you took exception to the idiot you've quoted because she plays the old "This is not the Netherlands" card. Well, you have my sympathy and, more realistically, my empathy. Believe me, I know what it's like to have people make blanket statements about me and my nation of origin based simply on anecdotal evidence or quotes that are removed from the perspective of public policy debate.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]loopychew
2005-03-10 13:30 (link)
Such would be the problem with loudmouths like Focus on the Family and the Reverend Jerry Falwell. Because their mouths blab on and on more loudly and passionately, they tend to sound like a mouthpiece for the rest of the country, even when it ain't so.

Believe me, Dragon-kun, not all of us feel this way. You of all people should know that by now.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]shadur
2005-03-10 13:34 (link)
I also failed to quote Jerry Falwell, Albert Pike, George W. Bush, and pretty much the entire staff of Fox News, but that's aside the issue. I'm fully aware that not all americans are bigoted imbeciles; it's just that those who aren't are currently in the minority.

I also explicitly pointed to CNN rather than, say, this little gem or the thousands of others like it.

And no, I didn't took exception to the "this is not the Netherlands" part of the quote. I took exception to the part where she makes a very spirited attempt to establish "Netherlands = infanticide".

Believe me, I understand and sympathise when you say you're sick and tired of hearing people bitch at your country just because the current majority needs a kick in the nuts, but that doesn't change the situation much, does it?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]schneeble
2005-03-10 13:57 (link)
Believe me, I understand and sympathise when you say you're sick and tired of hearing people bitch at your country just because the current majority needs a kick in the nuts, but that doesn't change the situation much, does it?

No. No, I suppose it doesn't. And, since I'm ill-suited to enter the arena of debate on the topic of legalized euthanasia I think I'll just leave it at that.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]twoflower
2005-03-10 13:38 (link)
If I may put on my half-baked theory hat for a moment... the USian stance does make sense under Christian doctrine. After all, Christ suffered and suffered and suffered and died of murder (by the romans, or jews, or however you wanna read it). If he had chosen to take his own life and end the suffering early, it'd be suicide, which is an unforgivable hellworthy sin.

Ergo, letting a child suffer and suffer and suffer and die is "teh lord's waye" whereas euthanizing it isn't a sympathetic gesture of kindness, it's EBIL.

I think the whole of the christian world needs to get over their guilt complexes and moral superiority in the face of common logic. But they never will, because that's just not how the religion was designed.

It's a shame, because on the whole a lot of Christian doctrine -- you know, the bits about being nice to people and leading a good life and doing no harm and feeding the poor and so on -- is really uplifting and wonderful. It's the bad apples like the homophobia and things like this that bring the whole thing down.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mrfnord
2005-03-10 17:08 (link)
After all, Christ suffered and suffered and suffered and died of murder (by the romans, or jews, or however you wanna read it). If he had chosen to take his own life and end the suffering early, it'd be suicide, which is an unforgivable hellworthy sin.

I think you've got it right here. As far as straight Christian doctrine goes, suffering is a noble thing for everybody involved. We're supposed to suffer, because that's how we prove ourselves worthy of the redemption Christ promised.

(Note carefully that nowhere in the original contract does it say we're supposed to emulate Christ in his suffering, since he was supposed to have done all that in one shot. But I guess growing up as a passive-aggressive minority religion in Roman times does that to a meme.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]damienroc
2005-03-10 20:55 (link)
This seems to be another logical contradiction generally held by the religious right. You cannot prematurely end the life of an infant who is suffering... Yet an adult who has suffered a severe accident and been reduced to a mental vegetable is okay to turn off. (Granted, the decision should be agnozing.)

Say it's akin to being against abortion, but for specious military conflicts. Ultimately, the problem I have with this mode of thinking is that it tends to put the value of a child's life far above that of anyone else.

Now that said, the one point in Shad's post that I do tend to take issue with is this:

Now, of course, as was recently proven, a majority of Americans has no patience with anything that isn't perfectly black and white and doesn't want to believe in the possibility that some issues are more complex than can be fitted into a five-word catch phrase that sounds good as a headline.

There are many people, some who I know, who looked at the issues and considered both major candidates and, yes, believed that things would be worse under John Kerry than George W. Bush. For some this was an agonizing decision, but then, for some, voting for Kerry was an agonizing decision. It's not fair or correct to say that Republican = Black & White while Democrat = Complex. I've seen plenty of hard-line liberals who are as unshaded as any Republican.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)


[info]zibblsnrt
2005-03-10 22:03 (link)
It's not fair or correct to say that Republican = Black & White while Democrat = Complex. I've seen plenty of hard-line liberals who are as unshaded as any Republican.

That's true enough, but I know far, far more right-wingers who actually boast - actually boast - about their black and white mode of "thought" than I've seen on the left.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mrfnord
2005-03-10 22:05 (link)
This seems to be another logical contradiction generally held by the religious right. You cannot prematurely end the life of an infant who is suffering... Yet an adult who has suffered a severe accident and been reduced to a mental vegetable is okay to turn off. (Granted, the decision should be agnozing.)

Boy howdy, did you miss the memo....

No contradictions there, m'man; they're consistently evil.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]vacheestfachee
2005-03-10 18:22 (link)
Focus On The Family (Or as I'm starting to refer to them, Fart on the Facts)

I like that. :)

You've probably heard of the "Sorry Everybody" site that sprang up after the (*cough*stolen*cough*) election. I wish they had one for my faith. *sigh* Sorry about the bozos.

(Reply to this)


[info]zibblsnrt
2005-03-10 22:01 (link)
Now a while ago I decided to show a little consideration for those americans in my audience that didn't like some darn furrner bitch about their country

Fuck that.

Those backwards idiots don't warrant sympathy; if they don't like it, they can hit the page down key and go to the next post. It's there for a reason.

(Reply to this)


[info]keori
2005-03-11 05:12 (link)
After much thought, I have come to a conclusion.

Shad, rant and rave all you like about how much the U.S. government sucks. I will wholeheartedly agree with you. Yes, the vast majority are power-hungry hypocrites whose only real goal for America is remaking it in their own image.

The current administration panders to the Religious Wrong to such an extreme that it frightens me. Shrub has declared that Republicans are about a "Culture of Life", yet under his divine guidance *chokepuke* over 1,000 soldiers and countless civilians have died horribly in Iraq, poverty keeps rising, particularly among single, minority mothers, and health care costs are skyrocketing. This is the man who, as Governor of Texas, executed more prisoners during his time in office than any other governor before or since. Under his party's influence, reproductive education and health care, to include selective abortion, has become harder and harder to obtain (I think we've all seen the wondrous failure that is abstinence-only education), while social programs for women and children in poverty have gone down the tubes.

"Culture of Life"? I think not. These people don't care about any lives except their own. They care about staying in power, and exercising that power to determine who will die, who will live, and the quality (or lack thereof) of life that those currently living experience. I speak of both the Administration, and its support base of neo-con Paulines. (I refuse to call them Christians. True followers of Christ would do their utmost to care for their fellow humans and alleviate their suffering, not shit on them.)

Any doctor who takes the Hippocratic oath must at some point confront a situation where death would alleviate the patient's suffering far better than medical treatment. Cats and dogs are euthanised every day in this country, some with no more thought than it takes to blow your nose. They, like infants, are creatures in the care of adult humans, yet there is no legislation or debate over their euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide is still legal in Oregon, despite the howls of the Shrub Club. Some Americans do actually want to exercise power over their own lives and deaths, and over those for whom they are ultimately responsible - their offspring. Well, animals in the wild eat offspring that are born deformed, or the offspring die naturally. Only the human species has seen fit to keep its fatally deformed children alive and in pain under the guise of love, despite nature's efforts to have her way. We think we have so much power over life and death, but we keep forgetting that 1) Death comes to everyone 2) We are only mortals, not infallible, not all-knowing, and that sometimes nature really does know better.

As for the press, well, don't forget that corporations own networks, and corporations have money, and the networks will take the position that the corporation pays them to. After all, who made all those campaign contributions to the guy who loves tax cuts for the uber-wealthy? Hint: It wasn't small business owners of middle America. Do not be surprised if the pathetic excuse of American "news" jumps all over this, and criticises it to high heaven, because that is how politics work here. It doesn't matter if it's true, doesn't matter if it's right, all that matters is that it's said early, and often, and with as much money behind it as possible.

Now that I've taken up half the page, I'm off to cook dinner. See you in a few months.

(Reply to this)


Not logged in.
(Create an account?)