Deadly Diagnosis in the Netherlands
“Involuntary euthanasia” takes hold;
Will the United States follow suit?
Jonathan Imbody
Slumped in a chair surrounded by books on philosophy,
religion and sociology, Henk Reitsema still cannot fathom the tragedy that four
years ago robbed his family of their grandfather.
A Christian thinker in the mold of Dr. Francis
Schaeffer, the articulate young leader of the L’Abri Fellowship in
Holland struggles with words. How do you describe your feelings after learning that
your grandfather, like thousands of others in the Netherlands, had become a
victim of involuntary euthanasia-medical killing without the patient’s consent?
“Numb was the first response, just not knowing what to
feel,” Henk explains. “You imagined, ‘What was the doctor thinking in making
this kind of decision? How do you view him? Did he murder your Granddad?’ Those
feelings-you don’t know what to do with them. It’s very, very strange.”
Henk remembers, “This may have been something that was
becoming normal in the Netherlands. But for our family, it was not even an
option.”
The Reitsema family’s story illustrates the tragedy
euthanasia has rained upon the Netherlands. But it also speaks to Americans. In
1996, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled assisted suicide did not fall into the
ever-expanding category of constitutional rights. Then it effectively sent the
issue to the individual states for “experimentation.”
As a result, more than 40 individuals have already
died through a secretive, state-sanctioned assisted-suicide program in Oregon.
Michigan voters, by contrast, roundly rejected assisted suicide in 1998. Last
November, Maine voters narrowly rejected a misnomer, a “death with dignity”
measure, and a cadre of California legislators currently plans to introduce an
assisted-suicide measure.
As the Reitsema family’s story shows, reality tends to
rust the rhetoric of “death with dignity.”
Henk’s grandfather had contracted non-Hodgkin’s
lymphoma, which would have naturally taken his life within a few years. He also
had developed a painful thrombosis in his leg, so he asked the nursing- home
physician for help with the pain.
Instead, the doctor quietly ordered nurses to
administer overdoses of morphine and withhold food and water. Rather than
providing healing or comfort, and without consulting Grandfather Reitsema or
his loved ones, this doctor aimed to kill.
Henk’s soft-spoken wife, Riana, had been regularly
visiting Grandfather Reitsema. She relates that one of Henk’s aunts stumbled
upon the plan-but too late. The day before he died, she tried to give him
water, but the nurse didn’t allow it.
Horrified, the family realized the nursing home was
euthanizing Grandfather Reitsema. Henk explains, “My family tried to reverse
it, but he died from pneumonia”-a common result of heavy morphine dosing.
Shocked by the killing, some family members accused
other family members of complicity. Like most Dutch, they naively believed
euthanasia is always a matter of consent.
“Instead of being able to mourn together in the first
place,” Henk laments, “they were having a slinging match as to who would have
given permission. Nobody believed it could be possible that a doctor could make
this decision single-handedly.”
Dutch politicians and health officials carefully
emphasize a system of controls designed to ensure patient autonomy. In
practice, however, those controls are a fairy tale. Dutch medical surveys
reveal that in three out of four cases where doctors intervened to hasten
death, the patient did not give permission.
“After talking to each other and getting the emotions
calmed down,” Henk explains, “everybody realized that not even my grandmother
had as much as given an insinuation that it was okay. One never would have imagined
him not wanting to hold on to life. He respected the fact that God had given
him life.”
One day outside the nursing home, Henk’s aunt waited
for the physician who had killed her brother. When she confronted him, Henk
recalls, “[The doctor’s] response was, ‘But he was sick! Don’t you understand?
I was just helping him out.’”
Henk points to that conversation as an illustration of
the philosophical chasm between the Christian view of the intrinsic, sacred
value of human life and the utilitarian secular view.
“The framework is radically different,” Henk explains.
“The whole connectedness with other people was totally absent from his mind.
The doctor thinks, ‘This guy’s standard of life isn’t worth living, so let’s
just save them all the effort.’“
The family considered legal action against the doctor.
“But it proved to be a no-win situation,” Henk explains. “Only the most
extremely harsh cases ever come to court, and even then, the court always
favors the doctors.”
Not long after the incident with Henk’s grandfather,
Dutch media began to uncover the tragedy at the nursing home. Henk recalls,
“The newspaper reported that they practiced ‘bed- rooming’-making space in the
beds from time to time-by putting in what the Dutch call ‘versterving’. It’s a
sort of humanistic Dutch word for letting somebody starve. It’s an official
term that makes active killing of people sound like a treatment.
“When they needed beds for new patients, they would
‘clean out’ some beds. Make a checklist, and in a week, ten people would die.
The records showed that this kind of administrative pressure had started to
play a role in the diagnosis of the doctors. They become little lords over life
and death.”
Once trusted to “do no harm,” as stated in the
Hippocratic oath, a Dutch medical autocracy now kills with impunity. Euthanasia
and assisted suicide, originally promoted by Dutch physicians, have yielded
staggering power to physicians while placing them above the law. Now, thousands
of wary Dutch citizens have resorted to carrying documents stressing that they
do not want euthanasia.
Unlike the impressive dams keeping the sea from
flooding the Netherlands, euthanasia regulations have proven to be more of a breach
than a barrier. Thousands of patients have drowned in a flood of exceptions and
abuses. Last October 30, for example, a Dutch court acquitted a doctor who
assisted with suicide for a depressed patient who was not even physically
suffering-a clear flouting of the regulations.
The Dutch have now moved to officially legalize
euthanasia, just as they have legalized drug use and prostitution, believing
that legalization will somehow curb abuses.
Like their Dutch counterparts, American suicide
activists spread their propaganda with stories of patients suffering unbearable
pain. They realize if they frame the debate in these terms, many
Americans-especially younger ones-will approve of assisted suicide. However,
the tide tends to turn when the public learns the truth about the abuses of
assisted suicide and compassionate alternatives of hospice and pain relief.
In Oregon, state bureaucrats have trotted out
statistics to bolster public faith in their new assisted-suicide system. The
scrubbed-clean reports have offered no trace of the problems one would
naturally expect in the nation’s first foray into institutionalized suicide.
The law shields the details of assisted suicides from
public access. Despite this, some of the truth has gotten out. Stories have
surfaced of suicide slipping into suspected homicide. In one instance, a family
member suspected of murder had the supposed suicide victim cremated within 24
hours.
In an unguarded moment, an Oregon suicide advocate revealed
a botched assisted suicide. The event landed its victim in the emergency room
and eventually in a nursing home. Yet this case didn’t show up in the annual
report.
Out of the Noose Last November’s ballot measure in
Maine included a carefully crafted “Death with Dignity” statement. “Should a
terminally ill adult who is of sound mind be allowed to ask for and receive a
doctor’s help to die?” it asked. Thanks to a campaign by pro-life groups,
churches and the Christian Medical Association, Maine voters said no.
Nationally, Vice President Al Gore had waffled on
assisted suicide, attempting to frame the matter as one between patient and
doctor. Last June 15 on MSNBC’s Web site, Gore said, “When a family member is
in extremis at the very end of life, and there is a lot of pain, there is no
quality of life, and there are very subtle judgments that have to be made. ...
Common sense dictates that ought to be left to the family in consultation with
the physician.”
In contrast, President-elect George W. Bush went on
record opposing assisted suicide and upholding the Pain Relief Promotion Act,
which passed in the House of Representatives but died in the Senate. That
legislation would fund training in pain management and prevent physicians from
using federally regulated narcotics in physician-assisted suicides.
“First of all, in principle, I’m against
physician-assisted suicide,” Bush explained in the Portland Oregonian. “And
secondly, ... the idea of using a controlled substance to end somebody’s life
is something I don’t agree with.”
Shaping a Culture of Life In pre-war Nazi Germany,
physicians collaborated with Hitler in euthanasia initiatives. This paved the
way for the Holocaust. Philosophers and physicians helped convince the public
that killing the handicapped and mentally ill by euthanasia was actually
compassionate.
Dr. J.C. Willke is a euthanasia expert and president
of the International Right to Life Federation. He aptly notes in his
book, Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, “History can repeat. Today we are
living, once again, in the midst of a ‘culture of death.’”
As assisted suicide activists take their lethal
campaign state by state, will Americans embrace life or slide down the slippery
slope toward death? The answer depends largely upon Christians proclaiming the
truth and demonstrating compassionate alternatives. Above all, each believer
can help meet the deepest need of suffering patients, which is to know the One
who makes life worth living.
Jonathan Imbody
Senior Policy Analyst
Christian Medical Association (CMA)
P.O. Box 1016
Springfield, VA 22151, U.S.A.
phone +1 703 503-1158
fax +1 703 503-7121
e-mail washington@cmdahome.org
internet www.cmdahome.org
See also the Thoughtprovoking video of CMDA :
“No Mercy”
|
|
|
Schreeuw om Leven – Ruitersweg 35-37, 1211 KT Hilversum, The Netherlands |
|
phone +31 35 624-4352, fax +31 35 624-9141, e-mail schreeuw@solcon.nl, internet www.schreeuwomleven.nl |