Better for Old People to Kill Themselves Than Be A Nuisance

[Guest guest]

If you have read about the Aborigines in Australia, when the elderly are ready to die they go out and will themselves to die. That sounded terrible to me, but then it is painless and there is no suffering. That is their culture.

June

 

-

CHEROKEE

Undisclosed-Recipient:;

Wednesday, December 15, 2004 10:38 AM

Better for Old People to Kill Themselves Than Be A Nuisance

 

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200412\CUL20041214a.htmlBetter for Old People to Kill Themselves Than Be A Nuisance, Lawmaker SaysBy Patrick GoodenoughCNSNews.com International EditorDecember 14, 2004(CNSNews.com) - A prominent British lawmaker has triggered an outcry byimplying that elderly and very ill people should not only have the right,but theobligation to kill themselves rather than become a nuisance. The furoreruptedas British lawmakers prepared to vote on a bill that critics worry could beused to sanction the killing of patients in a vegetative state."I couldn't bear hanging on and being such a burden on people," saidBaronessMary Warnock, an 80-year-old medical ethicist, philosopher and member of theupper House of Lords, in a weekend newspaper interview."In other contexts, sacrificing oneself for one's family would be consideredgood," she told the Sunday Times. "I don't see what is so horrible about themotive of not wanting to be an increasing nuisance.""If I went into a nursing home, it would be a terrible waste of money thatmyfamily could use far better," Warnock added.Later in the interview she said: "I am not ashamed to say some lives aremoreworth living than others," before conceding that "if someone else decidesyour life is not worth living, that is very dangerous."Warnock was speaking ahead of a House of Commons vote Tuesday on legislationthat would give legal status to "living wills" and allow third parties totelldoctors to withdraw treatment -- or even food and water -- fromterminally-ill patients."Living wills" are documents that set out how ill people want to be treatedif they are no longer able to communicate their wishes directly to medicalstaff.The Mental Capacity Bill is highly contentious, with some members of theruling Labor Party opposing it and calling for the right to vote accordingtoconscience.'Drain on resources'Warnock's comments stunned many, not only because of what she said, but alsobecause of her own background. Considered one of Britain's most eminentphilosophers, she once sat on a House of Lords committee that rejected amove tolegalize euthanasia.In 1995, her husband died of a debilitating lung disease called fibrosingalveolitis.Her Sunday Times interview drew strong reactions: Age Concern, a charityworking with the elderly, called her remarks "outrageous.""The current system of care [for the elderly] is chronically under-fundedandwe should be looking at ways of improving the system rather than blamingolder people," a spokesman said.Euthanasia advocates welcomed Warnock's intervention, noting her change instance over the past 10 years and saying that it reflected a wider shift inpublic opinion.Warnock's remarks went beyond "end of life" decisions. She also suggestedthat if doctors felt premature babies could not be treated, the children'sparents should pay for them to remain on life-support systems."Maybe it has to come down to saying: 'Okay, they can stay alive but thefamily will have to pay for it,' " she said. "Otherwise it will be an awfuldrainon public resources."Warnock is the second member of the House of Lords to have made explosivecomments about ethical issues in the past 10 days.On December 5, Baroness Shreela Flather suggested in a newspaper interviewthat parents from deprived areas should be dissuaded from having largefamilies."People should be thinking more about how much they can offer five childrencompared to how much they can offer two or three," she said."If you want the best for your child, you have to think about how manychildren you can look after. If you had two or three children, maybe youcould havehigher aspirations for them."The India-born Flather is a former president of the Family PlanningAssociation and currently sits on the board of Marie Stopes International(MSI), aUK-based organization that carries out some 35,000 abortions a year, andworks in30 mostly developing countries worldwide.An MSI spokeswoman was quoted afterwards as saying Flather was speakingindependently of the organization, although MSI is reportedly consideringpublishing leaflets cautioning of the financial costs of bringing upchildren.'Eugenics'A spokeswoman for the British pro-life charity Life told CNSNews.com thatFlather's comments were "particularly worrying given the fact that the worldisfacing a population implosion whereby the fertility level for the world as awhole is predicted to drop below replacement level before 2050.""Most western countries are facing ageing populations where the workforcewill not be able to support the elderly," she said. "Many parts of the worldarefacing severe demographic imbalance in their populations.""It is therefore highly irresponsible of the Baroness to suggest any grouphave less children, and highly insulting to poorer communities to advisethatthey alone should have less children."The spokeswoman also said Flather's comments were unsurprising, coming fromadirector of "an organization that has its roots in eugenics and racism."MSI was founded by Scottish-born Marie Stopes, who opened Britain's first"family planning clinic" in London in 1921. Forty-one years after her deathin1958, she was voted "Woman of the Millennium" by the readers of Britain'sliberal Guardian newspaper.According to Life counselor Victoria Gillick, however, Stopes' publishedviews were racist and offensive. She referred to the "puny and utterlyunsatisfactory" children of the poor, and made such observations as "ourrace is weakenedby an appallingly high percentage of unfit weaklings and diseasedindividuals."Gillick wrote several years ago that Stopes was keenly interested ineugenics, also known as "selective breeding.""In Stopes's view, only those children with a chance of reaching 'strong,beautiful and intelligent maturity' should be conceived."Flather, incidentally, sat on the same House of Lords committee as Warnockdid in 1993 and at the time also opposed euthanasia. Flather said earlierthisyear that she had changed her mind and now supported the practice.Flather, Warnock and a third member of the Lords were cited as saying theyhad changed their opinion because of developments in medical care andsuccessful"right to die" laws in the Netherlands, Belgium and Oregon.«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§ - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH CONSPIRACIES! §Subscribe:......... - To :.... - Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be news related, purely speculation or someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.**COPYRIGHT NOTICE**In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml