As the demands for “right to die” laws ramp up in Australia, keep this incident in mind, because the always say “There is no slippery slope.”
Elderly Woman Resisted Being Euthanized When She Saw the Needle, So Her Family Held Her Down
A Dutch doctor who was rebuked for killing an elderly dementia patient without consent and in a traumatic manner has been given a formal reprimand by the Dutch medical complaints board, and may now face criminal charges.
The case involved a woman in her seventies, who was placed in a care home after her dementia became so advanced that her husband could no longer cope with care at home. She was distressed and frightened, and after a few weeks, the doctor at the home determined that she was suffering unbearably. He concluded that she was not mentally competent, but that an earlier statement in her will that she wanted euthanasia “when I myself find it the right time”; justified killing her.
The story was greeted with horror around the world, as it emerged that the doctor drugged the victim’s coffee, and had her family hold her down as she tried to fight off the lethal injection. Despite the woman not being mentally competent to consent to being killed, a review panel cleared the doctor of all charges.
No consent given
Now, the Dutch medical complaints board has formally reprimanded the unnamed doctor -the first case in which a practitioner has been formally censured since the Netherlands made it legal for doctors to kill patients at their request in 2002.
The board said that the woman’s will was contradictory, and that although she said she wanted to die on some days, on others she did not. She had written an ‘advance directive’ asking to be killed if her dementia became too severe, but whenever the issue of asking to die was raised, she also added: “Not now, it’s not so bad yet”. The board found that the doctor should have discussed the fact that a sedative was put in her coffee – which did not happen – and only carried out euthanasia if she agreed.
Read the rest of the story here
Then David confessed to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”
Following Uriah’s death, Bathsheba mourns for her husband, but then goes and lives in the palace. She gives birth to a boy.
Nathan the prophet comes to David with a story about a rich man who steals a lamb from a poor man. David is outraged and says that whoever does such a thing deserves to die. Nathan tells him, “You are the man.”
David realises that the story is about him and repents of his sin. Nathan says that although the Lord has forgiven David, the baby will die because of his sin.
Sometimes our temptations can blind us to the reality and enormity of our sin. David could have had any possession he desired, any woman he wanted. He was walking in God’s favour, but his list for one woman changed everything.
When we are battling temptation our one thought is, “I want that now.” We cannot see the wider picture. We neglect to pray about the issue and to find out God’s will. When we sin, the ramifications spread like ripples in a pond.
David’s temptation led him to a multitude of sins- adultery, lies and murder, to name a few. But the consequences of his sin were generational- the baby would die, his other sons would oppose him and each other, and so on.
We might think that there are no consequences for our sin. We might think that we got away with it. But God sees all. Of course, the first and most grievous result of sin is that it separates us from God and interrupts our relationship with Him.
The good news in all of the gloom of sin is that God forgives us when we repent and turn away from our sins. “If we confess our sins to Him, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and cleanse us from all wickedness.” (1 John 1:9)
Father, I confess my sins to you right now. I ask for your forgiveness and the grace to walk in obedience to you. Amen.
The Australian Government is introducing a digital health record where all of your health information is stored in one location accessible to all health professionals. On the face of it, this is a great idea. Hospitals, GPs and specialists will be able to see the full story of your health.
My mother-in-law in her later years required a huge number of medications and was under the care of several specialists who did not talk to each other. Consequently she sometimes became ill from the interactions of the drugs with each other.
The My Health Record would have prevented suffering for her and for many other people with chronic health conditions.
But the Government could not leave it there as a service to individual citizens and to the health service. No, they had to use it as a backdoor to spy on our personal data. So numerous agencies have access to your health records regardless of their need to provide health services.
Agencies which can access personal health records include The Australian Tax Office, Centrelink, State and Territory Police Forces, the various crime commissions, the Agency that runs the NDIS and many more.
I am not a huge privacy nut. If you want to know about my haemorrhoid, my blood pressure (controlled nicely by medication), or the prostate infection I had 20 or so years ago, I will happily tell you. That’s my choice.
I will not have nosy public servants having access to my information without my consent, just because they have an interest or they think I might be defrauding them. If they think a crime may be committed, for example by people on sickness benefits, then they should gather evidence and apply for a warrant.
This is yet another “Big Brother” exercise by the Government under the guise of helping the people.
If they rescind the ability of agencies that are not health related, then I will be in it.
You can opt out at http://www.myhealthrecord.gov.au
The Federal Government announced on August 1st that it will legislate to ensure that health records can only be accessed by other agencies after obtaining a court warrant. A win for privacy! After the legislation is passed, I will be opting in.