"Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’(killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled."
The statement at the beginning of this article is an abstract from an article that was published online in the The Journal of Medical Ethics on February 23rd 2012 written by Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva. Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva are medical ethicists. Their "ethical" defense of the killing of newborns even though the newborn does not have any medical problem is the logical progression of abortion on demand, whether or not abortion supporters are willing to admit this publicly.
The Groningen Protocol
Before prosecutors approved the protocol voluntary euthanasia in the Netherlands was legal for children as young as 12 years old, now involuntary euthanasia is legal from the moment of birth. Supporters of the Netherlands practice of voluntary euthanasia will point out that in the case of newborns the parents must request euthanasia based upon medical criteria, and children between the ages of 12 and 16 must have parental permission before they are euthanized. Those are the written guidelines but how euthanasia is actually practiced no matter how old a patient is may be an entirely different matter.
"In January 1997-June 2004, 22 cases of deliberate termination of life in newborns were reported. All cases concerned newborns with spina bifida and hydrocephalus. Deliberate termination of life was acceptable to the physicians because of the presence of hopeless suffering, with no means of alleviating the suffering. In all cases, at least 2 doctors were consulted outside the medical team. In 17 of 22 cases, a multidisciplinary spina bifida team was consulted. All parents consented to the termination of life; in 4 cases they explicitly requested it." - from the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health
Note the time span concerning the 22 cases of the "deliberate termination of life in newborns" that were reported. The Groningen Protocol had not been written until September 2004. Doctors were euthanizing infants when it was not legal to do so in the Netherlands. Prosecutors were not interested in prosecuting these cases because doctors met the "medical criteria" written in a protocol that prosecutors agreed to after at least 22 infants had already been euthanized. How very fortunate for the doctors, probably not so fortunate for the citizens of the Netherlands.
Some Dutch citizens now carry what I call "Please do not kill me" cards for good reason. In the case of an accident or serious illness your first visit to the hospital could be your last visit. The lack of interest by prosecutors concerning the illegal euthanizing of newborns does not bode well for any patient no matter their age. Also of interest is that in the 22 cases only 4 parents explicitly requested euthanasia. What about the other 18 cases? Were parents encouraged or pressured to accept euthanasia?
One should remember that the Groningen Protocol was designed to protect doctors from prosecution for ending the life of infants, it was not written to protect the life of the patient.
"Criteria are amongst others "unbearable suffering" and "expected quality of life". Only the parents can start the procedure. The procedure is reported to be working well.For the Dutch public prosecutor, the termination of a child's life (under age 12) is acceptable if 4 requirements were properly fulfilled;"
- The presence of hopeless and unbearable suffering
- The consent of the parents to termination of life
- Medical consultation having taken place
- Careful execution of the termination
The sad irony is that the Dutch refused to cooperate with the Nazi Aktion T4 program that required the reporting and euthanizing of the disabled during the occupation of Holland in World War II.
The following quote is from a sermon delivered by Bishop Clemens on August 3rd, 1941. This sermon was delivered in Nazi Germany and it enraged the Nazi government. Several priests were executed by the Gestapo for distributing written copies of this sermon.
"No, these are not the reasons why these unfortunate patients are to be put to death. It is simply because that according to some doctor, or because of the decision of some committee, they have no longer a right to live because they are ‘unproductive citizens’. The opinion is that since they can no longer make money, they are obsolete machines, comparable with some old cow that can no longer give milk or some horse that has gone lame. What is the lot of unproductive machines and cattle? They are destroyed. I have no intention of stretching this comparison further. The case here is not one of machines or cattle which exist to serve men and furnish them with plenty. They may be legitimately done away with when they can no longer fulfil their function. Here we are dealing with human beings, with our neighbours, brothers and sisters, the poor and invalids . . . unproductive—perhaps! But have they, therefore, lost the right to live? Have you or I the right to exist only because we are ‘productive’? If the principle is established that unproductive human beings may be killed, then God help all those invalids who, in order to produce wealth, have given their all and sacrificed their strength of body. If all unproductive people may thus be violently eliminated, then woe betide our brave soldiers who return home, wounded, maimed or sick."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_Protocol#Legal_status
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15702738
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full.pdf+html
http://www.euthanasia.com/galen.html
