Dutch Euthanasia
Headlines:
Dutch Legalize Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
Dutch Pro-Life Leader Speaks Out About the Vote
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition on the Dutch Euthanasia Vote
Christian Medical Association Laments Dutch Euthanaisa Vote
Dutch Group Cry for Life on Euthanasia Debate
Dutch Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Bill Details and Chronology
Dutch
Legalize Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
Associated Press,
Reuters; April 10, 2001
The Hague, Netherlands -- Despite protests outside parliament, the Netherlands legalized euthanasia and assisted suicide Tuesday, becoming the first nation to allow for both practices.
About 10,000 euthanasia opponents surrounded the building, praying, singing hymns and quoting the Bible, while the upper house of parliament, the Senate, considered the legislation. The Senate voted 46-28 in favor of the law, likely to take effect in the summer.
Before the vote, Health Minister Els Borst reassured legislators the bill could not be abused by doctors because of careful supervisory provisions. The law presupposes a long doctor-patient relationship and requires patients be legal residents of the Netherlands.
``There are sufficient measures to eliminate those concerns,'' Borst told the senators. Assisted suicide, she said, will remain a last resort for those who have no other choice but endless suffering.
The law formalizes a practice discreetly used in Dutch hospitals and homes for decades, turning guidelines adopted by Parliament in 1993 into legally binding requirements. Doctors can still be punished if they fail to meet the law's strict codes.
Outside parliament, some protesters were masked in black balaclavas and carried oversized syringes dripping with fake blood. Others gathered signatures for a petition that already had 25,000 names before the debate opened Monday evening. Several Christian schools canceled classes to allow students from across the country to participate in the demonstrations.
``We don't have the right to decide about matters of life and death, but God does,'' said 19-year-old Henrico van der Hoek as he walked passed Parliament. ``As Christians, we simply cannot support this law.''
After the vote, they said they were disappointed but not surprised. The Senate vote was considered a formality for the bill, already passed by the lower house.
``The tide will turn back someday,'' said 69-year-old Piet Huurman of the Cry for Life protest group. ``They will realize they have made a terrible mistake.''
Despite the strong showing of opponents on Tuesday, van der Hoek, who belongs to the Dutch Reformed Church, admitted he is one of a small minority in the Netherlands, once a stronghold of Christian politics.
In the debate, Borst said a broad consensus had coalesced after 30 years of discussion, claiming some 90 percent of the population backing the changes.
Under the law, a patient would have to be undergoing irremediable and unbearable suffering, be aware of all other medical options and have sought a second professional opinion. The request would have to be made voluntarily, persistently and independently while the patient is of sound mind. Doctors are not supposed to suggest it as an option.
The new law also would allow patients to leave a written request for euthanasia, giving doctors the right to use their own discretion when patients become too physically or mentally ill to decide for themselves. An independent commission would review cases to ensure the guidelines were followed.
If a doctor is suspected of wrongdoing, the case will be referred to public prosecutors for review and possible punishment.
Several countries - Switzerland, Colombia and Belgium - tolerate euthanasia. Belgium is the only other country currently considering making assisted suicide legal. In the United States, Oregon has allowed assisted suicide since 1996, but its law is more restrictive than the Dutch bill. In Australia, the Northern Territories enacted a law in 1996, but it was revoked in 1997 by the federal parliament.
Early reaction from abroad, however, was negative.
Russian Health Minister, Yuri Shevchenko, interviewed by RTR state television, said the law would be wide open to abuse. "Imagine an ill, old man induced to die with his belongings and small apartment taken from him. This is a great sin and we must not allow it," he said.
The Illinois-based "Not Dead Yet," organisation, a U.S. disability rights group, also condemned the action. "The Dutch experience with euthanasia is best described as one of increasing carelessness and callousness over the years," it said in a statement.
An influential Roman Catholic bishop in Poland also spoke against the new law. "Euthanasia allowed in one sphere.., can slip out of control and embrace other groups of people -- those unwanted and disabled," said Bishop Tadeusz Pieronek, former secretary general of Poland's episcopate.
In contrast, Australian anti-euthanasia campaigners do not expect any "ripple effect" from the Netherlands becoming the first country in the world to legalise euthanasia.
"I can't understand the Dutch, I really can't," said Right to Life chairwoman Margaret Tighe, pointing to the rejection of euthanasia elsewhere in Europe, Australia and the United States. "I believe that when the history books are written in years to come, people will look back in sorrow and in anger at what the Dutch have allowed to happen because (voluntary euthanasia) is a very, very slippery slope," Tighe told Reuters.
The drafters of the Dutch bill denounced a plan from Australia's leading euthanasia campaigner to set up a floating clinic in a ship flying the Dutch flag off the coast. Philip Nitschke had said if the Dutch legalize euthanasia he would offer clients lethal injections in international waters off the Australian coast.
Borst said the Dutch government would do ``whatever it could'' to counter any such effort and stressed that the scheme ``could by no means'' fit into the Dutch rules.
Dutch
Pro-Life Leader Speaks Out About the Vote
Cybercast News
Service; April 10, 2001
The Hague, Netherlands -- Tuesday's development prompted pro-life campaigner Dr. Bert Dorenbos to say he felt "ashamed" at what is being done in his country's name.
Speaking by telephone from the square in front of the upper house of parliament, Dorenbos said he was convinced most Dutchmen and women were opposed to what was being perpetrated by "a small group of hardliners."
"We are trying to excel in evil. We see the result. It doesn't bring happiness, it brings problems and death," Dorenbos said. "But I'm convinced this is not the will of the majority of Holland. We're working to revive the good spirits of the Dutch people, and there are many [right-minded people] in this country."
On Tuesday afternoon, the protestors outside parliament were joined by thousands more arriving from around the country, brought in by schools, youth groups and women's organizations, for a silent protest, he said.
Dorenbos is president of a group called Cry for Life, which Monday night handed lawmakers a petition bearing 40,000 signatures, appealing to them to defeat the Bill. But he acknowledged that the chamber was weighted in favor of euthanasia. A simple majority of the 75 Senators is required to pass the law, which the lower house passed by 104 votes to 40 last November.
The three parties comprising the ruling coalition, Labor, VVD and D66, hold 38 seats between them, while the Greens, with eight seats, also support the Bill. It is opposed by the Christian Democrats, the Socialists and smaller Calvinist parties.
Dorenbos said pro-lifers would continue to campaign against euthanasia even though the law was passed. Noting that Australia's Northern Territory had in 1996 legalized medically-assisted suicide for terminally-ill patients, but later repealed the law, he expressed the hope of a future reversal in the Netherlands too.
"Things will change. [Euthanasia] is an offense against human rights. I believe that soon the whole pro-death mentality will be turned upside down."
Dorenbos said some Dutch euthanasia campaigners wanted to push things further, making it even easier for a person to demand suicide than the new law's restrictions will allow.
"[Some] pro-euthanasia people say that every person has the right to kill himself at any point, not when he is terminally-ill, just fed up with life." This law, he said, was merely another step towards an even more dangerous situation, and so the battle would continue.
Dorenbos said he suspected the slide would be halted by doctors who eventually dig in their heels, saying that they were being forced to take lives at their patients' demand, rather than trying to save them. "Doctors should be the last people to kill," he argued. If the government legalized euthanasia, it should also appoint official killers. "It's a horrible thought, but I'm just following their mindset."
Earlier this year, Dutch pro-life activists were hoping that a murder conviction of a doctor who ended a terminally-ill patient's life prematurely may have helped to swing legislators' opinion against the law being voted on today.
Wilfred van Oijen was convicted of murder for killing an 84-year-old woman in 1997. Although doctors have up to now been allowed to hasten patients' deaths under prescribed circumstances, he failed to get the woman's go-ahead. Neither did he get another doctor's opinion, as stipulated.
Among those waiting for the Netherlands to legalize euthanasia was an Australian doctor who wants to acquire a Dutch-registered ship, then anchor in international waters off his home country and offer euthanasia while circumventing Australian law.
Philip Nitschke, who killed four patients in the Northern Territory before the euthanasia law was abolished, did not respond this week to emailed queries about his controversial proposal. But he was quoted earlier as saying he knew of many people who would take up his services if his floating euthanasia clinic was operating. Australian pro-lifers have called the plan "bizarre."
Dorenbos said Tuesday his group had approached lawmakers about stipulating that the new law should not enable people like Nitschke to exploit Dutch legislation in this way.
"The fact that this man is doing it is proving that what we are doing is evil," he said. "That he's choosing a Dutch ship is proof that these people like to work in the dark."
Euthanasia
Prevention Coalition on the Dutch Euthanasia Vote
Euthanasia
Prevention Coalition; April 10, 2001
London, Canada -- "The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition opposes both in theory and in practice the new Dutch law legalizing euthanasia, because it will result in significant abuse of vulnerable Dutch citizens who are not dying," declares Dr. Barrie deVeber, President of the Coalition. "The essential factor for requesting euthanasia in the Dutch legislation is that a person be experiencing unbearable suffering."
"Since the law does not require that a person be terminal ill in order to be euthanised, individuals who are not given appropriate pain and symptom management will be candidates for euthanasia. Essentially this law protects physicians and nursing care providers who lack the knowledge and expertise necessary for excellence in patient care, rather than protecting their patients." says Dr. deVeber.
"We are extremely concerned about people who are experiencing profound emotional anxiety and depression," states Jean Echlin, a nursing consultant in palliative care and Vice President of the Coalition. "The Dutch Supreme Court has already established that emotional suffering is recognized as a type of unbearable suffering, even though it is normally treatable. This raises serious questions about the laws ability to protect people who are emotionally vulnerable."
The law, which allows for an incompetent patient to be euthanised, "fails to protect vulnerable citizens in the Netherlands and calls into question the integrity of the Dutch euthanasia model," says Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Coalition.
Legalizing euthanasia in a society that lacks adequate pain and symptom management for its citizens send a chilling message to vulnerable Canadians who fear that Canada may introduce a law to legalize euthanasia based on the Dutch model.
Christian
Medical Association Laments Dutch Euthanaisa Vote
Christian Medical
Association; April 10, 2001
Washington, DC -- The 14,000-member Christian Medical Association (CMA) today lamented the Dutch Parliament's vote to legalize euthanasia, saying the policy will further corrupt the medical profession and lead to more involuntary deaths.
CMA Executive Director David Stevens, MD noted, "When the Dutch government has sanctioned euthanasia in the past, statistics have shown that over three out of four Dutch patients who died through medical intervention never even gave their consent. Decriminalizing this tragic practice will now open the door to even more involuntary deaths and destroy trust--the foundation of the doctor-patient relationship."
Stevens added, "This is not a question of who will have the right to die; it's a question of who will have the power to kill. What's being promoted as 'freedom of choice' flies in the face of the Dutch government's own Remmelink Report, which documents thousands of cases of patients put to death without their consent."
The Christian Medical Association conducted intensive on-site research in the Netherlands, interviewing experts as well as family members who have suffered the consequences of involuntary euthanasia. CMA also produced a video and provided testimony for Congress about the dangers of the Dutch experiment with officially sanctioned suicide.
Stevens said, "We have looked beyond the official statistics and into the faces of real people who have suffered under this tragic policy of turning doctors into killers. It all sounds so libertarian until you realize that the real autonomy lies not with the patient, but with the doctor. And once the deed is done, the chief witness to the crime is dead."
Dutch
Group Cry for Life on Euthanasia Debate
Cry for Life;
April 10, 2001
The Hague, Netherlands -- Yesterday, April 9, the Upper House of the Dutch Parliament started the final debate on the Euthanasia Law, which will make it legal to kill patients with their consent under certain conditions. The Lower House of Parliament already agreed on the new law at the end of last year. Cry for Life presented a second batch of 15.000 signatures to members of Parliament before the debate. Earlier, 25.000 signatures had already been given.
During the first round of the debate on Monday evening, different parties criticised the procedure through which doctors have to notify the authorities of the committed euthanasia. The Christian Party Christenunie voiced repeated concern about the fact that there is a duty to report euthanasia after it has been committed instead of before. The main opposition party, the Christian Democrat CDA, questioned the willingness of doctors to report euthanasia, even now the reporting committees are already operating separately from the office of the Public Prosecutor. In the present -already liberal law- in working during the last two years, the committees (in which doctors have a large say) practically judged over the reported euthanasia. Only in 'questionable cases' the Prosecutor received the advice to prosecute. In 1999 (latest data) only 2216 cases of euthanasia were reported to the committees. Of these cases only a very small number was questionable.
The problem with the way of voluntary reporting is that the numbers 'below the line' are not clear. What the total number of cases of practised euthanasia is, is not known. During all recent research, it became clear that 60% of all cases are NOT reported. By taking euthanasia from the Penal Code, the government hopes to place doctors in 'a judicial safer environment' so that their willingness to report will increase.
However, the present law, which relaxed the rules already, did not have that effect. Even the speaker from the ruling coalition party, the social democratic PVDA (a supporter of the new law) concluded during the debate that the number of reports has not increased, but decreased by 20% in two years. The party stressed the need to control what is happening and criticised the government of not taking enough action on this point. Even the documents of the reported cases are, contrary to habit, destroyed and not kept for statistic or scientific research. The conclusion of the government that the lower willingness to report was caused by 'start up problems' of the new procedure, was questioned by the social democrats as well.
Christenunie voiced clear concern about the introduction of euthanasia, with all negative ethical consequences, into the normal medical practice. 'What is now seen by many as a good, final solution (to the judicial and ethical matters around euthanasia), could well prove to be the beginning of a nightmare.
The debate continues this morning. We hope to keep you informed during this day and tomorrow. This afternoon at 15.00 hrs (local time), there will be a large 'quiet protest', organised by numerous churches and organisations to protest against the new law.
Dutch
Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide Bill Details and Chronology
Associated Press;
April 10, 2001
THE HAGUE, Netherlands -- Under the bill enacted by the Dutch parliament Tuesday, a patient seeking assisted suicide or euthanasia must be a legal resident of the Netherlands. A doctor performing the practice on a patient must first:
-- be satisfied that the patient has made a voluntary and carefully considered request;
-- be satisfied that the patient's suffering was unbearable, and that there was no prospect of improvement;
-- have informed the patient about his situation and his prospects;
-- have come to the conclusion, together with the patient, that there is no reasonable alternative in the light of the patient's situation; and
-- have consulted at least one other, independent physician, who must have seen the patient and given a written opinion on the due care criteria referred to in a. to d. above.
Doctor must terminate the patient's life or provided assistance with suicide ``with due medical care and attention.'' The doctor must notify the municipal coroner after performing euthanasia. Age plays no role. Being simply "tired of life" is not covered by the bill.
----
Chronology: Netherlands' growing tolerance of euthanasia
Here is a chronology of key events leading to Tuesday's vote by the Dutch upper house of parliament to legalise euthanasia.
The Netherlands now becomes the only country to make assisted suicide and euthanasia legal, after tolerating the practice for more than two decades.
1973 Dutch court outlines conditions which can override doctors' vow to prolong life. It imposes a one-week suspended sentence and one year of probation on a doctor who injected her mother with a lethal dose of morphine.
1984 Dutch Supreme Court overturns conviction of doctor who terminated the life of an aged woman who revealed in her will that she had requested euthanasia. The court ruled that the doctor had properly resolved a conflict between preserving a patient's life and alleviating suffering.
1993 Dutch parliament passes law to regulate mercy killing with a 28-point checklist for doctors to follow in euthanasia cases. Doctors should find patients are terminally ill, in unbearable pain and have repeatedly asked to die. Euthanasia remains a criminal offence carrying a maximum 12-year jail sentence, but doctors who follow guidelines told they should not expect to be punished. Public prosecutor to decide on case-by-case basis whether to prosecute.
1994 Dutch Supreme Court upholds a conviction, but declines to impose a penalty, for a doctor who helped a woman commit suicide at her request. The woman was not terminally ill, but had a long history of depression. The court ruled that the doctor should have consulted an independent medical expert before acting.
1995 Dutch court rules in two cases that doctors who ended the lives of two severely handicapped babies at the request of their parents were justified. The doctors should not be punished even though a charge of murder was formally proven. The doctors were the first to be prosecuted for ending the lives of patients unable to express their own will.
1997 Government unveils euthanasia reform after official inquiry reveals about 60 percent of mercy killings go unreported by doctors who fear prosecution. Under new measures, reported euthanasia cases are no longer automatically referred to prosecutors, but to an independent panel of medical, legal and ethical experts.
1999 Government delivers bill to parliament to legalise euthanasia.
November 28, 2000 Lower house votes to legalise euthanasia under strict conditions.
March 2001 An Amsterdam doctor is convicted of murder, but given no prison sentence, after a court ruled he failed to follow euthanasia principles.
April 10, 2001 Upper house of parliament, the Senate, votes 46 to 28 in favour of legalising euthanasia under strict conditions.
--