Dutch Woman With Dementia Euthanized Against Her Will. The Doctor Was Just Cleared Of Wrongdoing.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Free health care for all.  #winning

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/51688/dutch-woman-euthanized-against-her-will-doctor-was-amanda-prestigiacomo

 

 

[Ban Hammer 13,498]

Quote

Patients with dementia can now be killed by their doctors even if they strongly object to euthanasia at the time, so long as they have previously given consent for the fatal procedure. In other words, if a patient were to change their mind about the assisted suicide, a doctor could still legally kill them against their will.

hitler would be proud

[Steeleballz 7,550]

48 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

Free health care for all.  #winning

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/51688/dutch-woman-euthanized-against-her-will-doctor-was-amanda-prestigiacomo

 

 

 

   Have you somehow missed all the cases of this happening in the USA?

 

   I mean the doctors killing people obviously. At least they go to jail for it here.

Edited September 13, 2019 by Steeleballz

[luckytxn 2,265]

Well you can kill babies so why not old people?

[Falcon Cara 378]

3 hours ago, luckytxn said:

Well you can kill babies so why not old people?

Why stop there?

 

 

[Dashinka 24,747]

4 hours ago, luckytxn said:

Well you can kill babies so why not old people?

Wasn't there a woman that killed her baby after birth that was found not guilty.  Ralph Northam would be proud.  At least they did convict her of violating a corpse.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/cheerleader-acquitted-killing-newborn-corpse-abuse

[Boiler 45,982]

Biden needs to be careful.

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

I support assisted suicide for extreme medical cases but do not believe in forced euthanasia I feel that is the tipping point, at least for me.

 

My father died over a fairly long period of time, he was in constant pain, robbed of his dignity on a daily basis, assisting him to cross would have been merciful but illegal, I would have supported his choice had he made it, but ot force it upon soneone is wring, akin to murder  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, Randyandyuni said:

I support assisted suicide for extreme medical cases but do not believe in forced euthanasia I feel that is the tipping point, at least for me.

 

My father died over a fairly long period of time, he was in constant pain, robbed of his dignity on a daily basis, assisting him to cross would have been merciful but illegal, I would have supported his choice had he made it, but ot force it upon soneone is wring, akin to murder  

 

  If we had legalized euthanasia here, we could run into the same issue. We already have advanced directives for Alzheimer's and dementia where you state your wishes far in advance of the disease progression and those directives hold when you are no longer able to make cognitive decisions.

 

  She made the decision (in her advance directive) that she wanted to be euthanized when her dementia progressed past a certain point.  I question why there wasn't a second doctor involved in determining the disease progress and level of competency she displayed. She wasn't saying she changed her mind, she was saying she wasn't at the point yet to where she wanted to be euthanized. On the surface that would appear she enough cognitive ability to realize what that decision involved. On the other hand the family was on board with the decision to euthanize.

 

  The biggest concern I have here is not euthanasia itself (or linking it free health care), it's that you have to be very careful how you look at an advanced directive and what you put in it. Many people are pressured into signing these at stressful times, like right before surgery. It takes a lot more thought to come to some of those decisions than people are able to give at times like that. The other thing I would say is if we ever do have legalized euthanasia, there needs to be multiple levels of safeguards to ensure that it is ultimately the patient who is making that decision at all levels. Not the family, and definitely not the medical personnel.

 

   

[Dashinka 24,747]

9 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  If we had legalized euthanasia here, we could run into the same issue. We already have advanced directives for Alzheimer's and dementia where you state your wishes far in advance of the disease progression and those directives hold when you are no longer able to make cognitive decisions.

 

  She made the decision (in her advance directive) that she wanted to be euthanized when her dementia progressed past a certain point.  I question why there wasn't a second doctor involved in determining the disease progress and level of competency she displayed. She wasn't saying she changed her mind, she was saying she wasn't at the point yet to where she wanted to be euthanized. On the surface that would appear she enough cognitive ability to realize what that decision involved. On the other hand the family was on board with the decision to euthanize.

 

  The biggest concern I have here is not euthanasia itself (or linking it free health care), it's that you have to be very careful how you look at an advanced directive and what you put in it. Many people are pressured into signing these at stressful times, like right before surgery. It takes a lot more thought to come to some of those decisions than people are able to give at times like that. The other thing I would say is if we ever do have legalized euthanasia, there needs to be multiple levels of safeguards to ensure that it is ultimately the patient who is making that decision at all levels. Not the family, and definitely not the medical personnel.

 

   

Didn't Obama tell someone to give grandma a pill?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Didn't Obama tell someone to give grandma a pill?

 

   Did he say grandma, or Grandma? There's a big difference.

 

   In all seriousness, I believe Obama brought up the hypothetical example of choosing between treatment and a pill. Obama actually ended that example with “I don’t want bureaucracies making those decisions”. There's no need to take every thing out of context to make a legitimate debate more partisan. I'm not going to follow you down that road.

 

[Dashinka 24,747]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Did he say grandma, or Grandma? There's a big difference.

 

   In all seriousness, I believe Obama brought up the hypothetical example of choosing between treatment and a pill. Obama actually ended that example with “I don’t want bureaucracies making those decisions”. There's no need to take every thing out of context to make a legitimate debate more partisan. I'm not going to follow you down that road.

 

Actually, I think it was actually a mother.  As to him saying he did not want bureaucracies to make those decisions, that is good rhetoric, but in the end with universal healthcare, or Medicaid for all or whatever, it will be the bureaucracy that makes the decision.  I think there are other threads deep in here where we discussed the NHS and how that bureaucracy made medical decisions regardless of the family's wishes.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Actually, I think it was actually a mother.  As to him saying he did not want bureaucracies to make those decisions, that is good rhetoric, but in the end with universal healthcare, or Medicaid for all or whatever, it will be the bureaucracy that makes the decision.  I think there are other threads deep in here where we discussed the NHS and how that bureaucracy made medical decisions regardless of the family's wishes.

 

    The bureaucracy makes the decision now. We just call it insurance. Unless we are wealthy enough to pay out of pocket, any one of us can find ourselves at the mercy of a committee that decides our lives are no longer worth the cost of treatment.

[Boiler 45,982]

Seem to have read quite a few cases where the beneficiaries were not keen to spend more money where there was money available. One of those moralistic questions that has no easy answer.

[Dashinka 24,747]

22 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    The bureaucracy makes the decision now. We just call it insurance. Unless we are wealthy enough to pay out of pocket, any one of us can find ourselves at the mercy of a committee that decides our lives are no longer worth the cost of treatment.

In a government run system would you still have the option to do an out-of-pocket procedure?  In the NHS, that does not seem to be the case.