Translate

Showing posts with label death pathway. Show all posts
Showing posts with label death pathway. Show all posts

Sunday, 5 February 2017

What I propose is already being done

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics launched an enquiry in 2006 into critical care in fetal and neonatal medicine, looking at the ethical, social and legal issues which may arise when making decisions surrounding treating extremely premature babies.

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, in its submission, recommended that a public debate be started around the options of "non-resuscitation, withdrawal of treatment decisions, the best interests test and active euthanasia" for "the sickest of newborns". The College stated that there should be discussion over whether "deliberate intervention" to cause death in severely disabled newborn babies should be legalised; it stated that while it was not necessarily in favour of the move, it felt the issues should be debated. The College stated in this submission that having these options would save some families from years of emotional and financial suffering; it might also reduce the number of late abortions, "as some parents would be more confident about continuing a pregnancy and taking a risk on outcome". In response to this proposal, Pieter Sauer, a senior paediatrician in the Netherlands, argued that British neonatologists already perform "mercy killings" and should be allowed to do so openly.

The Church of England submission to the enquiry supported the view that doctors should be given the right to withhold treatment from seriously disabled newborn babies in exceptional circumstances, and the Christian Medical Fellowship stated that when treatment would be "a burden" this was not euthanasia.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability_in_ancient_Rome#Roman_laws_on_disability

The Twelve Tables included a law that said disabled or deformed children should be put to death, usually by stoning.

In addition, Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that the city's founder Romulus required children who were born disabled to be exposed on a hillside. Historians think that this was a fairly common practice due to a believed high number of congenital defects, which are sourced due to poor nutrition, incest, and disease.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias#Children

The laws of the Twelve Tables required the pater familias to ensure that "obviously deformed" infants were put to death. The survival of congenitally disabled adults, conspicuously evidenced among the elite by the partially-lame Emperor Claudius, demonstrates that personal choice was exercised in the matter. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Ironside

Ironside received attention after her appearance on BBC One's religious discussion programme, Sunday Morning Live, in 2010. She stated "If a baby's going to be born severely disabled or totally unwanted, surely an abortion is the act of a loving mother." and added "If I were the mother of a suffering child - I mean a deeply suffering child - I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face... If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would."

http://www.freethesaurus.com/terefah


The questionable viability of newly born infants, due, at least in part, to doubts as to whether they were premature or full-term, led Jewish law to exempt one who kills a child less than thirty days old from human prosecution, just as it treats the person who kills the terefah.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9710426/Children-placed-on-controversial-death-pathway.html

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, 13 September 2015

Next generation of the elderly will be skint/childless/abandoned by their children/family

If suicide is forbidden then it would be wrong to expect doctors to assist and abet suicide. The Koran explicitly forbids suicide, as you can see at http://quran.com/4/29.

If we want to do something we are not supposed to do, then we should not really involve other people, especially senior professionals.

You already know that such a rule would be ripe for exploitation from greedy relatives and wives too lazy to nurse.

Since I think the NHS should be abolished the best way of dealing with the problem is to withdraw healthcare from the retired and the unemployable.

Those who want to check out at a time appointed by themselves will have a government check-out service, so to speak.

You get to stay in a waiting room type of hospice where you will be treated well while any loved ones you may have (or mention in your will) can get in touch to visit you to pay you their last respects before you check out. The date will be announced in a publication called the Death Gazette.

If you have no one at all, you will still be treated kindly for about one week and encouraged to tell stories about your life which will be recorded in a book and archived for the benefit of social historians.

Then, the Soylent Green death bed scene.



Alternatively, a pack of pills with a poison pill in it could be just the trick. You can have a week of them or even a month's supply.

You could have a week of pills with a poison pill at the end of the week/month, OR, randomly inserted like Russian Roulette to make things more unpredictable and dramatic.

You just have get two doctors to say you are in your right mind when you declare your wish to go on this course of poison pills.

The person who administers this pill must be someone who has nothing to gain from the death of the patient ie not a beneficiary of the patient's will. A Grim Reaper Agency could undertake the task of administering this course of pills to the patient if  he or she is unable to take the pill himself or herself. All that is required is a for the agent of the Grim Reaper to visit the patient every day to administer the pill, and this service will have been paid for in advance by the patient.





A male MP asked "Who does it benefit?"

Assisted Dying benefits wives more than husbands, women more than men, since nursing is women's work and allowing assisted dying would save more wives the trouble of nursing their husbands than vice versa. It also benefits the welfare state by expanding its scope over the lives of citizens.

The Koran proves its wisdom by forbidding suicide. If it is performed discreetly by a sympathetic family doctor, then no one would know or mind, would they?

Caroline Spelman:

"Even if we consider assisted dying to be acceptable in some circumstances, the law should not be changed. Assisted dying should be the absolute exception not the rule and, in practice, the law as it stands has seldom been used to convict anyone for assisting someone else to die."

NHS still using Death Pathway despite 'ban' with charity warning that controversial end-of-life programme is merely operating under 'a different name' A cancer charity claims the NHS is using a controversial 'Death Pathway' Patients are being sedated and then refused food and water until death Studies show that patients on the death pathway last on average 29 hours

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_Care_Pathway_for_the_Dying_Patient

Financial inducements to NHS trusts
In October 2012 figures released under the Freedom of Information Act showed that some two thirds of NHS trusts had received incentive payments for meeting "targets" for using the LCP, and that such payments totalled £12 million or more.
End of life care for adults

It seems we already have euthanasia so what is the big fat fuss about? The ones who clamour for it are attention-seeking whingers who think they do not fit into this category and want something special just for themselves so they can feel special, methinks. Pandering to the egotism of these people surely cannot be the role of the legislature, who should be discussing more urgent matters such as the abolition of the welfare state, leaving NATO, repealing the Equality and Equal Pay Acts, discussing what constitutes the long term national interest and whether the operation of representative democracy prevents our politicians from formulating and implementing policies that actually serve it.  
at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, 3 December 2012

What my detractors so hysterically condemn me for proposing is already happening in UK hospitals

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/httpwww.html has a certain gun and flag photogrpah of me being circulated by people who want me expelled from the Conservative Party, which I have recently joined.

I feel bound to point out that this photograph was taken in April this year before I was a member of the Conservative Party.

The reason why I had it taken was simply to challenge anyone predictably claiming that I am a Nazi to state which Nazi policy they think I support.

It is of course impossible for me to be a Nazi.  For me to be a Nazi, four conditions would have to be satisfied:

1.  I would have to be German-speaking.
2.  I would have to be Aryan.
3.  The Nazi Party would have to be in existence.
4.  I would have to be admitted to the Nazi Party and I really cannot see that happening under Hitler.

I am no more a Nazi than anyone photographed standing outside a police station is a policeman.

Of course, it is the wish of my detractors that I be condemned to obscurity and forced to retire from politics after being expelled from the BNP for saying what I said at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html

When you have read that link, you will realise that I have at no time proposed the systematic extermination of the disabled, though this is what my more virulent detractors are now hysterically and libellously proclaiming.

The most I have said was that unviable disabled unwanted infants could be "let go" by their parents if that is what their parents wish and what their doctors advise, without getting into trouble with the law and being charged with infanticide.

This is in any case already happening, as you will have to acknowledge once you have read http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240075/Now-sick-babies-death-pathway-Doctors-haunting-testimony-reveals-children-end-life-plan.html#ixzz2DcUKj73D

So I am not as revolutionary as my detractors have made me out to be, after all!

As I understand it, the Conservative Party is a broad church and its constitution so undemocratic that it can contain most trouble-makers.

[I have had my membership cancelled on 20 December 2012.  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/claire-khaws-membership-of-conservative.html ]

My intention is certainly not to cause trouble for those who are social conservatives in the Conservative Party and therefore genuine conservatives as far as I am concerned, but to help Tories articulate and define what is meant by Conservatism so that its policies and principles become less what the leader says they are, but what they are really meant to be.

While I have said things critical of Cameron in the past, this by no means suggests that my presence in the Conservative Party would necessarily be bad for him politically.

I would venture to say that my presence would add interest to the party and assist in the generation interest in what Conservatism is or ought to be.  Even a Whateverist like Cameron would find my presence helpful as regards attracting favourable attention to the Conservative Party when it finally begins a serious ideological examination of its principles and policies.

Conservatism ought not to be an unquestioning defence of the status quo, whatever that status quo is.   Otherwise, we would find ourselves defending human sacrifice just because our ancestors have been practising it for generations, would we not?

Reform to survive, as articulated in Robert Peel's Tamworth Manifesto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamworth_Manifesto still continues to make sense in the 21st century, and this is what I propose is considered by all right-thinking honourable members of the Conservative Party who are not mere party hacks and lobby fodder toeing whatever line they are told to toe.








HELP ME ANNOY THE FEMALE-DOMINATED PC BBC

Would you like to nominate Claire Khaw for the iPM New Year Honour for being the most entertainingly philosophical, political and theological Woman of the Year?  Go on, go on, go on!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0089nbb/features/new-year-honour

Would you like me to the be the Most Powerful Woman in Britain?
Do you want to annoy the feminazis at Woman's Hour?  Then you know what to do: nominate me!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/features/womans-hour/power-list/
(They won't let me win, but they will definitely get annoyed if the nominations keep coming in!)
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Mark Parker entertains doubts

26:00  Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis ​​I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...