I haven’t written about this before, but I got an email from someone who thinks this child’s days are numbered. The culture of death has been around for a long time in Europe and children with disabilities are the first victims. This is about baby Charlotte, from Britain. Her Mom maintains a blog where she has written about her battles with medical staff to take action, if needed, if Charlotte were to stop breathing. A judge has backed the doctors up with this.
It had been an enormous fight,and she had made such improvements it was hard to see in the happy, responsive baby the same infant the doctors had characterized the year before as deaf, blind, with no hope to ever leave her plastic box or get any better, and in constant pain– the baby they had decided was better off dead.
Better off dead? By whose standards?
She had proven them all wrong, and on Christmas she came home for the first time unattended by any but her parents.
She has a will to live.
But little ones cannot keep off infections forever, especially in a hospital and in wintertime, and she caught a cold which quickly began to hamper her breathing. In a normal case when your baby is ill the hospital will step up efforts to help. But Charlotte is special, and instead doctors submitted an emergency application to the judge to get permission not to treat her. Yesturday Justice Hedley concurred with them, reversing his previous order. Apparently the baby was on a “downward rather than an upward trend” and therefore not worth saving.
Every life is worth saving. But when you have that grimm reaper of EuropeOn death looking over your shoulder, you better watch out. (And don’t think this doesn’t happen here in America, it has and it does.) I cannot imagine what these doctors are thinking. I work with kids and young adults with health issues exactly like Charlotte; she has a good chance at living a happy life; NO, that life will not be like mine. No, she may never walk and talk, but those are not standards that anyone should apply towards “quality life”…she can live her life in relative peace, without pain and with proper medical and nursing care. It’s not an easy life as defined by what WE experience; but it’s no excuse to kill her or “allow” her to die.
After all, she was Charlotte, and Charlotte… Charlotte might always be disabled child. She might never be quite normal, and her joys might never be quite the same as ours. Disabled people aren’t like the rest of us, and when they are sick…they have to be allowed to die.
“Have to be allowed to die”- what a statement. Is this humane? Has this child asked to be “allowed” to die? Disabled children get sick more often than non-disabled, but that is not an excuse for state sanctioned murder. I have to wonder, as I always do, is this more about the costs associated with “maintaining” a life that so many deem not worthy of living.
What has our grand world come to when we can do this, and still walk the streets without shame? How can we pretend we are innocent of a great crime? –for are indeed guilty to if we do not protest. And the measure of a society is in how it treats her most defenseless.
Society should be ashamed. Ashamed that this barbaric policy is considered progressive.
I challenge everyone to go visit a child who has disabilites. Visit for awhile and tell me: Does this human being need to die? Is this human being’s life SO bad, so awful, that we must end this life? Are we so sure we KNOW what a quality life is that we can determine that another human has to die? Or should die? I’ve worked with thousands of these kids and I can say, without any hesitation, that every single child had a life worth living; they laugh, they smile, they cry, they touch, they communicate (not always with a voice, but they communicate). They learn to compensate for their disabilities and it’s amazing to watch how they manage. Often these kids grow up to be so much stronger, emotionally, than any of us could ever hope to be. And they don’t live with horrid pain and discomfort. THAT is such a LIE. And every doctor knows it. Charlotte deserves to live.
Don't Mess With Me.
The funny thing about the pro-euthanasia croud (if there is anything funny) is that they bridle at the suggestion that they are engaged in eugrnics. I am sorry but, “…must be allowed to die” is the statement of a eugenicist. We all know what spectre that raises in Europe (as it should here) but I am tired of people who would have been comfortable with Hitler’s “Final Solution” masquerading as (as well as portrayed as) “angels of mercy”.
[…] […]
The feeling in countries with “free” healthcare is that Charlotte is better off dead because we don’t want to pay for her. The same reason I can’t get an MRI in Toronto, or my uncle can’t get chemo in Montreal, Charlotte isn’t allowed a chance because she is a high-cost, low-yield patient. The doctors aren’t looking at her with doctors’ eyes; they’re looking at her with administrators’ eyes.
RG
Ah, Raven - what kind of monsters are we revealing ourselves to be? How could ANY civilized person dismiss this child’s life so callously?
*sigh*
Keep up the good work, sis… I’ll try to keep checking in while I’m down here in FL.
– R’cat
Raven, thank you so much for what you written. Charlotte is not just Charlotte but she is part of a family. Her life impacts everthing that they do and as she lives and grows so do they and all the wonderous things they learn from her, like unconditional love, patience, peace, joy, challenge facing adversity and the value of not only life itself but each breath we are gifted with. To take Charlotte away before her time is to rob society of the lessons she is sharing with all those who are within her circle and who is to say who those people could pass these lessons on to. I know because I was blessed to raise a disabled child till her death and have a severely disabled grandchild who is still teaching these lessons.
This is the harvest of socialized medicine–euthanasia. The euthanasia of a child.
You’re all right with your assessments of this issue. I keep using the term CULTURE OF DEATH because that is what it is- no use trying to sweetin things up with PC terms.
The medical community has really let me down by not speaking UP about this stuff; the fact that disabled children can lead decent lives with little pain; the fact that patients suffering with terminal illness can have their symptoms placed under control (palliative care works!)…I do wonder about the medical people in Europe- are they behind American medicine? Or are they all on the take?
This issue has nothing to do with cost the decision was made by doctors not accountants who believe they are acting in the best interests of their patient. There is no secret agenda here unlike many of you who blindly object only because of your own political and religious bias.
Charlotte Wyatt
This is the kind of thing that makes my stomach turn.
It had been an enormous fight,and she had made such improvements it was hard to see in the happy, responsive baby the same infant the doctors had characterized the year before as deaf, blind, with …
Awwww, Victor.
What you see as “acting in the best interests of the patient” is OBVIOUSLY an act of bigotry against the disabled. If Miss Charlotte were sick with an infection but not disabled, she’d be treated.
We spoiled able-bodied people are so arrogant to think that life isn’t worth living without our physical perfection. No one DESERVES physical perfection. You didn’t earn your full-term birth. You did work to keep from falling victim to Lou Gehrig’s disease. But you condascend to say that those who have don’t have lives worth living anymore. That’s like a person with a car saying those without a car must be miserable. That’s like the rich saying the poor need to be put down.
Disabled people have just as much the right to live as able-bodied ones. Which is worse: throwing an able-bodied person into a lake or throwing a quadraplegic in the lake? They are both equally murder, but I would venture forth to say that harming a disabled individual, unable to fight back is a far more cowardly and disgusting crime. Disabilities don’t justify murder. If anything, it reveals the murders for the bigoted, arrogant and evil bastards that they truly are.
Have anything else to say, Victor?
[…] NOBODY has the right to say someone is “better off dead.” I am so pissed I can’t even write. Read what Raven says: I’ve worked with thousands of these kids and I can say, without any hesitation, that every single child had a life worth living; they laugh, they smile, they cry, they touch, they communicate (not always with a voice, but they communicate). They learn to compensate for their disabilities and it’s amazing to watch how they manage. Often these kids grow up to be so much stronger, emotionally, than any of us could ever hope to be. And they don’t live with horrid pain and discomfort. THAT is such a LIE. And every doctor knows it. Charlotte deserves to live. […]
Victor you are wrong. I have no concerns with religion and all that. This is medically WRONG. This is state sanctioned murder, plain and simple. The easy way out. The cheapest way out. It does all come down to money, I really think. I cannot imagine any other reason; medically speaking there is no reason to kill the disabled. Pain and suffering are now just a myth when you have proper medical care.
Both of you call it murder which leads me to believe you either don’t know the facts or more likely you are blatantly lying to try to sensationalise your posts. For a start no one has ever suggested that Charlotte be killed off, although to be fair if Charlotte was a dog lying there in constant pain, gasping for every breath we would all consider it a kindness. The doctors have only asked to be able to withold “aggressive resuscitation” in other words they have asked that Charlotte be allowed to slip away peacefully rather than be subjected to any more unnecessary pain when her organs fail again.
Unfortunately Charlotte has severe and permanent organ and brain damage, she has no hope of recovery and is destined to spend the rest of her short life in agony. To “artificially” keep her alive because of ignorant superstitious beliefs is cruel beyond measure.
The parents of Charlotte both devout christians (surprise surprise) have already sold their story to the press and seem to be doing rather well off this little crusade. It has had fairly limited coverage in the UK but it looks as though they have finally found a market in the US for their nonsense.
Ahhh…another of the dog-is-a-horse-is-a-pig-is-a-boy crowd. This nothing more or less than eugenics. Let’s clean out the gene pool and rid ourselves of inconvenient life. Best og luck to ya on that Master Race thing, Vic. Hope it works out for ya….NOT!
No not at all the Master Race thing was a far right wing Christian idea, not much in common with me there, how about you?
VICTOR, this isn’t about taking the life of a child in pain. This little girl has an infection- a cold- that doctors don’t want to treat! She could die as a result and, a judge ruled the docs do not have to do anything if that happens. HER parents want life saving measures taken (CPR & whatnot)
She has a COLD.
Again your post is misleading, Charlotte has extensive brain and heart damage and chronic respiratory disease not just a cold. I would agree with you if Charlotte was simply disabled be it physically, mentally or both. But the truth is she has massive irreparable internal damage and faces a short life of continual pain and discomfort. To read to your post you would assume that when she recovers from her cold or infection she will no longer be sick. Charlotte will always be sick as she is terminally ill and has always been sick. Her parents admit to wanting to preserve her life at any cost because of their faith. The doctors in UK hospitals are responsible for making these desicions based on the best interests of the patient alone. They are not accountable for the expense involved in reviving Charlotte or for providing ongoing care, money has nothing to do with their decision. In fact it probably costs more to take this case through the courts. I suggest people should be wary of this family who seem to be very keen to raise money on this issue even though they currently have no expenses. It might also interest you to know that even Charlotte’s Grandmother supports the doctors decision and recently said the following.
“Myself, I’m trusting the hospital decision at the moment because I’ve seen the care they’ve given her and I know they love her,”
and
“They are not withholding any treatment at all and I do believe that if they don’t resuscitate her, it is for Charlotte’s best interests, to be quite honest.”
Victor,
Obviously pointing out that killing disabled people is morally abhorrant goes beyond your sensibilities, so let me put it this way: You better pray to God (oh, wait…You don’t beleive in that.)…Let me start again: You better hope that you never have an accident or become disabled, because people like you will ensure you are never given a chance to recover.
That would be poetic.
In closing, you are an evil, evil bastard.
Jacque,
You obviously are a moron, do I really need to say it again.
NO ONE IS GOING TO KILL CHARLOTTE WYATT.
NO ONE WANTS TO KILL CHARLOTTE WYATT.
Neither have I either now or in the past advocated killing disabled people. This case is simply about a little girl being allowed to pass away without continually being subjected to futile, aggressive and painful medical proceedures that will only slighty delay her inevitable early death. The Doctors in this case believe that Charlotte is in constant pain and has no hope of recovery. If you disagree with this diagnosis can you please state your reasons for doing so? Do you perhaps have some long range telepathic medical abilities? Or maybe you don’t care if Charlotte artificially survives another 6 months in agony as long as your warped religious moral code is not compromised.
I can see the Christian spirit is stong in you by the way you delight in the thought of me being maimed in an accident. Jesus would be proud I’m sure.
Doctors in this case are wrong. In fact they are using pain and suffering as an excuse- which disgusts me. It’s being used all over the Utopian world of modern Europe. Where the cloud of death is slowly churning up a big storm.
The “Master Race” was NOT a Christian idea given thet Nietzsche and Margaret Sanger (the mother of eugenics) were atheists. She thought cleaning out the gene pool was a good idea, much like you seem to, Vic.
HItler’s religious beliefs resemble nothing close to orthodox Christianity (sorry but Jesus was a Jew and NOT an Aryan). He may have claimed to be a christian, but beyond that claim there is no evidence of it.
And before you protest that you have not advocated taking her life, you have spoken pajoratively and in insulting terms toward those who do not share your view. Sounds like advocacy of epivothanasia to me.
Raven,
You obviously attended the Joseph Goebbels school of journalism. Your post is full of the type of inflamatory sensationalised propaganda that has no credible source or basis in fact. How do you know the doctors are only using the pain and suffering as an excuse? It’s clear that you condemn them based only on your fixed and blinkered view.
JRob,
So by your warped reasoning because I don’t agree with you means that I want to kill all disabled people and create a master race? This explains a lot about the way you view this case. It seems that unlike most normal people you do not require any actual information or facts in order to form an opinion, your opinions seem to come prepackaged straight off the shelf.
Also you are wrong about Hitler. Hitler was baptised and raised a catholic he died a catholic and was never excommunicated. He had a very close relationship with the church and spoke fevently on many occasions about his christian beliefs. There is PLENTY of evidence for it.
Nietzsche and Margaret Sanger may have been atheists but I don’t seem to remember them slaughtering 6 million people. My point is that Hitler obviously did not feel that his devout christian beliefs conflicted with his desire to slaughter jews and disabled people. The catholic church at the time was rabidly anti-semitic and is probably where Hitler got his ideas from in the first place. Jesus may have been a Jew but Hitler thought he was an Aryan Israelite just like your own christian KKK do today. And since Hitler is the foremost master race nut the world has ever produced I would conclude that it is relevant that this monster was nurtured by the catholic church and had christian beliefs much the same as yours.
Victor, you’re wrong again.
You’re saying the Mom here isn’t credible?
Because the doctors say something doesn’t make it honest, right and forthcoming. I work with this stuff, nursing, so don’t tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about.
Hitler was a sick man. Plain and simple.
To equate him with Catholics and the Catholic principles is wrong. And you know it. ANY person who does what Hitler did is not in their right mind; their religion has nothing to do with it.
Raven,
The parents freely admit to basing their stance on this on their religious beliefs this would suggest that the needs of Charlotte are secondary. Of course it is possible that the doctors are homicidal maniacs bent on slaughtering an innocent child as you suggest. But in reallity they are probably just not burdened by the same fixed ideology that would prevent them from
continued..
acting in the best interests of Charlotte. The doctors could still be lying but you still have not put forward a credible reason why they would wish to do so.
I do not believe the majority of Hitler’s veiws are in line with catholic principles at all. JRob accused me of advocating Eugenics and the creation of a master race. I just pointed out that right wing christians have always had plenty of crazies who promote these ideas.
Victor, Victor, Victor-
Your moral code (or lack thereof) doesn’t free you to make life or death decisions for others. Yourself, maybe- but not Charlotte.
So deliberately withholding what Charlotte needs to survive wouldn’t be killing her. There are many child welfare agencies that would take that up with you. The doctors recognize this hence their scramble to get a court order, i.e. “get out of jail free” card.
You are painfully idealistic to think that money and bigotry aren’t a motivating factor in socialized health care. Furthermore, you’re quick to beleive whatever suits your agenda although the facts dispute it. This “terminal” little girl has shown continuous improvement. All prognoses thus far have been wrong, and while you hop to making your own amateur assertions, you can’t back anything up. How do you know she is in constant pain? It’s what the news said, the doctors said, and you accept it blindly. Anything to stick it to Jesus, huh?
She will probably always have disabilities, but she has every right to live as anyone else. You are quite cliche. I bet you’re pro-assisted suicide and abortion, too. Once again, anything to stick it to Jesus.
I don’t delight in the thought of you being in a similar fate to those you condemn, hence me imploring you to hope against it. It would be just, though.
Victor, show me…documented, where any known Christian body has ever put forth the noption that a race must be purified. I don’t mean some obscure sect either. I do not mean some small organization (officially recognized or not by the main body) within an orhtodox sect. You cannot because they do not exist. The KKK is a bad example because I do not know of a single orthodox Christian body that recognizes them as such.
The reason I cited Maggie Sanger was because she was of the same mindset, if it can’t exist without help then kill it. I also cited her because the original name of the organization was almost identical to the name of the office in Hitler’s government charged with carrying out the racial purification. She chaged it to “Planned Parenthood” for PR reasons. BTW…she considered the KKK brothers in arms.
As far as your desire to kill disabled people, you are the one who came here disparaging the parents for wanting to do what was needed to keep their daughter alive. Referring to it as “nonsense” and tarring them as some backward-thinking baboons because their religious beliefs move them to fight for their daughter’s life. res ipso loquitur”.
Jaque
The doctors only went to court because the parents demanded that Charlotte always be rescucitated. In most cases with the parents consent they would not need to go to court.
I would be interested to know what makes you such an expert on the NHS, I don’t think you understand how it works over here. You seem to be caught up in this “socialized health care” idea where the doctors are all heartless communist drones working in some sort of uncaring mechanised soviet style state collective. I can assure you the doctors here have no regard for the cost of treatment and are happy to spend funds in ways that would have made Nero blush. I see no reason to dispute their diagnosis that Charlotte is in considerable discomfort and has no chance of long term survival. What makes you so sure they are lying? After all their reputations are on the line and unlike the parents they have spent years in training. In any case the parents admit that their faith forbids them from allowing Charlotte to die in this way. Apparently according to them God has to decide when we die, we are not allowed to make these decisions in any circumstances.
I also think you lot are way too consumed with Charlottes outward physical and mental disabilities. You still seem to fail to recognise her internal injuries, her heart, kidneys, lungs and brain all have massive permanent damage. I personally don’t know for sure if she is in constant pain but these injuries certainly sound painful to me. But just supposing for a moment that the doctors are right and Charlotte is in a great deal of constant pain, would you allow her to die in peace? Or would you keep her alive and suffering whatever the circumstances?
PS. I don’t believe that Jesus was the son of God. Why on earth would I want to stick it to someone who was probably just a insurgent Rabbi.
JRob,
The Christian Church doesn’t seem to go in for racial purity so much but it doesn’t exactly object to it either as was seen by their collaboration with Hitler and Mussolini. Now spiritual purity that’s a different kettle of fish altogether the Church has always be happy to get stuck in maiming and torturing heretics.
I may call the parents backwards but I explained my reasons for doing so. You accused the doctors of being murderers how about giving an explanation for this assumption?
“Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo”
Victor - I’m going to try to address what you’re actually saying rather than blasting you with prolife rhetoric - bear with me.
Brain damage is not inherently painful - there are no nerve endings in the brain and when the medics talk about Charlotte’s brain damage they are illustrating how disabled she is rather than any direct source of pain.
I’m not aware of where they had said that Charlotte has damage to her heart, but again - experiencing the damage to heart or lungs in the first instant would be painful, and having a low oxygen saturation undoubtably is (that’s suffocation, essentially) but with appropriate supplemental oxygen, it sounds like Charlotte is saturating well - eg, all of her body is getting enough oxygen. Ironically, it would only become painful if she was struggling to take deep enough breaths, which would be the point at which she needed the help of a ventilator to remain comfortable - that, or enough morphine to render her unconsicous and supply a gentle transition to death.
Kidney damage I’m afraid I’m not too sure on but I have a general impression from a young friend - who, like Charlotte, was a very premature baby and has badly damaged kidneys as a result of that prematurity - that although meds and needle sticks aren’t exactly fun, it’s not inherently painful having dicky kidneys.
Charlotte’s doctors in the most-recent-but-one court case (the one in which it was decided that she may recieve ventilator support if needed) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/4361414.stm this one, in fact, said that they did not feel that she was suffering in any way. It doesn’t look, from her again-decreasing oxygen needs, like this recent viral infection has caused any more damage, and while we all feel pretty crappy when we’ve got a bad virus and people with dodgy lungs more so, it appears eminently recoverable-from and indeed Charlotte is doing just that even as I type.
I hope that has clarified why, at least in part, many of us feel that Charlotte is quite capable of living a happy and comfortable life and want her to be given every reasonable chance to do so.
The doctors are taking a life the protests of the parents not withstanding. They are not assisting suicide. Now I never used the word “murder” I did, however, use “epivothanasia”. The Doctors are, in my opinion, doing this in persuit of a socio-political agenda.
Now, as to Christians engaging in torture, last time I looked the Spanish Inquisition ended in the mid 1800’s. Some of the loudest voices condemning torture are Christian. We aren’t the ones sawing people’s heads off and advocating killing the disabled.
Rebecca,
I appreciate a response that is rereshingly honest and without all the sensationalised nonsense. Of course I would have to disagree with you regarding the level of discomfort Charlotte is in right at the moment but to be fair there is no real way we can know for sure. However I recently read the court transcripts of the case and no one can dispute that Charlotte has suffered a great deal during her short life. The doctors position seems to be that they think it would be cruel suject Charlotte to that degree of discomfort again since there is no hope for her long term survival.
Looking at her life over all and taking into account what has gone before and what is expected in the future it is fair to ask if Charlotte is having a tolerable standard of life? The doctors who are treating her injuries think overall that she is not and I feel that they are best placed to know.
It is quite an extrordinary step to take this to court and feelings must be strong on both sides. I just think that since the doctors have nothing to gain their diagnosis must at least be honest even if there is no way we can know for sure if it is correct. Whereas the parents are admittedly restricted by a fixed ideology.
I would encourage anyone to read the court transcripts I think they show what this little girl has been through what she can expect in the future. They also shed a little light on the personalities involved.
JRob,
You may well have used the word “epivothanasia” instead of murder but you seem to be the only person in the entire English speaking world that has ever used it at all. Is this your own personal word? Could you please tell us what on earth it means?
PS. I’m glad you don’t saw peoples heads off, well done.
Thank you Raven, for picking up Charlotte’s story at your site! When I first heard about her back several months, I hoped more would know about her. I appreciate your writing about her story.
Victor?
Several things you have written here have touched a raw nerve with me, and I wish to discuss them with you, civilly.
First off, I too wish to know what “epivothanasia” means. jrob has used that word before, (the only other time it comes up in a google search BTW) on a thread about terri schiavo.
Perhaps he meant “apothanasia”.
Now, you said “no one can dispute that Charlotte has suffered a great deal during her short life”. Who are you to make that call? Who are you to decide what a “great deal of suffering is”?
“The doctors position seems to be that they think it would be cruel suject Charlotte to that degree of discomfort again since there is no hope for her long term survival.”
Again, what is “cruel”? Define, please, “long term survival.”
“Whereas the parents are admittedly restricted by a fixed ideology.”
Do you have children?
If you do not have a child you cannot possibly know the anguish that these parents are going through.
If you do not have a child you cannot possibly know the depth of love that is possible for one human to have for another.
If you do not have a child you can never understand the pathological drive a parent possesses that necessitates saving that child, protecting that child and willingly fighting satan himself with nothing more than a broken toothpick in defense of that child.
If you do not have a child you can not possibly ever understand what those parents are going through.
If you do have a child, and show a willingness to let a child die simply because she doesn’t possess a “tolerable standard of life please, please adopt your child out.
You are not a fit parent.
Kender,
Apothanasia seems to mean postponement of death so I very much doubt it is what J Rob meant especially in the context he used it.
You wrote,
Now, you said “no one can dispute that Charlotte has suffered a great deal during her short life”. Who are you to make that call? Who are you to decide what a “great deal of suffering is”?
The fact that Charlotte has suffered a great deal is a matter of documented fact it has nothing to do with my opinion. Just look at her case history you will see for yourself what she has been through.
You also wrote,
“The doctors position seems to be that they think it would be cruel suject Charlotte to that degree of discomfort again since there is no hope for her long term survival.”
Again, what is “cruel”? Define, please, “long term survival.”
Cruel is inflicting pain for no purpose.
Regards long term survival, I don’t know how long Charlotte will live but it’s extremely unlikely that she will survive more than a year or two. Her head and brain has stopped growing and she is malnourished and cannot hold down food very well. Add this to the the fact that her kidneys, heart and lungs are all severely damaged and it’s plain to see that she has no prospect of a recovery.
In answer to your last question, I do have children and understand the deep feeling the parents have for Charlotte.
You wrote,
If you do have a child, and show a willingness to let a child die simply because she doesn’t possess a “tolerable standard of life please, please adopt your child out.
No I would not put my kids through that sort of suffering if there was no hope for any sort of prolonged life that is at the very least free of pain.
Tolerable is by definition something we can put up with intolerable is just the opposite.
An Intolerable standard of life is a life of constant pain and discomfort, so no I would not subject my kids to such a life.
If you are prepared to keep a child alive with an intolerable standard of life I see no point in debating with you the health of Charlotte. Your position makes it clear that whether Charlotte is suffering or not is irrelevant to you as you would keep her alive under any circumstances.
I cannot even comprehend how someone could see a child suffer so much just because of their own selfishness. I would say it is your children who are at risk not mine.
Victor, you have no standingt to determine what is or is not tolerable for somebody else.
The fact of the matter is that I have been termed “severly disabled” and many people say “Wow, Kender, you have been through so much, I don’t think I could’ve done that” but the truth is they probably could have lived through the experiences I have lived through, as nobody realizes how much they can take.
I am this very moment profoundly ill, and am awake at 4:30 A.M. wondering if this sudden turn for the worse my day just took is going to continue, or if this is a passing feeling of nausea, and knowing that either way I have a full day and must be out on a few hours doing what I said I would do today.
So please don’t try to assign such things as cruel level of discomfort on someone else……it is not our call to make.
Actually the word I meant was “epivalothanasia” (I left out a syllable) which means “imposed death”. Its advocated like to substitute “euthanasia” in its place because they don’t want to be honest about what they are doing.Seeing this is under a judge’s order I would say it is in fact imposed death. I don’t care how rosey you try to paint it.
You applaud the judge for showing those religious morons who is in charge. Well, you can have your little thanatocracy. Acroding to you I should just shoot myself because I am in constant pain. Well, great god Victor, I do not see the pain as a reason to kill myself, but since you think I should die because I am too stupid to know that pain is bad and makes YOU uncomfortable.
Thank you jrob. I have been wondering about that word.
Kender,
I am not making the decision here so I am not determining what is cruel or intolerable for Charlotte. I am not a doctor, judge or healthcare professional. The only reason someone has to make a call is because there is no way we can ever know Charlotte’s feeling on the matter as she has very little brain function left to her. I just happen to agree with the conclusion drawn by the professionals involved in the case.
Don’t try to draw a parallel between your condition and Charlotte’s your situation is completely different. It also appears that your brain function and decision making capabilities are reasonably intact.
In Charlotte’s circumstances it is reasonable that someone should make a decision on her behalf as long as it is made in her best interests. Charlotte will die soon there is nothing we can do about it but we can avoid unnecessarily prolonging her suffering when her condition deteriorates again as it surely will.
“…as she has very little brain function left to her.”
Wasn’t this roughly what the doctors said of Haleigh Poutre when they diagnosed her as being in a PVS? And everybody just knows that when a doctor says that then “God hath spoken”.
Apparently while judges with their drunkeness on the wine of death-by-judicial-fiat forgot what the word “permanent” means. The good part of that horror story is that Haleigh recovered to make fools of them.
JRob
I did not suggest that you shoot yourself nor do I think you should die as you well know. You seem to be quite capable of deciding that for yourself. Although if that is what you want I’d recommend that you go for it. You see you and I are quite capable of making decisions for ourselves even if they are bad ones, Charlotte unfortunately does not have that luxury.
Charlotte’s pain does not make me uncomfortable either as I am not experiencing it. But I’m sure it makes her uncomfortable and that what this is about Charlotte’s feelings not our own. You are typical of the pious prigs who sit back and do nothing because the suffering is all part of Gods greater plan.
On a separate note could you please stop showing off by using all these long words as it’s all becoming rather sesquipedalian.
Do not presume to tell me what I do or do not do to alleviate suffering. I just refuse to accept death imposed by judicial fiat as an answer. No matter what pretty trappings you wrap it in that is what this is.
Nobody is ever promised a life without suffering in any degree. As much as I wish it were so. All through the Teri Schiavo mess we were lectured that this is a family matter, don’t involve judges (the people saying that were conveniently ignoring the fact it was judicial fiat that created that situation). Now those same people are saying the opposite, screw the family let the judge decide. I don’t doubt that you truly believe that this is what is beat for Charlotte, that does not make it right. My reaction is to the use of just about every eugenicist’s euphemistic cliche to justify this. This is nothing but part of a weeding out of the weak. Until people realize that this it is going to become a nightmare that will make us long for the days where we thought listening to phone calls was what defined a “nazi”
JRob,
You obviously refuse to believe that letting people die to relieve their suffering is not an option in any circumstances. Its clear you don’t care if it is the family’s decision or a judges as you oppose it anyway. Such a view is far more oppressive than mine,
you want to impose your morality on other peoples lives without a thought of the individual circumstances.
Do not lecture me on “imposing your morality” while you applaude the imposition of death on somebody who cannot speak for herself. I’m sorry (sctually, no I’m not) but death is a pretty big imposition.
You advocate death for inconvenient life and I’m “opressive” I’m sorry (again, not really, just a rhetorical device) but once the person you have imposed your solution on is dead it is a bit late to say, “oops, sorry”
He’s got a point victor. Death is permanent, and “imposing” death on people that haven’t chosen it, especially disabled children, is wrong, period, end of argument.
If you think otherwise you are a murderous cretin.
JRob
You do not wish to keep this girl alive based on her medical condition and prospects for a recovery. To you this is irrelevant, if she was permanently screaming in agony you would still resuscitate her and put her through it all again. I support a decision based on the circumstances not because of a fixed ideology. Charlotte’s injuries are such that it is clear to all reasonable people that she is terminally ill. The people who are making these decisions do not want to kill her but have actually seen her distress and suffering, you have not. They simply do not want to cause more pain. If you are happy to inflict pain on someone who is already suffering and is terminally ill then you are being cruel by causing suffering for no reason.
It is a fact of life that we are sometimes forced to make decisions for those who cannot. Most sane people would prefer to be allowed to die naturally if they were in Charlotte’s situation.
Of those who would like to live most would have based their choice on religious ideology.
You automatically assume you are the ones fighting for Charlotte but in reality you are only selfishly imposing your superstitions upon her.
Could you posiblly be a little more cliche, Victor. So far you have done little more than spout the usual atheist responses to things you disagree with and offered no substantive argument. You hypocriticly decry the imposition of morality while you applaud the imposition of your own. The decision is being made idealogicly one way or another. On one side is one that wants her to live and the other side’s first reponse is to “pull the plug”.
Haleigh Poutre was supposed to die almost immediately, remember? She had no prospect for recovery because the ones who think “euthanasia” is a marvelous thing had used their standard CYA diagnosis (PVS). They were wrong in that case, and given the way that certain doctors don’t want to have their opinion questioned, I would not be surprised if they are wrong here. BUt you can rest easy, Vic. Your morality has been imposed. Score one for your side.
Actually, Vic, I don’t know why you are so upset, your side won. Can’t let a chance to gloat pass by?
JRob
My argument is clear, it has been demonstrated that Charlotte has suffered a great deal and will suffer much more in the future. It is also clear that she is terminally ill. My argument is backed up by the facts and trained physicians. I have no hidden agenda, I have no desire that people should be allowed to die as a matter of course. But I do have the freedom to decide on a case by case basis.
Remind me, what exactly is your argument based on? I don’t seem to remember you actually having one. Apart from of course the notion that all doctors and judges are part of a Nazi conspiracy to cleanse the world of the disabled and create a master race.
victor,
“if she was permanently screaming in agony you would still resuscitate her and put her through it all again”
This is bunk. First off it is irrelevant as she isn’t screaming in agony, and secondly, pain management would take care of that if she were.
“Charlotte’s injuries are such that it is clear to all reasonable people that she is terminally ill.”
You, victor, are terminally ill. You are. You are going to die. YOu are going to die and there is nothing you can do about it. Shall we let you die? Did you know that nutrition is a heroic life saving measure? Should we let you eat?
Mayhaps, to save you from the anguish that living a life that you now realize will only end in your death, we should let you peacefully, calmly starve to death.
Or perhaps we can give you pnuemonia (sp?) and deny you lifesaving drugs, for you, victor, are terminally ill, and there is no hope, you WILL die someday, and alas, we cannot save you.
I am sorry to have to tell you this way, but perhaps it is better to let go now rather than to endure all of the suffering you are certain to go through as you continue to breath and live, knowing it is all for naught, and that no matter what anybody does, you are going to die.
How can you live with that knowledge? Surely that causes you no end of grief.
End that grief now, victor.
Starve yourself.
It is painless.
You are going to die anyway.
You may as well get it out of the way.
Not all doctors and judges, just the ones you are falling at share your view that the disabled should be put out of our misery.
My position is essentialy the same as that of Not Dead Yet. Quoting from their site:
“Legalized medical killing is not a new human right, it’s a new professional immunity. It would allow health professionals to decide which of us are “eligible” for this service, and exempt them from accountability for their decisions. Killing is not just another medical treatment option, and it must not be made any part of routine health care. In these days of cost cutting and managed care, we don’t trust the health care system, and neither should you.”
Further:
” What we oppose is a public policy that singles out individuals for legalized killing based on their health status. This violates the Americans With Disabilities Act, and denies us the equal protection of the law.”
By the way, the organization was founded by an atheist.
Kender,
My point is valid if you are prepared to keep someone alive whether they are in agony or not it becomes pointless to debate Charlotte’s level of discomfort as is not a factor in your objection.
Pain management can only go so far especially when dealing with someone who cannot communicate what they are feeling. And yes you are right I am going to die and I can only hope that I don’t end up in a position of having my fate decided by someone whose only consideration is what their imaginary god would approve of.
Theists are not the only ones holding that position. Obviously you have never heard of Not Dead Yet who which was founded by an atheist. For you that seems to be your excuse for being insulting, so have at it.
As far as I am concerned this conversation is ended. You hollar about one group wanting to impose a certain morality while you happily do exactly what you are complaining about. Your hypocricy makes any further discussion a waste of time. Good day, sir.
JRob,
It would indeed be strange if no athiests or agnostics agreed with you and I have never suggested this was the case. However to ignore the influence of the Church in this issue is dishonest. But then again you have fabricated and exaggerated all the way through this discussion and I have learnt to expect no less from you. So whether it’s faith or paranoia that created your position I really couldn’t care less. I have only ever argued for the freedom to be able to act in the best interests of the patient.
Which is something you lost sight of long ago.
And it is in the best interest to let disabled people die?
What about that fact that you are dying, victor? If I shoot you in the head it is a more an act of mercy than murder since you are going to die anyway, right?
Kender,
“And it is in the best interest to let disabled people die?”
No not die no we should conduct experiments on them first.(Is this the sort of thing you are after?)
Your constant over dramatisation is really rather childish. You have consistently twisted and misrepresented everything I have said which only demonstrates the weakness of your argument.
Your other point is simply a repeat of a rather poor joke again based on a deliberate misrepresentation and equally pathetic.
I can assure you, as a “disabled” person, that this entire subject is NOT a joke to me.
The moment that we begin to allow, indeed encourage, people to die from a lack of care simply becuase we “feel they don’t have a “tolerable standard of life” is the day that we are no better than the nazi regime.
The first thing to say is that clearly nobody gains by Charlotte continuing to live: not the parents who have to go through this, not the doctors or the society that has to pay them, and certainly not Charlotte. I think they should simply give her an overdose of morphine and be done with it.
I believe that anyone who is severely disabled enough that they will never be able to support themselves or take a meaningful part in society has no business going on living. I believe that adults with dsabling conditions have a moral obligation to commit suicide, and that anyone who WISHES to commit suicide for whatever reason should be able to get asistance in doing so.
Interesting argument you guys are having.
Not an easy subject to take sides on. Having just become a father I am sure I would have trouble if it were my child. But we can all have a personal opinion based upon the facts presented to us.
My understanding is that the doctors want the right to withold resuscitation if they consider that it is not in HER best interests.
On the other hand, the parents have been fighting to ensure that the doctors MUST resuscitate her every time, no matter what the doctors opinion might be.
Unlike what we see on the TV sitcoms, resuscitation is a brutal affair ( I have recently done training courses in first aid and baby rescuss, just in case we need it ourselves). At some point, the process itself changes from life saving to physical abuse. Someone, at some point has to make a decision when to stop.
Only modern medical methods allowed Charlotte to survive birth and live to this day. Even 5 years ago she would have probably died at birth.
There is probably zero chance of recovery. Charlotte suffered significant brain and organ damage. Her oxygen requirement has reduced (now to 30%) but she still requires almost constant care and supervision.
The cost aspect has to be considered, both in monetary and resourse terms. Her care is estimated at over £300 a day (about $550) and totals over £1million. She has also been a consumer of the limited resourses in hospital which therefore have not been available to other children who need is as much as she does.
But, we live in a society here where for the most part, healthcare is free for those who need it.(we each pay about 8% of our salaries to pay for it). It is reassuring that the care and knowhow is available if we need it. It is not restricted to those who can afford it more. But our hospital budgets are stretched beyond limits and the only way to cut costs is the reduce the number of hospital beds and medical staff.
The latest news is that Charlotte is likely to be taken into foster care since her parents have split up.
Personally, I beleive the doctors are right. They are viewing the situaion objectively, without letting emotions get in the way.
And I agree with an earlier post. Had Charlotte been a pet dog or cat, we would have never have let her suffer this long. Of course, we each have an opinion on what suffering is. Charlotte cannot communicate her opinion to anyone.
Decisions are made on behalf of Charlotte every day. Her death is another decision that she will not be allowed to decide upon herself.
Now that her parents have split up, perhaps one of you would like to foster her…?
Talk is cheap.
Roger, I would take Charlotte into my home in a heartbeat. I have worked with kids just like her and have watched them GROW UP and live relatively pain free lives. These children are beautiful human beings who deserve to have a life as full of love and compassion as possible. Just because she has a disabilty does not mean ANYONE has a right to take her life away. That’s not our choice to make.
I would take her in without a second thought.
WHY does she have to go to a foster home just because her parents split up? I don’t get it.
Raven,
Charlotte does not have a “life”, just a pitiful existence.
It appears that Charlotte was considered well enough to go home in February of this year (2006) although she still requires 24 hour a day care..
Her parents split up in January and are now very rare visitors to the hospital where Charlotte has lived all her life (The mother has visited 3 times in the last 8 months).
Charlottes 3rd birthday was this Saturday. not sure if the parents turned up for the party.
And though the parents don’t want her to go to foster parents, Charlottes younger sister is in foster care for much of the week.
So, have her parents now given up on her? They are leaving the care of the child to the hospital (who obviously want her moved from the hospital so that they can care for other children who need a bed).
Unless suitable foster parents turn up, I guess that she will eventually die in hospital…one day…
sad.very sad.