Two-year-old euthanised in Netherlands in first assisted dying case of its kind

[IwantToRetire]

I'm not going to select any part of the article but just post the link for those who want to read
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/netherlands-infant-2-euthanised-assisted-37709218

@PencilsInSpace I’m arguing for assisted dying and euthanasia for any option. If someone is competent, but are physically or mentally suffering, and no longer want to live it would be good to have it as a CHOICE.

Just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t mean there isn’t a need for it.

Care homes are full of old women with dementia, with only a smattering of men. This is a heart rending case which could be used to justify a slippery slope I do not want the UK to go down.

I want to be euthanized when/if I have severe dementia. I'm amazed there are people who would wish to be kept going.

@PencilsInSpace

There is no universal moral rule stating that a person has an obligation to stay alive regardless of their level of distress. This is why people want assisted dying and euthanasia. It would give people bodily autonomy. It lets them decide when they want to die.

@ReleaseTheDucksOfWar “The problem is that while services ought to be well funded and good levels of care ought to be available for everyone, they aren't. And they aren't, realistically, going to be”

Thank you! People don’t want to face reality. It’s all well and good saying we need to tax people more to pay for adult social care, but this isn’t happening, it would take years to improve and there are no guarantees it will get better in our lifetime.

“I think it is a valid pov to say that we are arrogantly refusing people in that situation the way to die when they don't want to go on, while we are content enough with our own lives to want to live. We are taking a great deal on ourselves to remove that possibility from others, when it exists.”

I agree. Just because some people want to
live other people don’t. Our endurance for life differs.

Ok, I acknowledge them. That help?

I was answering Scrolling Leaves question regarding the drugs used for lethal injection executions versus assisted dying drugs quoting a paper that had two illustrative examples to demonstrate a larger issue with the drugs available for both that is more common than most people think.

I didn’t think I needed to make a series of long posts even longer by pulling in all forms of death, dying, and suffering without assisted dying as well when the question was about whether or not convicts being executed would have a more humane death if assisted dying drugs were used.

The answer is no, because they already use the same drug families on both, sometimes the exact same drugs and the problems of them failing or causing a death with suffering and pain still exist at fairly high rates for both executions and assisted suicides or euthanasias.

The most important thing to realise is that the Hollywood death marketed by assisted dying proponents is not even not guaranteed, but many clinicians are in doubt that even a majority are dying with no pain or suffering.

Actually yes it does help that you acknowledge them because many, many people don't. If someone knows the absolute reality of forcing someone else to continuing living against their deepest will, and still holds to that, it at least has some integrity. I think there are other words than can be used to describe it as well, but there -is- some integrity there.

The drugs used for executions are not, on the ground and in the syringe, the same ones used in assisted dying. The name is the same but ... well, here goes

The pharma companies will not allow their products to be used to kill unwilling people, so they refuse to supply the States. The states that have execution by lethal injection therefore get the pentobarbitol from underground sources or from specialist pharmacies that will mix drugs to order, but have no quality control. Therefore the drugs are very often not what they claim to be or old, and the potency is poor (would you want your medications from these companies?)

The execution drugs are also not administered by trained medical staff who know what they are doing, they are administered by untrained prison staff on the whole. Nor are known individual illnesses taken into account (as in the recent appalling case).

So as so often, while anti-euthansia campaigners will say it's the same drugs and procedures - it's not.

The issue of good drug quality is one that goes much beyond this particular topic actually. Aurobindo is one major drug manufacturer that has huge problems in this area, and it's actually regulated. The independent pharmacies that produce the execution drugs aren't.

The scientific paper says differently, may be have a read of it?

Yes while EU and UK pharmaceutical companies are banned from selling these drugs to the US, you are incorrect to claim US pharmaceutical companies that produce and sell the same drugs in the US are somehow doing it underground with no quality control.

EU and UK law doesn’t apply to the US. The US pharmaceutical industry is just as good as the EU and UK’s. So is the Chinese pharmaceutical industry dare I say.

The execution drugs are also not administered by trained medical staff who know what they are doing, they are administered by untrained prison staff on the whole.

In the US, execution by lethal injection are administered by nurses under the supervision of a doctor, not by prison staff. The catheter is placed by a phlebotomist nurse. The issues they have had is in finding suitable veins.

As for pre-existing conditions, you’re right, but the protocol for assisted dying also doesn’t take that into account. For one prisoner, the lethal injection failed because of his advanced cancer and he underwent immense physical pain abs psychological torture before they called off the execution and a few years later, he died of the cancer. That is relevant to assisted dying is it not?

Do you know that the UK assisted dying bill doesn’t require any health care qualification at all administer the drugs?

The EU companies do not want to supply to the US because they know this particular drug is used in executions.

The US manufacturers are reluctant to supply for executions too. It's a known problem.

How drugs are administered also makes a difference. In voluntary end of life situations in some countries if the self-adminstration fails (and it does, sometimes) then the physical steps in to administer the lethal dose. How Dignitas handle it I'm not sure (although I'm a member, and if I choose to go there then I'll be sure to ask that question since the medical personnel are not allowed to actual administer the drugs themselves, unlike in the NL).

Here is the prisoner I mentioned
February 22, 2018. Alabama. Doyle Lee Hamm. Lethal Injection (failed). Despite several warnings from defense counsel that it would be impossible to find a vein in which to insert the catheter (Hamm suffered from advanced lymphatic cancer and carcinoma), the State went forward with the execution. For 2.5 hours, the executioners tried to find a vein, leaving Hamm with a ten-twelve puncture marks, including six in his groin and others that punctured his bladder and penetrated his femoral artery. Finally, approaching a midnight deadline that prohibited further attempts, the execution was called off. Alabama Corrections Commissioner Jeff Dunn later told reporters, “I wouldn’t necessarily characterize what we had tonight as a problem.”[80] [NOTE: On March 5, 2018, attorneys for Doyle Hamm submitted a preliminary report from an anesthesiologist who evaluated Hamm on February 25. WARNING: Report contains graphic images and descriptions.] On November 28, 2021, Mr. Hamm, still in prison, died from his lymphoma and cranial cancer.[81]

I absolutely agree with you about the choice but feel almost certain this would become a pressure not a choice. So that is the dilemma imo.

How drugs are administered also makes a difference. In voluntary end of life situations in some countries if the self-adminstration fails (and it does, sometimes) then the physical steps in to administer the lethal dose.

Yes I already mentioned this. For both Canada and NL, if death hasn’t occurred within 60 mins, a doctor steps in to inject a lethal dose.

They need to do this in around 50% of cases in Canada. Half is a bit more often than sometimes.

The unpredictable efficacy of assisted suicide drugs is acknowledged by the Royal Dutch Medical and Pharmaceutical Societies and the Canadian Association of MAiD Assessors and Providers, who both recommend that clinicians obtain consent from patients to convert to euthanasia prior to ingestion of the lethal drugs in case the patient takes too long to die.8,25 In 2018, of the MAiD cases in Canada with available data, 50% were unsuccessful by 60 min and the clinician transitioned to euthanasia to complete the ‘assisted’ death.25

As for pre-existing conditions, you’re right, but the protocol for assisted dying also doesn’t take that into account. For one prisoner, the lethal injection failed because of his advanced cancer and he underwent immense physical pain abs psychological torture before they called off the execution and a few months later, he died of the cancer. That is relevant to assisted dying is it not?

Not if the doctor is able to get help, quickly, to resolve the situation. I'd also like to point out that this prisoner did not choose voluntarily to die. And if you really believe the US prison system including the execution system is well planned, effective, practical and decent, I have a bridge to sell you .... https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/botched-executions

Do you know that the UK assisted dying bill doesn’t require any health care qualification at all administer the drugs?

No, and this alone means that this bill is unacceptable. If it's legalized, it needs to be done properly and that means medically trained staff.

There's a really easy solution to the UK bill not requiring health care professionals to be involved at this point, isn't there.

As I've said, repeatedly, Canada is no model for euthanasia.

But just because Russia carries out democracy really badly doesn't mean that every other country in the world should reject the system.

It's actually reassuring that in the Dutch system they do actually plan what to do in the case of it taking too long. Given that this is what the individuals want for themelves.

I agree with you, but if adult social care collapsed leaving many more people who need daily care to suffer and die alone, wouldn’t it be good to have a choice if you wanted it?

The houses getting smaller and less adaptable is a bad idea. That is the point.

Some people don’t want elderly relatives, some people, and definitely some cultures do.

Thanks, but I have already posted a quote from the death penalty botched executions webpage.

We have no data showing that it’s being done any more humanely at the assisted dying clinics other than a few glowing loved one of client testimonials plus loads of marketing material depicting a Hollywood death.

And yet, people getting PTSD diagnoses and therapy after witnessing a relative having assisted dying is a growing subset of psychological trauma.

There isn’t much oversight and I for one have zero faith it’s as good as it says on the tin.

? Canada and NL have the exact same plan, the difference is we have data from Canada on how often it’s needed but no data from the NL. Why do you assume that what is hidden behind the curtain in the NL is any better than what is being honestly recorded in Canada?

@ReleaseTheDucksOfWar
No, and this alone means that this bill is unacceptable. If it's legalized, it needs to be done properly and that means medically trained staff. There's a really easy solution to the UK bill not requiring health care professionals to be involved at this point, isn't there.

Yes and it’s too bad the Leadbetter committee rejected that HoL amendment too to have trained, qualified medical staff administer the assisted dying drugs. Perhaps because they had promised assisted dying wouldn’t cost a lot?

We have no data showing that it’s being done any more humanely at the assisted dying clinics other than a few glowing loved one of client testimonials plus loads of marketing material depicting a Hollywood death.

No data means just that. No data. You can't judge.

And in this area more than any other if there are problems, it is highlighted - as in Canada. WHich is why it's clear that Canada's model is bad.

But these complaints do not exist in the same level in the NL and Belgium and other countries - which incidently (regarding NL and Belgium and Switzerland have a far greater respect for adults' ability to choose for themselves than the UK).

"a few glowing loved ones of client testimonials" is absolutely inaccurate. Try talking to the families and doctors of people who have gone for euthanasia. None, and I mean none, that I have talked to have complaints. They have either been relieved for their family members, or neutral - taken the view that "it was their choice". Respected that choice.

You are consistently cherry picking data and phrasing things in the way to cast the worst possible light on euthanasia, which can be a well run and very, actually, positive way to end a life. Every single point you make is unbalanced and unnuanced.

As for therapy and PTSD, have the decency to look up the stories of people who have had to watch their loved ones live or die in agony. Even on this thread there are some.

Because I live here, I knew people who went for euthanasia, and because a friend's partner works as tech support on one of the teams administering euthanasia.

For god's sake, is all this theoretical to you? It's not to me.

[editted: lost touch the last few years with the friend, but she was a high powered and very direct Rotterdammer whose own husband had gone for euthanasia and she'd been present]

I have not finished reading but will do so later.
I cannot express how shocked I am. I would guess almost no one discussing this subject would have the first idea of the truth as described here.

Anyone considering assisted dying for themselves or a relative should read this and get armed with information. It needs a thread of its own I think @NullaEffugium

Likewise read the Liverpool Pathway reports from this same pp if you have very ill, or dying, relatives or friends in hospital.

Do not just trust. Get to know the facts and speak to the doctors first even if these are protocols you think are right for you.

No it’s not theoretical to me, as I have family living where it’s legal- NL, Oregon, France, and I am genuinely concerned by the rhetoric around disability benefits in the UK that the abuses in Canada could all to easily happen in the UK.

I am sorry you have friends who have had to make this difficult choice and I can see why you’d need to believe they died with minimal suffering and pain. That the NLs process is free of complications and abuses. I am sorry for your loss.

(I am sure you understand that a friend’s partner’s opinion of how well they do their job isn’t technically impartial oversight.)