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

I don't think you can say this particular case doesn't raise feminist issues when it relates to a child who needed such substantial care. Without more specific information on the family, at minimum we can say that the caring expectations on a societal level are different for mothers than fathers, and the Netherlands isn't immune to that by any means.

Which doesn't mean the points about euthanasia and women as lower value than men are wrong either. I think it's quite possible that whatever policy options we pursue, they're all worse for women than they are for men, but in different ways.

It is cruel. Preserving life at all costs can prolong severe suffering.

What have you reported? There is nothing wrong with an OP starting a thread to do a feminist analysis of one of the most important ethical questions of today without presenting a fait accompli of her own. Forums are for discussion, they aren’t just for defence of a thesis.

'Withdrawal of support' does not always mean starving to death.

This child had breathing difficulties and frequent seizures. It's unlikely they would have survived long enough to starve if treatment was withdrawn.

This ^^ all too often sadly people want intervention at all costs and to save lives. Understandable when that’s your baby or indeed your elderly mum getting cancer treatment at 85 years old.
But Drs should be making clinically sound decisions based on quality of life and facts. Not emotions.

That’s impossible to do because quality of life is a subjective assessment that is entirely dependent on the emotions and biases of the observer.

Ive read the article now

I dont know why this is termed assisted dying, its not assisted dying.

It sounds heartbreaking. I cant quite make out if the child was actually euthanised or whether treatment was withdrawn? Is that the same thing?

It concerns me that more women die as a result of euthanasia- either formal or informal- and more men ‘assist’.
It concerns me that every country that has legitimised euthanasia, has gradually widened the acceptable boundaries.

It is a feminist issue for many reasons.

Exactly and even in this case it seems the doctors didnt necessarily agree.

Canada is a particular problem with this I think.

Womens medical issues are also moore likely to be dismissed by medical professionals. So it could well be they are more likely to be suffering.

I think one aspect is that it relates to a reason for abortion in cases where the child has been identified as having a severe disability which will cause it suffering when it is born. I remember a doctor suggesting that spins bifida could be like this.

Many people who would not otherwise agree with abortion might do so in a case if such a disability were going to severely affect the baby, yet they might not feel at all sure about ending the life of a child once he or she had been born. Logically though it should be the same as abortion.

I am not sure what I personally feel about the euthanasia in the article. On the face of it, the child’s suffering was so bad it was a certainly mercy to end it. It must have been truly terrible for the parents to have to make this choice.

On the other hand, I feel unease that this sort of euthanasia could be abused and used to end the life of a disabled child whose life might nevertheless be worthwhile for them, and have quality and purpose - but be inconvenient.

But balance I agree with the practice a pp mentioned as being relevant in 1970 when the pp was born, which was to have the choice not to take steps to keep a chid alive just after birth if he or she is certainly profoundly disabled. That is similar to the OP article though more passive and less active.

It must be so upsetting for any parents having to consider this.

@likelysuspect I think the word ‘euthanise’ used in the article means they would have administered a drug in a quantity they were certain would end the child’s life. It is an active step with the purpose of killing ( as a mercy).

Whereas ‘assisted dying’ means something more like not taking emergency life-saving actions, not continuing to feed the person, and possibly administering pain relief.

There should be.

Hasn't Kathleen Stock been involved in this for a while? Could be a starting point.

What is the difference between euthanasia and palliating someone ? Did the Doctors involved give the child something to make them die or did they reduce input and increase symptom control , I am not sure the article makes that clear ?

Why would you look at things differently via feminism? Surely the only question here is whether this child is suffering and whether anything other than euthanasia is a viable alternative to end his suffering.

That may be a fair point. But 'unlikely' is not something I'd want to risk when it comes to my child's suffering. How is extending suffering and directly causing harm through the withdrawal of support (or forced support when it will clearly have little if any positive outcome) better than immediately ending the suffering?

Exactly this. Apologies because I know in advance that this is trite and a cliche but we end the suffering of pets because they don’t understand pain and it’s thought of as cruel to extend a life of suffering. How is the life of a child any different ? If there is no chance of recovery and there is pain and suffering surely ending it is the kindest option ?

I can't see the aggression in the posters answer?

Also - any thing to do with children would interest feminists wouldn't it? As would anything to do with life, assisted life, assisted dying etc.

I mean, your confusion over why feminists would be interested in this is ... confusing!

If I want a 'GC feminist' take on anything this is the first place I come.

The title of this topic is Feminism: Sex and Gender. In practice it is primarily a feminist forum*. You see those 1135 pages of threads, starting from 2010? The vast majority were posted under the topic's old title of Feminism and Women's Rights.

I'm sure most posters here would agree that there is no way of doing feminism without acknowledging sex. If you disagree then start a thread explaining how and why we would do that. What is non-GC feminism? How would that work?

Maybe 'Feminist Chat' would be more your thing. That's the topic that was demanded by people wanting to discuss 'feminism' while pretending sex is not relevant. It's a bit of a ghost town but maybe you can liven it up.

*Ancient threads on site stuff clarified that it's a topic about feminism which means we have to put up with raging misogynists posting why they reckon feminism is shit, as long as they abide by the talk guidelines. We are free to argue back.

No different to hospitals here withdrawing treatment for similar children, especially when the parents don’t want it

Sadly this is true.
Its also true at the other end of the spectrum, keeping very elderly frail people alive with no good reason. Sometimes letting nature take over is the right thing to do

The word euthanasia makes it clear:
Cambridge Dictionary
Noun
the act of killing someone who is very ill or very old so that they do not sufferany more:
Although some people campaign for the right to euthanasia, it is still illegal in most countries.
Synonym
mercy killing

Just to add balance and not to derail because I broadly agree, but I was born with spina bifida in the late 1950s. Mum was advised that the best thing would be to let me die because I would always be dependent, would have a low IQ and would be unable to walk or participate in life in the same way as someone without the disability.

I’m now early sixties. Had limited walking ability which necessitated elbow crutches and outdoor wheelchair use, which I’m still fine with. IQ of 130, mainstream education and uni, worked full time in a hugely fulfilling career and married for forty years. Broad range of friends - many of whom are lifelong and remain supportive. I wouldn’t change a thing.

Things were far from easy for my parents but they persevered and because of their intelligent approach I had as normal a life as possible. Your unease is the reason I’m still here and I thank you for it.❤️

Yes, totally agree with you here.