Facts Everyone Should Know about Euthanasia
Dr Vernon Coleman
1. During the lockdowns introduced during the fake covid pandemic, thousands of elderly people were deliberately killed using a mixture of midazolam and morphine. This was allegedly done to `protect’ the NHS but was a trial for introducing euthanasia into Britain.
2. `Do not Resuscitate’ notices (DNR notices) are routinely put on sick and disabled patients in the UK. When a DNR notice is put on a patient that patient will not be treated if, for example, they have a heart attack or develop a chest infection. The original aim of a DNR notice was to avoid repeated and traumatic life-saving attempts on patients who were dying and genuinely beyond help. Today, DNR notices are used as an excuse to kill by failing to treat. Hospital staff regularly lie to patients – telling them that resuscitation procedures are painful. This is not necessarily true. Thousands of patients are already being killed with the aid of DNR notices.
3. If the euthanasia law is passed in Britain the rules will soon change – they always do. There will be uncertainty about whether parents will be allowed to make decisions for their children. Will children be allowed to decide to die? Will the courts overrule any parental views? It seems likely. In some countries children are already allowed to choose to kill themselves. In countries where euthanasia has already been introduced the parameters are constantly changing to allow more and more people to choose to kill themselves.
4. In France, there are plans to introduce a new category of `care home’ where people would be allowed to die. These will be cheaper to run than hospitals.
5. Some organisations such as religious organisations and the Red Cross, which have ethical principles opposed to euthanasia, would be placed in an impossible situation if euthanasia were made legal.
6. Experience with DNR notices, and in other countries, shows that people (even healthy ones) will be blackmailed, and subjected to moral, psychological and financial pressures to persuade them to allow themselves to be killed.
7. In France, the right of healthcare establishments to refuse euthanasia within their walls is being fought by the Association pour le Droit de Mourir dans la Dignité (France's leading pro-euthanasia association).
8. It seems that in France, pro-euthanasia groups may be allowed to run `care centres’ (which should perhaps be described as death camps) where patients could be killed.
9. The prohibition of killing is the foundation of human rights. It is an inviolable principle of international law. This principle was reaffirmed in the aftermath of the Second World War, after doctors were condemned at Nuremberg for having euthanized disabled people. This principle does not provide for any exceptions to euthanasia. Therefore, any euthanasia – even if presented as voluntary – is a violation of human rights. The European Convention on Human Rights clearly states that “No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally”
10. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “Every human being has the inherent right to life.” The decriminalization of euthanasia violates the prohibition of killing.
11. As the experience of other countries demonstrates, once decriminalized, the practice of euthanasia becomes uncontrollable and spreads at the expense of the most vulnerable especially the disabled, the elderly, the poor and the unemployed. The decriminalization of euthanasia therefore not only leads to a systematic violation of human rights, but also to an extremely serious cultural and legal regression.
12. The European Court of Human Rights has delivered a long-awaited ruling on end-of-life issues in the landmark case of Karsai v. Hungary. It confirms the absence of a right to assisted suicide. Palliative care is presented and promoted as “essential to ensuring a dignified end of life.” A judgment handed down on June 13, 2024, by the European Court of Human Rights is significant. A former European Court jurist suffering from a neurodegenerative disease had come to plead his case before the Strasbourg judges. He hoped that the ECHR, after a long evolution of its case law, would “finally” recognize a right to assisted suicide under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court did not do so but cautiously indicated, obiter dictum, that it might take this step at a later stage should the practice become legalized by a significant proportion of European states and accepted by international ethical standards. The ECHR considers that it is too early to create a right to assisted suicide; to do so would be tantamount to obliging the 46 member states of the Council of Europe to legalize the practice. States may, therefore, continue to prohibit euthanasia and assisted suicide under criminal law in their own countries and may even prosecute those involved in these practices abroad on their own nationals.
13. Instead of supporting euthanasia the Court emphasized very clearly the importance and necessity of “high-quality palliative care, including access to effective pain management,” which it described as “essential to ensuring a dignified end of life”. This case is the first time that the Court has placed such emphasis on palliative care in its end-of-life jurisprudence and presented it as falling within the positive obligations of States. The Court’s emphasis on palliative care is the second significant contribution of this judgment.
14. It is absurd and immoral to allow politicians to decide that doctors and patients may conspire to end a life. Any legislation allowing euthanasia would be contrary to the fundamental right to life.
15. Currently, a pharmacist who prepares or dispenses a lethal substance for a potential suicide may be prosecuted for complicity in poisoning. The fact that the person consents to their poisoning does not lessen the severity of the crime. With an "end of life" bill, the Government would oblige pharmacists to cooperate in euthanasia and assisted suicides. An act currently punishable by imprisonment would, by such a law, become an obligation for pharmacists. How will pharmacists be protected?
16. If euthanasia becomes legal, doctors, nurses, pharmacists and others who have moral objections may still be put under pressure to help to kill people. No clever wording in a Parliamentary Bill will stop this any more than laws making murder illegal succeed in stopping murder.
17. There has been little or no informed debate about euthanasia. The media has been clearly supportive of euthanasia which is also the Labour Government’s position. As with covid and the covid vaccine, only those supporting the Government position are allowed a voice. Dr Jack King, author of the world’s no 1 bestselling book on euthanasia, sent copies of his book to most leading broadcasters in the UK but not one wanted to interview him.
Note
Please watch and share Vernon Coleman’s video entitled They want to kill you- Here’s how they’ll do it. And please read Jack King’s book `They want to kill us – here’s how and why’ – which is the world No 1 bestselling book on euthanasia.
Copyright Vernon Coleman November 2024
Home