child youth

Belgium to legalize child euthanasia, because it’s going to be done anyway

File photo: Children play at a park
File photo: Children play at a park.

Belgium’s euthanasia program is already out of control, but it might be getting even crazier. Euthanasia-friendly countries have a history of letting the programs go off the rails, and now Belgium might sanction one of the most horrible things they could: allowing minors to be euthanized. Their reasoning? Well, it’s being done anyway…

Belgian legislators opened a debate today on whether to amend a decade-old law on euthanasia to cover minors, being told by experts that it was already taking place in practice without any set guidelines.

Currently, the law applies to those over 18 but one expert told the upper house of parliament that it was clear that euthanasia was being carried out on younger people, the Belga news agency reported.

“We all know it,” said Dominique Biarent, head of intensive care at Queen Fabiola Children’s University Hospital in Brussels.

Faced with this reality, “doctors need a legal framework,” Biarent was quoted as saying by Belga.

Well, in that case, why not legalize things like murder, rape, and robbery? After all, they’re against the law, and people still do them. So why even bother making them illegal?

In all seriousness, there is so much wrong with legalizing euthanasia for minors. First, will parents be allowed to subject their children to this? Say a family is driving along and they get into a car accident, leaving one of their kids in a wheelchair. That’s just too much work for them, so they decide they’d like to euthanize that kid. It’s a completely plausible situation, one that already has a lot of support, so would Belgium be OK with that?

Or let’s go with another situation. Let’s say a sixteen-year-old has decided that his life is horrible and he wants to die. He’s bullied, he doesn’t get along with his parents, and he just wants to be euthanized. There’s no question here – if this law is changed, that would be completely legal. Belgium would tell minors that it’s completely fine to be euthanized at such a young age. Never mind that the brain of a teenager isn’t fully developed yet. Teenagers aren’t capable of reasoning and thinking before they act the way adults are, because their brains just aren’t matured enough yet. Who cares, though? When a teenager, incapable of making a rational long-term decision, decides that she wants to die via euthanasia, Belgium will be happy to oblige.

How is it that no one sees a problem there?

As if that weren’t bad enough, they’re also debating allowing Alzheimer’s sufferers to be euthanized. Because that doesn’t sound like a situation ripe for elder abuse at all, does it?

If nothing else, this should serve as a warning to other countries around the world. Once you open the door to euthanasia, there’s no going back. Claim it’s for the terminally ill only – we all know that requirement won’t last.

  • Deathpool1984

    Casey…your story is 1 sided and extremely biased. Go visit terminally ill patients suffering and see what they have to say. Big Pharma has you in their pocket and you don’t even know it. Guess how much the medical industry makes from the terminally ill being kept alive to suffer…

    No matter how you swing it, this is a choice, a personal choice, that has nothing to do with you. Forcing people to live through law is the most idiotic thing I’ve ever heard of.

    Your reasoning through “situations” is self serving to your article, as I can present just as many “situations” to the contrary of your argument. I’m sure it’s not a free for all at the Belgium clinics with kids lined up waiting, although I do not have first hand experience.

    Would you rather force those to live and one of these kids with nothing to lose decides to make a statement…like many of these kids in the news with guns are doing?

    Again, this is a personal choice and harms nobody but the person making the choice. It should be legal everywhere.

    • Fangbeer

      I’m sorry, did you say “Forcing people to live through law” How do you force someone to live? What a load of nonsense.

      The problem here is not forcing people to live. The problem here is allowing someone a legal pathway to kill someone else. This isn’t a suicide law. This is a law that regulates murder.

    • Basset_Hound

      As for the terminally ill, I guess you’ve never heard of palliative care or hospice have you?

      As for your statement about forcing “one of those kids to live”, I DO have first hand experience. Our daughter was unendurable her sophomore year of high school. She was bitter, sarcastic, unendurable to be around and was convinced that everyone hated her. Guess what? This was due to a VERY treatable endocrine condition, and once she was on the proper meds, her outlook improved tremendously. Your “reasoning” that if she would have chosen euthanasia, it would have “harmed no one” is horrendous. That choice would have devastated my husband and me. And no, it should NOT be “legal everywhere”, as it would open the floodgates to all kinds of abuses.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1018686848 Jason Roberts

      wtf !

    • http://www.facebook.com/ralph.moore.79 Ralph Moore

      I don’t care how mny “situations” you can present to the contrary..even 1000 to 1…that means one person was killed who didn’t want to die or wasn’t mentally capable of making that decision

    • Old R.N.

      You do realize that the terminally ill are not being “kept alive”, correct? When the choice is made by either the patient or the responsible family member (should the patient be unable to voice his/her wishes) to do nothing further regarding medical care, then we offer them palliative care only. You do understand what palliative care is, correct? It does nothing to extend the length of life.

      Palliative care is actually rather inexpensive, but finances are neither here nor there in regards to caring for a dying human being. It is far more respectful to mercifully care for them as they prepare to leave this world, than to simply kill them. Desiring to make a quick end of another’s life appears to be simply a way to dodge ones responsibilities to a brother in humanity.

    • Texas3Step

      As others have pointed out, terminally ill patients may choose to receive palliative care, and can choose a DNR order. As for others, you should know that almost all teens go through periods of angst, and toy with the idea of suicide. For almost all of them, that passes. Many people suffer from clinical depression and become suicidal, even though they do not want to die. For most of them, a combination of medication and therapy overcomes their despair, and they are happy to be alive.
      The choice to surrender one’s life through suicide or euthanasia is not just a simple decision, and it does harm others. Imagine the agony of parents who lose a child that way; think of the shock and sorrow of friends and family; think of the loss to the world of any contributions that a euthanised person may have made.

      • Johnny de Vulcan

        …another facet of the NWOs de-population-agenda;85% to die!*

  • http://twitter.com/RevrendBo Bo Sickels

    Democrats in the Obama administration should love this. It’s like retro-active abortions. They are only pro-life when it comes to death row inmates.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1018686848 Jason Roberts

      you hit the nail on the head .

  • Basset_Hound

    Let’s go with another situation. A couple is facing having to care for an aging parent. Then they could make sure to separate the parent from his or her support network. Next they could heap on the verbal and physical abuse until said parent is convinced that death is a viable option.

    • MEL

      Several psychologists came to the same conclusion about Kevorkian: he exhibited the behavior and personality traits of a serial killer. So did most of Hitler’s eugenics doctors.