Belgium introduces child euthanasia - Polidicks

[quote]Twelve years after legalising euthanasia for adults, Belgium's parliament extended the right to die to terminally ill children of any age, despite opposition from the Church and some pediatricians.[/quote] Source: [url]http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/2014/02/14/08/30/belgium-introduces-child-euthanasia[/url] I'm okay with this.

Uh how young are we talking because I don't feel entirely comfortable with this and how ill are we talking as well?

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;43904708]Uh how young are we talking because I don't feel entirely comfortable with this and how ill are we talking as well?[/QUOTE] "terminally" ill and "any" age.

What? But think of the Youth in Asia!

Welp. This caught me by surprise. This is great for those kids who know that their lives will be getting worse and worse everyday but it also means that those childrens have Life and Death on their hands (with psychological and parental advice) Let see how this turns out.

[QUOTE=Dakiin Dovah;43904748]"terminally" ill and "any" age.[/QUOTE] This would be a tough decision to go through though, so hopefully they've got a plan for families to follow to get help with it

It was really only a matter of time, other countries will probably follow too eventually.

i can't really agree with this unless we're talking like, coma or catatonic youths

thank god if the abortions fail we can still get em

If I was one of those children, I would be happy to know that my life is in my hands and nobody is saying, "You have no choice. You [i]must[/i] stay alive until you slowly die (painfully)."

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43904817]i can't really agree with this unless we're talking like, coma or catatonic youths[/QUOTE] [Quote]terminally ill children[/quote]

whats a terminal child

Now Belgium must acquire an Asian colony so they can practice euthanasia on youth in Asia.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;43904837][/QUOTE] you can be terminally ill and not be in a coma or catatonic

I have a feeling that here in the US, some stupid politician is gonna bring this up in a debate. "Yeah, well, if we do X, then what's next? Killing babies like Belgium?" anywho, this is pretty good. If the kid's fucked, why would you prolong it? That's crueler than letting them drift away painlessly, as much as it sucks letting them, y'know, cease to live for another month or so.

[QUOTE=TheFishyG;43904930]I have a feeling that here in the US, some stupid politician is gonna bring this up in a debate. "Yeah, well, if we do X, then what's next? Killing babies like Belgium?" anywho, this is pretty good. If the kid's fucked, why would you prolong it? That's crueler than letting them drift away painlessly, as much as it sucks letting them, y'know, cease to live for another month or so.[/QUOTE] well, for one thing, there are tons of people that are alive today that were considered hopeless cases when they were children. my best friend was so small when he was born he could fit in his fathers palm and they said there was more chance of him dying than living. would he be a candidate for child-euthanasia? because he is now a healthy adult with a full time job a girlfriend and his own house

[QUOTE=TheFishyG;43904930]I have a feeling that here in the US, some stupid politician is gonna bring this up in a debate. "Yeah, well, if we do X, then what's next? Killing babies like Belgium?" anywho, this is pretty good. If the kid's fucked, why would you prolong it? That's crueler than letting them drift away painlessly, as much as it sucks letting them, y'know, cease to live for another month or so.[/QUOTE] But the question is, when is the pain too much? When is the child let go?

[QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;43904943]But the question is, when is the pain too much? When is the child let go?[/QUOTE] another question: what gives someone the right to decide that someone else is in too much pain to live? (as i said though, i'd support this in the case of like, hard out coma or catatonic people) and if it's up to the child to decide, can we really say children are mature enough to consent to their own death?

yeah tbh i think that plenty of children - esp those with terminal illness - are extremely shortsighted in regards to their lives. they don't think about the long term, at all, and that's not really a characteristic you start to get until you're a little past 18 years of age. and especially given that terminal illnesses can be so chaotic in terms of recovery, i'd feel a bit uneasy letting people do it before the age of 18. half a dozen friends of mine are pre-mes and we're going to die until like the age of six, and huzzah they lived

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43904955]another question: what gives someone the right to decide that someone else is in too much pain to live? (as i said though, i'd support this in the case of like, hard out coma or catatonic people) and if it's up to the child to decide, can we really say children are mature enough to consent to their own death?[/QUOTE] If a child is in unending pain and going to die in the short term (short term is part of the law), would you deny him euthanasia? I don't think it should be done on babies, since they can't say that they want euthanasia, or people who have a defect that will make their life harder/make it so they wont live past x age.

[QUOTE=cis.joshb;43905009]If a child is in unending pain and going to die in the short term (short term is part of the law), would you deny him euthanasia?[/QUOTE] when can you ever say that though? as i said, they thought my best friend was going to die in the short term and he didn't [editline]14th February 2014[/editline] medical science isn't 100% definite, death certainly is

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43905017]when can you ever say that though? as i said, they thought my best friend was going to die in the short term and he didn't [editline]14th February 2014[/editline] medical science isn't 100% definite, death certainly is[/QUOTE] He was a baby. If you look at my edited post, I don't support that. The argument for children that medical science can't be sure they're going to die can also be made for adults, but if the child is old enough to express their desire and the physician says that it is true that they are going to die in the short term I don't see the issue with ending their pain.

[QUOTE=cis.joshb;43905042]He was a baby. If you look at my edited post, I don't support that. The argument for children that medical science can't be sure they're going to die can also be made for adults, but if the child is old enough to express their desire and the physician says that it is true that they are going to die in the short term I don't see the issue with ending their pain.[/QUOTE] children don't have the mental capability to see past pain in any sort of prolonged sense, adults do to some extent [editline]13th February 2014[/editline] i'm all for child autonomy but this is still treading a super dangerous line

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43904941]well, for one thing, there are tons of people that are alive today that were considered hopeless cases when they were children. my best friend was so small when he was born he could fit in his fathers palm and they said there was more chance of him dying than living. would he be a candidate for child-euthanasia? because he is now a healthy adult with a full time job a girlfriend and his own house[/QUOTE] Uh no, he wouldn't be. There is literally nothing wrong with this, the option for a terminally ill human, of any age, to end their life is a godsend.

i don't think children have the mental capacity to make the decision to end their own lives, and i don't think people should be able to make it for them

On a bad day, a healthy child might tell you they want to die. They can't consent. That's the difference between children and adults. So the decision is in the hands of the doctors and parents. There are terminal illnesses out there (Tay-Sachs, extreme cases of harlequin ichthyosis), but what about when we're dealing with cancer or brain damage?

this is gonna sound super out there but if a child isn't allowed to consent to sex why should they permitted to consent to end their own lives? it's the same logic, they're not capable of understanding the full consequences of such an act

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;43905127]this is gonna sound super out there but if a child isn't allowed to consent to sex why should they permitted to consent to end their own lives? it's the same logic, they're not capable of understanding the full consequences of such an act[/QUOTE] imagine being terminal

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43905017]when can you ever say that though? as i said, they thought my best friend was going to die in the short term and he didn't [editline]14th February 2014[/editline] medical science isn't 100% definite, death certainly is[/QUOTE] That's why both terminally ill and short term life expectancy are both conditions of being eligible. There are other safeguards like a psychological evaluation for the patient and other means. Someone brought up in the last thread that only 5 people were allowed to undergo euthanasia last year, so we're talking about a pretty small group of people.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43905100]i don't think children have the mental capacity to make the decision to end their own lives, and i don't think people should be able to make it for them[/QUOTE] Just stop. It still requires parent approval for children that are under 16. They aren't just going to make this decision and be approved. Doctors and other professionals have to approve, along with the parents and the child themselves. The child has the capacity to feel pain and weigh in on how they feel. Who are you to say otherwise? They shouldn't be the only say, but their opinion matters.