Belgian woman euthanized for autism?


An expert on euthanasia is cautioning the United States and Canada to be mindful of the slippery slope of assisted suicide on demand in countries where it’s legal — such as Belgium, where a depressed, middle-aged woman’s life was recently terminated.

A 38-year-old woman was the latest victim of an alleged “mercy killing” in northern Europe after a psychiatrist labeled her as autistic and depressed — which allegedly resulted in “psychological suffering” that was spurred from the ending of her long-term relationship with her partner.

This latest incident adds to the controversy of Belgium’s lax laws regarding euthanasia.

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition founder and executive director Alex Schadenberg is an expert on the matter and points out that autism should have nothing to do with any decision being made to euthanize a person.

“The fact is that we don’t kill people who have autism — and autism in itself is not a psychological condition,” Schadenberg tells OneNewsNow. “It’s actually how the brain processes stimuli.”

It was also noted that autism can be managed. The truth was revealed that the woman was actually depressed because her longtime live-in relationship with her boyfriend ended.

“She was defined as being ‘psychologically suffering’ and it all comes down to the whole thing in Belgium: they allow euthanasia for psychological suffering,” Schadenberg continued. “Sadly in my own country of Canada, they’re talking about allowing euthanasia also for psychological suffering — which, of course, is a condition you cannot define. You can’t define psychological suffering.”

In order to promote euthanasia, proponents of assisted suicide argue that it should be available for terminally ill people with six months to live. However, according to the Canadian expert of the issue, European countries provide an example of what really happens when the practice is carried out.

“It comes down to … you allow euthanasia — so what you’re saying is [that] it’s okay for a doctor to kill people, in law,’” Schadenberg concluded. “The only question now — once you’ve allowed it — is for what reason … and it’s a changing entity at all times.”

Read Original Article Here


Leave a comment

Filed under Posts

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s