[Republished from September, 2008 before all this talk about rationing life became the stuff of our American dinner table conversations and nightmares. This was the habit of mind in Europe one year ago.]
Together at last: The Baroness and Dr. Joseph Mengele
"They told them they would be given medication
that would help them. Oh, yes, they were given
medications, medications of poison that gripped
their heart and closed their eyelids still;
that is the sort of medication they were given."
-- Colonel Leon Jaworski, 1945 **
An evil woman touted as "the influential medical ethics expert Baroness Warnock" says it's time for some tough love and hard death among the demented of England. Call it "the culling the herd to save some money" ethic. Warnock says, "If you're demented, you're wasting people's lives – your family's lives – and you're wasting the resources of the National Health Service."
Or, as Orin Judd so succinctly puts it: "Ever notice how "medical ethics" is nothing more than justifying murder.
We do and we also note how this is a rising trend in the "ethical" thinking of Europe. Or perhaps we shouldn't say "trend" as much as a nostalgic yearning for the past century where an interest in eugenics amongst the "leaders" of that civilization was part of the biggest butcher's bill in history.
Where have we seen this sort of "cost crisis" medical thinking in Europe before? Oh yes, that would be the Hadamar Hospital AKA the Hadamar Euthanasia Center
The Hadamar Nurses welcome you to their facility
Thus in 1906 the Korrigenden-Anstalt in Hadamar was converted to a mental institution. By 1930 the home contained 320 patients. As decreed by Nazi law, from 1934 nursing costs for mental patients were reduced. By 1936 the mental homes had become overcrowded, and conditions worsened as a result of the reduced quantity and quality of food supplies. The building had been designed to accommodate 250 patients, but by 1939 about 600 inmates were crowded into cramped quarters.That was only the first phase of the killings at Hadamar. Sloppy and very unscientific. They got better in the next phase.During late August 1939, following Hadamar's designation as a military hospital, patients were distributed to surrounding mental homes. However, between November 1940 and January 1941 the sickrooms were converted into quarters for the medical and administrative staff of the new T4 Hadamar euthanasia killing centre. The staff had been transferred from Grafeneck following the closure of that facility.
Rooms to receive arriving patients were located on the first floor. A gas chamber disguised as a shower room was installed in the basement of the building, together with a crematorium with two ovens which were attached to a chimney. Gas entered the chamber from an adjacent room through pipes with holes punched in them.
Killing at Hadamar recommenced in 1942 as part of the second phase of the euthanasia program, the so-called “wild euthanasia.” Now the victims were murdered by administering lethal doses of barbiturates or morphine-scopolamine injections. While initially there had been some pretence of medical deliberation before deciding on a patient’s fate, with the arrival of Polish and Russian workers in 1944, mostly diagnosed as “tubercular” despite a complete lack of medical examination until after their death, the killing became automatic."The killing became automatic." That's the phrase that pays these days, isn't it? If we can only get to the automatic killing phase of medicine, then everything will be copacetic... cool... "it's all good."
Cheap too. Just a little needle and good night. Followed by the cremation in the cardboard box. A bit heavy on your final carbon footprint, but thing of the carbon we save by killing you early. Surely that's an offset.
Of course some of the witnesses that brought the medical killers of Hadamar to trial after the war had a slightly different view:
At the Hadamar trial of October 1945, one of the first American war crimes trials, Colonel Leon Jaworski** described the murder of patients by their physicians in the following terms:Even though she was 21 when these trials took place and must have had some knowledge of them, history lived doesn't seem to be slowing down the 84-year old "Baroness'" drive to get rid of the garbage in the National Health Care system."Oh, what a vicious falsehood, what a terrible thing, what an evil and wicked thing to do to a person who is already suffering and already carrying burdens, to build up the false hope that sunshine was to enter their hearts. They told them they would be given medication that would help them. Oh, yes, they were given medications, medications of poison that gripped their heart and closed their eyelids still; that is the sort of medication they were given."
Baroness Warnock: Dementia sufferers may have a 'duty to die' - Telegraph Lady Warnock, a former headmistress who went on to become Britain's leading moral philosopher, chaired a landmark Government committee in the 1980s that established the law on fertility treatment and embryo research. A prominent supporter of euthanasia, she has previously suggested that pensioners who do not want to become a burden on their carers should be helped to die. Last year the Mental Capacity Act came into effect that gives legal force to "living wills", so patients can appoint an "attorney" to tell doctors when their hospital food and water should be removed. But in her latest interview, given to the Church of Scotland's magazine Life and Work, Lady Warnock goes further by claiming that dementia sufferers should consider ending their lives through euthanasia because of the strain they put on their families and public services."The last time this person was trotted out to as the point-guard for death, she was working on the issue of when to put premature babies down.
Expert tells doctors: let youngest premature babies die - Times Online BRITAIN’S top medical ethics expert has urged doctors to let the most premature babies die, with treatment offered only in exceptional cases.Again, you have to wonder how deep the sickness goes into the soul of Britain's intelligensia to have this thing cited as "the top expert" in ethics. Still, it is interesting to see that she's now, in her dotage, working hard to get people killed at the other end of life. And all because if you are old and sick you can.... cost too much!
Now that's what we call really controlling government spending at last! Suck taxes out when you're vital, put you down like a dog when you're not.
Can I have a show of hands for all those in favor of US National Health Care with all the dependable cost-benefit analysis the US government will bring to your own life when you become... well... just a little too costly? After all, once you're no longer actually kicking in payroll and income taxes, the only place left to get money from you is the Death Tax. And the government is going to need money to fund its "Free" "Health" "Care."
Of course, it will take some time for the proposed system to get to the point where it actually has to kill you in your old age to fund itself. I'll probably be gone by the time it rolls around, but I do find it sweet to think that many of the young voters so keen for this today will be among the first killed by it tomorrow.
The Washington proposal, in a major departure from Oregon's law, adds a layer of unprecedented deception by forcing doctors to lie about the cause of death. It requires that, when a patient dies after taking the prescription for assisted suicide, the physician "shall list the underlying terminal disease as the cause of death."Feeling better about being in America? Posted by Vanderleun at September 2, 2009 4:50 AM
As I recall, the Nazis favored euthanasia for the mentally handicapped and physically crippled, a position embraced by much of Germany's medical establishment. From there it was only a short step to the culling of other undesirable elements from society, including gypsies, homosexuals, political opponents and of course, Jews.
Winston Churchill is spinning in his grave.
Posted by: Jonathan at September 19, 2008 9:47 AMWon't be long before it will not only be our patriotic duty to pay more taxes, but our patriotic duty to die on demand when reaching old age.
It's astonishing that these people who celebrate the "modern," "advanced," "progressive" world-view would demand primitive solutions from our prehistoric past.
We should practice euthanasia on these monsters first, and cherish those who, despite their infirmities, have graced our lives for far more years than the number of "burdensome" years of their final days.
How long before other decrepit, monstrous, degenerate notions slither to the fore? Will NAMBLA speakers be at future conferences on social issues?
Posted by: Roderick Reilly at September 19, 2008 10:10 AMI can't help but note that this psychopath is 84 years old and seeming pretty demented if not suffering from dementia. I say she should take her own advice.
You may also remember a story from a few weeks (months?) back about the Oregon state health care system sending out letters denying patients possibly life saving treatment but offering, very generously I might add, to pay for euthanasia. So right now you get the option of doing the right thing and taking one for the team. I can only wonder how long until it becomes mandatory.
Posted by: Big E at September 19, 2008 10:13 AMPlaying God again, seems like. "Sorry, the godhead of Britain can't support your life any more..."
Socialism.
Posted by: RiverC at September 19, 2008 10:25 AMThank you for this thought-provoking piece. I find it interesting that the same people who have their views worked out on abortion and capital punishment give befuddled answers when asked who among the feeble should be "allowed to live" by the State.
Also curious how it is *always about funding*, as if this exonerates these death proponents of any serious moral contemplation. I believe the numbers show that this is, at most, a minor fiscal issue. Of course that depends on the breadth of one's study group...
Posted by: Hannon at September 19, 2008 11:39 AMDon't forget that one of the uglier things vomited up from the left regarding Trig Palin was that Sarah and Todd were being irresponsible to knowingly give birth to a Down Syndrome child.
And the Democratic candidate for President voted to keep passive infanticide legal in Illinois.
Posted by: Pastor Jeff at September 19, 2008 12:10 PMThis is not just a European phenomenon. Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton, has long advocated the murder of infants with handicaps. He's also big on "animal liberation." 'Nuff said.
Posted by: Jonathan at September 19, 2008 1:08 PM"""""And the Democratic candidate for President voted to keep passive infanticide legal in Illinois""""""
AND it should be noted that he framed his defense of his position in terms of saving such babies as being a waste of resources (i.e., it'll tie up TWO doctors instead of just one).
""""""Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton, has long advocated the murder of infants with handicaps. He's also big on "animal liberation." """""
Ah yes, Professor McCreepy himself. This goes to the foundation of what hard-core animal rights activists actually believe: They are NOT trying to raise animals to the level of humans, but rather, they are trying to LOWER humans to the level of other animals. Infanticide among animals is a "natural" practice.
Posted by: Roderick Reilly at September 19, 2008 1:19 PM""""""I find it interesting that the same people who have their views worked out on abortion and capital punishment give befuddled answers when asked who among the feeble should be "allowed to live" by the State."""""""
I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in noticing that grotesque double standard. Leave criminal monsters alive, but kill the inconvenient innocent.
Again, the greatest grotesquerie of all is that in the guise of "progressive" thought, these "enlightened" beings want to return us to our most primitive and barbaric state.
Posted by: Roderick Reilly at September 19, 2008 1:23 PM"""""""As I recall, the Nazis favored euthanasia for the mentally handicapped and physically crippled"""""""
They were inspired by the American progressives-led eugenics movement that preceded Nazism.
The Nazis were also inspired by the Bolsheviks' earlier creation of the Gulag to develop their own network of concentration camps. They synthesized their two borrowed concepts into one huge monstrosity.
Posted by: Roderick Reilly at September 19, 2008 1:28 PMC S Lewis saw this coming in the 1950's; unfortunately, we paid him insufficient attention.
Posted by: Dave in NC at September 19, 2008 1:43 PMWhen we come to this, what is there left?
The Washington Initiative proposal also to me suggests a tactic encouraging doctors to lie to their patients that they're "dying" of a false condition in order to rush them to be killed off as soon as possible. That's the other perspective in regards to lying about the cause of death. I went to the "Vote Yes" site for the initiative and a former teacher of mine supports this bill but of course not surprising of him considering I knew him to be extremely liberal. Even protesting against the WTO in Seattle back in 1999. But the state endorsing doctors to lie is appalling. I've already texted my dad to tell people to vote against this BS initiative that the state doesn't have the right to lie their ass off especially to my grandmother who is still alive today. My grandmother? Expendable? I don't think so. We've come to this crap today? It's just bullshit and should not be allowed. It's one thing if it's abortion regarding the sanctity of life but among those people who are not suffering of a painful condition and to sneak in this clause that encourages state murder to kill them off? Damn appalling alright.
Posted by: Kaitian at September 19, 2008 4:55 PMTHX1138, anyone? Why should we let anyone get to the old and feeble point, when 30 is suffcient?
Posted by: Sam L. at September 20, 2008 10:55 AMI's dumb, lemme see if I can git this straight: the lefties are advocating killing off those that are a financial burden, but they also want to expand welfare at every turn, taking more from the rich to support those that can't support themselves, right? But those that can't support themselves should be killed, right?
Are they creating a target rich environment?
Posted by: Russell at September 20, 2008 6:07 PMHopefully soon, before she does any more damage, this despicable woman Warnock will die of natural causes.
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
KILL all the old people
and the mentally ill
when they pay no more taxes
.
I hope it happens soon!
A madadory experation date.
It's a good idea.
People used to live to 25 then it became 35
Then 50 - It wasn't that long ago that used to be VERY rare.
Now 80, 90, 100 some guy was saying 150 might become common.
Enought is enought!
I am fifty and I say 75 and its over.
How much more would we do with our lifes if We KNEW that it would not go on forever.
The self-centered have been heard from so far here.
What about doing what is right for our world and the others on it.
An Upper limit on how old you can get
A Limit to the number of kids you can have in your life time.
I say, YES!
The time has come to stop acting like we don't know there are others on this world. Yeah, the I want to live forever crowd
What are you 12?
Nazi's That's your argument Nazi's Geese
The only psychopaths & demented ones here seem to be the ones saying one person living till 150 and another dying at 30 is "Natural"
Time to Nut up, Pull the boot straps up and know when its time to leave the game and give others a seat at the table.
Live Fast - Love Hard and Who wants to Live Forever
by the way being confined to a place and being poked, prodded and stuck an't living it's existance and those who force others to that existance.
Well I don't belive in an invisble papi in the sky but if I am wrong - let's hope they have there own little speacal plot of God's Green Acre
Posted by: Brad at April 24, 2009 3:13 AMWell, that'comment's a keeper if only for the sheer insane spew of it all.
Posted by: vanderleun at April 24, 2009 8:41 AMFew are ready to recognize that the rise of fascism and Naziism was not a reaction against the socialist trends of the preceding period but a necessary outcome of those tendencies.
It is no accident that Germany, the country that inaugurated the social security system, was the cradle of both Marxism and Naziism.
We did not want to understand the development which has produced totalitarianism because such an understanding might destroy some of the dearest illusions to which we are determined to cling--
Hayek and Mises
Gerard, what "Brad" doesn't realize in his ignorance is that the "life expectancy" statistics for ancient and medieval times are tremendously distorted by infant mortality, plagues, and wars. Humans on average lived into what we now consider late middle age throughout our history as Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
Posted by: Don Rodrigo at September 2, 2009 2:07 PMThe concept of leisure for the non-wealthy is only about 110 years old. By then, even the working class could take an excursion ferry from NYC to Massachussets or Rhode Island. Closer to home was Coney Island and Far Rockaway. This was a new concept for ordinary Americans and Europeans.
The concept of retirement for a majority of ordinary folk is mostly a post-WWII concept. The "Greatest Generation" and many of their Depression-Era parents are the first majority of senior Americans who could actually retire and have a substantial number of years of relative, if modest, leisure.
The whole point is that this was a fulfillment of the Pursuit of Happiness that may not have been anticipated by the Founding Fathers, but it is considered a priviledge that ordinary citizens could aspire to. And why not? They earned it from years of toil and hard work.
Now after this rather brief period in our history, we are to be considered "parasites" in our old age.
Posted by: Don Rodrigo at September 2, 2009 2:19 PMSolyent was "Green". Figures.
Jim
Sunk New Dawn
Galveston, TX
Of course, nobody in the USA media has addressed this, which is the true agenda. There are 78 million boomers headed to retirement and there is no way to pay for their benefits so the obvious and easiest path is to “kill them off” asap. Otherwise the next generations face 85% tax rates and the pols face riots… better to sacrifice the oldsters “for the common good”.
Coming soon…. constant media examples of oldsters living comfy contrasted with the younger generation (and future leaders) barely scratching by— to create that generational war and make the die-off more palatable.
The most dangerous human for the government would be the inventor/chemist who creates an effective life-extension technology…. now THAT would be a Disruptive Technology !
Posted by: Jeebus at September 3, 2009 12:15 AMMy father is 91 and my mom is 88 and they live independent, productive lives other than needing transportation help as they cannot drive due to health issues. Dad planned well for their future and they own their home and have health insurance that covers them beyond medicare.
They participate in their church, community, vote and work each day. They take complete care of their home, 1/2 acre yard, a bit of flower/vegetable garden. Dad makes furniture and wooden toys while Mom sews clothes and makes dolls with clothes which are then donated to
needy people identified through their church.
I dare anyone to tell me that they should be denied health care for their various age related
problems.
On September13, they will have been married for 75 years.
Our seniors are a national treasure. Their experience and advice in just getting through the 30's and WW II and beyond should be sought and used to help us make better decisions today.
Teri
HOME