Assisted-suicide activists always promise that strict guidelines will protect against abuse. It’s a big con. The guidelines are not really strict. They rely primarily on self-reporting. And they are meant to be temporary: As soon as political conditions permit, the access to doctor-prescribed death expands. Read More ›
But eliminating suffering is impossible. Not only is the goal Utopian, but it leads to ever-more-extreme distortions of decency and a collapse of public policy rationality—which ironically, can cause the very “evil” that suffering abolitionists yearn so desperately to prevent. Read More ›
I just hope that state’s legislators read this decision carefully because, as the paragraph I quoted above demonstrates, maintaining the law against assisted suicide serves and protects the general welfare and is in the public interest. Read More ›
A court has struck down a measure to expand euthanasia laws in the Netherlands. Activists wanted to make it legal for non-medical professionals to perform assisted suicide procedures. Read More ›
If we don’t change our current cultural trajectory we will end up in the same dark corner as Canada, the Netherlands, and Belgium. And the real danger to our cultural wellbeing is that the people who now complacently assume that such warnings are alarmist will be the ones applauding the loudest when that dark time comes. Read More ›
Some lines should never be crossed. Allowing doctors to kill patients during organ harvesting wouldn’t only be an acute threat to the sanctity of life, but I can think of no better way to sow mistrust in our health care system generally—and the lifesaving field of organ transplant medicine specifically. Read More ›
Canada has gone all in for euthanasia, and it is going to get worse now that the “strict guidelines to protect against abuse” — in the movement’s parlance — have expanded to people with chronic and disabling conditions, and will soon expand to those with dementia and mental illnesses. Read More ›
Back in the ’90s, the assisted-suicide movement tried to convince the Supreme Court to impose a Roe v. Wade–style decision for their cause that would circumvent the democratic process by imposing doctor-hastened death as a constitutional right. Read More ›
