Drug depressed patients to death?

[Melody]

Apparently I did not hear about this when it came out, maybe cause of the presidential campaigns?  Has anyone heard about this?

California plans to Drug depressed patients to death

Posted: August 29, 2008 .11:40 pm Eastern


By Bob Unruh © 2008 WorldNetDaily http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73786http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73786


Just as Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama was in Denver preaching to a crowd of thousands of fans about the "change" he wants to see in the United States, his party compatriots in the California Legislature were making a "change," by approving a controversial plan that would allow nurses to assist terminally ill patients with suicide.

"AB 2747 allows a physician assistant or a nurse to opine that a patient is 'terminal,' and then push for unnatural death by 'palliative sedation,'" said Randy Thomasson, chief of the Campaign for Children and Families shortly after the vote.

"Depressed patients who succumb to this pressure will be drugged unconscious and die from dehydration, usually within five to 10 days. Nothing in the bill prohibits this horror," he said.

Forty-two Democrats in California voted in favor of the plan: 30 Republicans and two Democrats opposed the plan.

"AB 2747 pushes suicide through the back door at the hands of non-physicians taking advantage of depressed patients," Thomasson said. His organization has been alerting Californians to raise their concerns about the plan for sudden death with floor alerts, phone calls and e-mails.

"AB 2747 cheapens the value of human life by endorsing suicide as an option. Gov. Schwarzenegger should pledge to veto this very dangerous bill," Thomasson said, describing how the author, Assemblywoman Pattie Berg of Eureka, "deceptively changed" the bill to appear that "voluntarily stopping of eating and drinking" and "palliative sedation" no longer were on a list of "symptom management" options.

But the final bill "is broad enough to easily include these suicide techniques," Thomasson said.

The specific references to those treatments simply were changed to "other clinical treatments useful when a patient is actively dying."

According to the CCF report, Assemblyman Van Tran of Costa Mesa warned the bill has no protections for patients "who could be mistakenly diagnosed as 'terminally ill' but would have many, many full years of life ahead."

"The bill does not otherwise attempt to expressly define terminal illness that each of these health care professionals would have to diagnose to trigger the offer of counseling end of life options. It is not clear why nurse practitioners and physician assistants could make such a significant diagnosis. It is further not clear from the bill how making such significant diagnoses on a case-by-case basis can be done by such practitioners and assistants based on so-called 'standardized procedures and protocols' not further defined by the bill. The potential effect of AB 2747 is extremely broad and could cause irrevocable harm."

Added Republican Doug La Malfa of Yuba City: "We really go down a slippery slope when we contemplate the ending of life in such a way that it could be coerced. You have people in a very precarious situation, in a very awkward situation, that when thrust upon them with options to end their life, you have people that may feel like they have no use anymore. They feel like they're not of value anymore, and that taking one of these options, they may feel, is the only way out, that they've become a burden to their family or to someone else. I would hate to put people in that kind of position. They're already feeling vulnerable, and now, confronted with ways to end your life – this is a very delicate and, I think, dangerous idea here. You could have people like heirs that are anxious to get the estate started and quietly coercing people into making decisions like this."

"Total sedation (TS) – called by some 'terminal sedation,' 'palliative sedation,' or 'slow euthanasia' – is a protocol recently added to the lexicon of contemporary medical interventions and is a construct actively promulgated by the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO)," wrote Dr. Howard M. Ducharme, past chair of the philosophy department at the University of Akron. "It is defined as 'the application of pharmacotherapy to induce a state of decreased or absent awareness (unconsciousness) in order to relieve the burden of otherwise intractable suffering. However, any quick acceptance of TS would be ill-advised because of the many 'devils in the details.'"

[Sis]

And just WHO gets to decide this?  The medical establishment or the patient?  My guess, if it's not stated, it will be the medical establishment.

[Charlene]

I don't know that I'd want my family member dehydrated, but you'd be surprised..or maybe not of how many family members want to give their dying family something to help them "relax".

I know this may come as a shock, but oh well. I've watched many people die a horrible death and sometimes I'm almost for it, then other times I'm not.

[Sis]

I don't know that I'd want my family member dehydrated, but you'd be surprised..or maybe not of how many family members want to give their dying family something to help them "relax".

I know this may come as a shock, but oh well. I've watched many people die a horrible death and sometimes I'm almost for it, then other times I'm not.

They're talking euthanasia, not comforting the dying.

[Brother Dad]

When our country endorses abortion it is a small step to beginning to  euthanize our senior citizens. 

[Charlene]

I don't know that I'd want my family member dehydrated, but you'd be surprised..or maybe not of how many family members want to give their dying family something to help them "relax".

I know this may come as a shock, but oh well. I've watched many people die a horrible death and sometimes I'm almost for it, then other times I'm not.

They're talking euthanasia, not comforting the dying.

I know that....I've given something to help "relax" and they die 30 minutes later....thats what I'm talking about. They relax so well that they pass. I'm not necessarily making them die, but it bothers me just the same.

[Brother Dad]

I am of course against euthanasia.  However I would like to say if a person is in their right mind and chooses not to eat or drink and request no tubes, then my law you can do nothing but maybe help them relax.  I knew a man that I worked for as a companion, he was 94 years old.  He had a right mind but his body was worn down.  He no longer could go like he once did.  He sty in a health care unit of a retirement home.  He was on an IV to help him stay hydrated.  He call his family in and ask that the IV be taken out and he be allowed to die.  He said if he was hungry he would eat, but did not want anyone to try and force him to eat or drink anything.   Since he was in his right mind, by law we had to just watch him die.  It took about two weeks, but no body did anything to speed it up.  It was no one could do nothing to slow it down.  He was talking up to a few hours before he passed away.

[Sis]

There's still a huge difference in killing a healthy person who is depressed and someone who is dying.

This reminds me of Hitler, too. He wanted to purify the race and get rid of anything that wasn't normal, including those were handicapped. Depressed people is only the beginning. Kill off the weak to save room for the "perfect" UGHHHHH!

[MelodyB]

I am of course against euthanasia.  However I would like to say if a person is in their right mind and chooses not to eat or drink and request no tubes, then my law you can do nothing but maybe help them relax.  I knew a man that I worked for as a companion, he was 94 years old.  He had a right mind but his body was worn down.  He no longer could go like he once did.  He sty in a health care unit of a retirement home.  He was on an IV to help him stay hydrated.  He call his family in and ask that the IV be taken out and he be allowed to die.  He said if he was hungry he would eat, but did not want anyone to try and force him to eat or drink anything.   Since he was in his right mind, by law we had to just watch him die.  It took about two weeks, but no body did anything to speed it up.  It was no one could do nothing to slow it down.  He was talking up to a few hours before he passed away.

So if you WILLINGLY dont eat and drink, and you are in your right mind, is that considered suicide? I mean like where God is concerned? I have always believed that if you commit suicide, you have a automatic ticket to Hell, and there is no hope of salvation for you anymore, because you have taken your own life, (murder is a sin) and if you murder yourself, you are dead so you cant repent.

(I know we went round and round on a subject like this last night, but again, this is what I have always believed and I wanna know for sure....I havent ever heard it taught or preached...I just wanna know your view on it.)

[Brother Dad]

Mel...I feel first of all I can be no ones judge.  But I would like to add that when a person commits suicide they are not in their right mind.  Nature itself teaches us to grasp for every breath if need be.  I will never judge someone who committed suicide as I would not know their state of mind.  I also feel when an old person who has no appetite chooses not to go against nature a lets nature take its course is not committing suicide. 

For years I heard the same arguments about people going to hell if they committed suicide , but I teach if their mind snapped then they were not accountable. I say once again they are in the hands of a just God. And we can discuss this more when you get here if you wish.

[MelodyB]

Hmmm...intresting. Yeah, we can talk about it later. I do better TALKING than I do writing it out, so we can discuss it when I get there.