FIND PAST HOMEPAGE TOPICS UNDER "CURRENT HEADLINES" IN THE LEFT MENU...

 Caring, and not convenience,
is the sign of a civilized and just society... [Ron Panzer]

NEW! Major Victory for Life in Europe: ‘Euthanasia Must Always be Prohibited’

NEW! POLST and the Euthanasia Movement

21-Year-Old Man Wakes from Coma Before Doctors Take His Organs

Doctors: Speak Out Against Assisted Suicide, Protect Patients

VSED: Voluntarily Stopping Eating & Drinking Orally - Death by Dehydration

Drugs That Wake the Minimally Conscious... 

Major Victory for Life in Europe: ‘Euthanasia Must Always be Prohibited’

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) adopted a non-binding resolution stating: “Euthanasia, in the sense of the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit, must always be prohibited.”

The purpose of the resolution, entitled “Protecting human rights and dignity by taking into account previously expressed wishes of patients”, defines the principles that should govern the practice of “living wills” or “advance directives” in the 47 States of the Council of Europe.

The European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) welcomed the adoption of the PACE resolution. “This Resolution is a major victory for the protection of life and dignity,” said ECLJ Director Grégor Puppinck.

Puppinck noted that because “living wills” or “advance directives” are open to abuses, and are a “backdoor” for introducing euthanasia or assisted suicide into legislation, PACE’s resolution was necessary.

The resolution is comprised of a list of principles already elaborated in three documents previously adopted in the Council of Europe, including the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention), which legally binds the majority of member States.

Another positive principle introduced by the Italian MP Mr Luca Volontè, states “in case of doubt, the decision must always be pro-life and in favour of the prolongation of life.”

Last year, on January 20th 2011, the European Court of Human Rights delivered a ruling (Haas versus Switzerland) that while there is a “human right” to suicide, the state has no obligation to provide citizens with the means to commit suicide.

Puppinck noted that although not legally binding on member states, the PACE resolution would nevertheless have a positive effect.  “It should have a direct impact on the upcoming judgment of the European Court in the case Koch v. Germany concerning the ban of assisted suicide in Germany,” he said.
 http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/major-victory-for-life-in-europe-euthanasia-must-always-be-prohibited?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=7430583f50-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines_01_26_2012&utm_medium=email



POLST and Euthanasia Movement
http://www.lifetree.org/newsletter/archive.html, a data base of the leaders and funders of the “third path” euthanasia movement  --http://www.lifetree.org/resources/funding.html, and LifeTree’s timeline of this movement -- www.lifetree.org/timeline (there is also a short 2-page version -- http://www.lifetree.org/timeline/EOLchronology.pdf).
 
One of the major tools of the “third path” euthanasia movement is the POLST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) form.   Just a few minutes ago I received a call from a reporter in Oregon saying the POLST form was sweeping the country and wanting to interview me.  I told him we have written and posted several articles about this form on our website.   POLST is particularly dangerous because it becomes “doctors orders” and is often filled out with the help of trained “facilitators” in so-called “end-of-life consulting sessions.”    You’ve heard them called “death panels.”
[23 Jan 12, LifeTree, www.lifetree.org]

21-Year-Old Man Wakes From Coma Before Doctors Take Organs
 A 21-year-old man has awakened from a coma just hours before doctors were ready to shut off life support and take his organs for donation purposes.

Sam Schmid, an Arizona college student who was thought to be brain dead, recovered from injuries sustained in an automobile accident in October just hours before he was slated to be killed and his organs given to other patients.

The accident took the life of his best friend and college roommate and Schmid’s injuries were thought to be so grievous that a local hospital could not treat him and he was sent to Barrow Neurological Institute at St. Joseph’s Medical Center in Phoenix to receive surgery for a life-threatening aneurysm.

As hospital officials began palliative care and talked with his parents about organ donation, Schmid began to hold up two fingers on command and started walking with the aid of a walker. Now, his speech has improved and doctors say he will have a complete recovery.
For remainder of article, visit -- http://www.lifenews.com/2011/12/22/21-year-old-man-wakes-from-coma-before-doctors-take-organs/




Doctors: Speak Out Against Assisted Suicide, Protect Patients

As physicians, we took an oath to strive, to the best of our abilities, to help patients and to make every reasonable effort to do no harm. Physician-assisted suicide is incompatible with that goal, and is the means to an end that we have no right to employ.

In Oregon (the first of only two states with legalized physician-assisted suicide), 17 percent of the 65 persons who chose physician-assisted suicide in 2010 indicated as a reason “not wanting to be a burden on family and friends.” Approximately 70 percent of persons who chose physician-assisted suicide in Oregon since 1998 were at least 65 years old.

Of concern when we consider this data is that there is a significant problem with elder abuse in America. Commonly, the perpetrators are relatives who potentially could have personal or financial interests in hastening the death of the family member.

Many proponents of physician-assisted suicide claim that poor pain control and intense suffering at the end of life are the reasons we should legalize this act.

However, Oregon data from 2010 indicates that only 10 percent of physician-assisted suicide patients report poor pain control as an end of life concern, down from the 22 percent who cited intractable pain as a reason from 1998 through 2009. This can be attributed to progressive advancements in palliative care and advanced methods of pain control.

Also in Oregon, about 94 percent of the time, people blamed “loss of autonomy and being less able to engage in activities making life enjoyable” as reasons to end their lives.

Many times these are signs of depression or other psychiatric conditions that may be treatable if accurately diagnosed. Some proponents say physician-assisted suicide is a route to autonomy.

What statement does that make about the human condition when suicide is necessary to achieve autonomy? The term “dignity” is often applied to the act of suicide, whether physician assisted or not. Webster’s defines dignity as “the quality or state of being worthy, honored or esteemed.” Does suicide warrant honor? Autonomy does not provide or relinquish dignity, or vice versa.

As we move into a world of reducing healthcare costs, there is a real risk that, if legalized, physician-assisted suicide could be used as a vehicle for significant financial savings in end-of-life medical expenses, an extreme case of health care rationing.

In fact, Medicare data reports that one-third of the yearly Medicare budget is used for patients in their last year of life. The Green Mountain Care Board has been formed by the Shumlin administration and has been tasked to design a universal health care system for Vermont by 2014, which cannot be successful without significant cost containment.

Surprisingly, this has already happened to a 53 year-old in Oregon without health insurance with advanced prostate cancer who received a letter stating that the state would pay for physician-assisted suicide but not for the costly treatment of his cancer.

Obviously, this is not the forum for a long discussion on the topic, but we hope to stimulate more thought and questions about the stark realities of physician assisted suicide. Adopting a controversial practice of this magnitude comes with a frightening array of intended and worse yet, unintended consequences.

The most important thing missing from the recent data collected by the Oregon Dept. of Health is the voice of the patient and their personal experience. It is important for all Vermonters to know that this has not been decided in our state and that those against this practice need to speak out and be active in the opposition of this dangerous and unethical option. We are adding our voice to the many others who have vigorously opposed this practice.

[Brian Cunningham, M.D. | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 12/13/11, http://www.lifenews.com:80/2011/12/13/doctors-speak-out-against-assisted-suicide-protect-patients/ ; LifeNews Note: Brian Cunningham is a Bennington, Vermont physician. This originally appeared as a letter to the editor to the Rutland Herald newspaper and Cunningham signed the letter with nine other physicians.]
http://www.lifenews.com:80/2011/12/13/doctors-speak-out-against-assisted-suicide-protect-patients/

VSED: Voluntarily Stopping Eating & Drinking Orally - Death by Dehydration

VSED does not refer to tube feeding. It is about a person (old, young, healthy, or sick) who stops taking food and fluids orally. Its purpose is specific: to cause death.
It's shocking, but true, that euthanasia and assisted-suicide advocates are promoting this as an "option" for anyone, for any reason. They are distributing brochures, primarily to seniors, letting them know that -- if they are tired of living or cannot do some of the things they could do when they were younger -- they can legally use VSED to end their lives. And recently, articles in newspapers, law journals, and medical journals have begun to promote VSED.

Euthanasia proponents are telling people across the country that not only is VSED an "option", but that doctors should inform patients about this and assist them in alleviating the [painful] symptoms of starvation and dehydration if they decide to die by not eating or drinking.

What happens when someone who is sick or is vulnerable to suggestion talks to her doctor, looking for medical relief or advice and, instead, is told that she should consider VSED?

A comment made by Helga Kuhse at a 1984 World Federation of Right to Die Society's Conference in Nice, France, sheds some light on the push for VSED. {Kuhse was then a colleague of Peter Singer at Monash University in Australia. Both Kuhse and Singer had advocated ending the lives of disabled newborns. Since then, Singer has moved on to become the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University.)

At that conference, Kuhse had noted that death can be accomplished by dehydration and went on to say that, once people see how painful death by starvation and dehydration is, then, "in the patient's best interest" they will accept the lethal injection.

When I included her remarks in my book Deadly Compassion, she tried to deny making them, but I had attended the conference and had heard her say it. In addition, I had the audio tape of her conference presentation.

In the years since Kuhse make her remarks, VSED has largely flown under the radar.

But now, Compassion and Choices [ed. previously the Hemlock Society] has launched an actual campaign for it. They call is "Peace at Life's End, Anywhere". (They do have a way with words, don't they?)

... How many vulnerable people -- particularly seniors -- will be urged to use this "option"? 
And I wonder how many nursing home patients will die from this...

Unless we publicize what is happening, the numbers may be great.
What can we do to stop this? Two things:

1. Be Informed. You can become more informed by reading the Update ... and the upcoming booklet, "Illegal for Animals, Legal for People". This booklet will explain VSED in detail. [Also, Human Life Alliance has just released their "Imposed Death" supplement which gives a very good overview of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Both websites are located at the end of this article.]

2. Take Action: Educate others by writing letters to the editor. (Did you know that the "letters to the editor" section is the most read part of any newspaper or magazine?)

Patients Rights Council has a function on the website that you can use to send letters directly to publications in your local area and nationally. You can get more details at the website. By working together, we can protect patients' rights.

Resources:
Patients Rights Council -- http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org 
Human Life Alliance -- http://www.humanlife.org 
[30 Sept 11, Patients Rights Council letter]

Drugs That Wake the Minimally Conscious
Comment: Note these quotes: "Only now, more than a decade after the initial discovery, are they taking a closer look." "According to several studies, about 40 percent of patients who have been declared vegetative are actually minimally conscious." and " It is not uncommon for doctors to assume the worst and advise family members to withdraw care early. They do so in part because they see their duty as helping loved ones face reality."
   This is what many of us who have worked with such patients have been saying for decades.
   Unfortunately, don't expect things to change anytime soon. Note this quote: " Still, it's unclear whether even the most aggressive care will make much difference for many patients. 'The payers need a better sense of what the likely outcome is for any given patient,' says Tom Smith, program director at Moss, 'so that they can say with confidence which patients are likely to benefit from treatment, and how significant that benefit is likely to be. And I hate to sound this way, but then it's basically: 'Am I going to invest this amount of money to get this outcome? Is that worth it?' And that is a tough, tough question to answer.'
   The real answer to that question is the same one my friend Marcia and I gave to a Missouri state legislator during the Nancy Cruzan travesty in the late 1980s. He asked us to give him one good reason to keep Nancy alive with her tube feedings. "At least we won't have killed her, sir" we responded.
   This answer infuriated the legislator but it is true that only by following the basic ethical principle of not deliberately ending life that we can scientific breakthroughs like this. N Valko RN

Drugs That Wake the Minimally Conscious

...A growing body of case reports suggests that the popular sleep aid can have a profound 'and paradoxical' effect on patients like Chris. Rather than put them to sleep, both Ambien and its generic twin, zolpidem, appear to awaken at least some of them.

The early reports were so pronounced that until recently, doctors had a hard time believing them. Only now, more than a decade after the initial discovery, are they taking a closer look.

The first report of a zolpidem awakening came from South Africa, in 1999. A patient named Louis Viljoen, who, three years before, was declared vegetative after he was hit by a truck, had taken to clawing at his mattress during the night. Thinking he was suffering from insomnia, his family doctor suggested zolpidem to help him sleep. But 20 minutes after his mother ground the tablet up and fed it to him through a straw, Viljoen began to stir. His eyes, which normally wandered the room, vacant and unfocused, flickered with the light of consciousness. And then he began to talk (his first words were 'Hello, Mummy'), and move (he could control his limbs and facial muscles). A few hours later he became unresponsive. But the next day, and for many days after that, zolpidem revived him, a few hours at a time.

Here was a case worthy of Hollywood: three years was well past the point at which doctors would expect any sort of spontaneous recovery. Viljoen awoke with the ability to speak in complete sentences. Not only did he recognize his mother, but he also recognized the voices of people who had spoken to him only when he was apparently vegetative. He remembered nothing of the mysterious realm he kept receding back into. When doctors asked him what it was like to slip away, he said he felt no changes at all. But he could recall conversations from the previous day's awakening, along with bits and pieces of his former life: his favorite rugby team, specific matches he attended, players that he rooted for and against. As time passed, his cognition improved. He could laugh at jokes, and his awakenings stretched from a few hours to entire days. Eventually, he no longer needed zolpidem.

In the years that followed, a steady trickle of similar reports emerged, some from doctors who tried zolpidem after hearing about the Viljoen case, others from those who discovered its benefits accidentally, as Viljoen's doctor had. The drug did not work for everyone, and even when it did, its effects typically wore off after an hour or two. But for a lucky few, those effects were profound. People who seemed vegetative for years were waking up.

There are roughly 200,000 patients in the United States trapped in the borderlands between consciousness and oblivion. Until recently, most doctors believed that recovering from this condition was not possible. Vegetative states were considered permanent after three months if the injury was caused by oxygen deprivation, or one year if it was caused by blunt trauma. And since minimally conscious patients did not fare much better than those who were vegetative, most doctors did not bother to draw the distinction.

But in the past decade, a series of developments have coalesced into a far more complicated picture than previously imagined. In 2003, an Arkansas man named Terry Wallis emerged, after 19 years, from a minimally conscious state. Neuroimaging suggested that his brain had essentially reconfigured itself  surviving neurons bypassed dead ones and forged new connections to one another. In a 2007 Nature paper, Nicholas Schiff, a neurologist from Weill Cornell Medical College, and his colleagues showed that deep brain stimulation - surgically implanting a 'brain pacemaker' that sends electrical impulses to specific regions of the brain - can help some severely injured patients recover the ability to speak and eat, years after the injury. And just this month, Adrian Owen, a British neuroscientist, reported in the journal The Lancet that the brains of some patients who seemed vegetative responded to basic commands: their bodies didn't move, but distinct patterns of neuronal firing were detected on EEG scans when these patients were told to make a fist (which triggered one region of the premotor cortex) or wiggle their toes (which triggered another).

This year, scientists at Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute and at the University of Pennsylvania, both in the Philadelphia area, began the first large-scale clinical study of zolpidem as a treatment for disorders of consciousness. (Amantadine, a drug used to treat Parkinson's disease, and the anti-anxiety medication Ativan also show promise in increasing awareness in minimally conscious patients.)

So far, the evidence suggests that less than 10 percent of brain-injured patients will experience the drug's paradoxical effects, and that among those, only a few will respond as profoundly as Viljoen did...

For families like the Coxes, such odds provide a tortured kind of hope. For doctors, they bring questions. Why does a sleeping pill induce awareness in some patients but not others? And what can these bizarre awakenings tell us about the brain's ability to heal?...

The only way to know the outcome is to give the patient time.

But offering time is a complex proposition. 'Early on, when families have the option to pull the plug, it's almost impossible to tell what the long-term prognosis will be,' says Dr. Soojin Park, a neurointensivist at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital, and an investigator on the zolpidem trial.

...It is not uncommon for doctors to assume the worst and advise family members to withdraw care early...

According to several studies, about 40 percent of patients who have been declared vegetative are actually minimally conscious. Other studies have shown that a surprising number of vegetative and minimally conscious patients made huge strides toward recovery much later [after the initial accident] than conventional wisdom would predict.

Park says that more doctors are trying drug therapy on vegetative and minimally conscious patients, but for the most part, they are groping in the dark. 'We still don't understand which drugs should work on which patients, or at what dosage, or at what point in their recovery,' she says. 'And that makes it tough for families to know when they should fight and when they should give up.'

... The reports on zolpidem are still mixed. Viljoen and a few others have improved steadily over time; some of them are now fully conscious on their own, without medication. (Viljoen is confined to a wheelchair and has cognitive disabilities but has improved over the years.) But such improvement is rare. According to Whyte, most responders fall into one of two categories: those who can take zolpidem daily, with no appreciable loss of efficacy, and those for whom the 'awakenings' wane with continued use. The latter type, he says, may be the most common ...

[1 Dec 11, Jeneen Interlandi, Entire article at -- http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/magazine/can-ambien-wake-minimally-conscious.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print ; Jeneen Interlandi lives in New Jersey and writes frequently about science and medicine. Editor: Vera Titunik]