.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Human rights and bioethics updates

A blog dedicated to updating you upon legislation and ethical debates around human rights (principally under the angle of law-enforcement forces) and bioethics (under the angle of the protection of vulnerable persons). You are welcome to leave your comments on any of the posts!

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

The French version of this blog is published

A short update: there is now a French language version of this blog. It is available at this URL: http://aurore-europe.blogspot.com It will contain more or less the same information as on this blog. What changes: the language. It might be of an easier access for those of you who are French-speaking.

Another controversial event around the end of life

In Belgian newspapers another shocking story has been published. A premature child seems to have been deprived of care immediately after his birth, on the order of his parents who wished not to bear the risk of a handicap. The child was aged 7 months and a half (less than 30 weeks old). According to sources near to the inquiry and quoted by the Belgian French-speaking newspaper La Libre Belgique the child could live, provided that he was given adequate care. The parents refused (before the birth) that their child be given whatever care, and thus the baby died about 4 hours later. A confirmed gynecologist, an assistant stagiaire in gynecology and a person responsible for births were present, but none of these persons followed traditional ethical, deontological and legal guidelines. Their intervention against the opinion of the parents was warranted by law, but they did not act.

It ought to be precised that we are not speaking here of euthanasia, but of interruption of care, which is another question. However, in the present case, this interruption was not warranted according to the King's prosecutor of Namur.

To get more information, read the two articles published in La libre Belgique of 21/02/2002 here: http://www.lalibre.be/article.phtml?id=10&subid=90&art_id=207260

And the follow-up article published today, here:
http://www.lalibre.be/article.phtml?id=10&subid=90&art_id=207504

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

A judicial decision in France on "double effect" medications

Another important news which appeared in today's (16/02/05) French newspaper Le Monde was the decision of a French investigating magistrate (juge d'instruction) of innocenting a doctor who was accused of euthanizing 9 patients in 2000. This decision was officially published (an exceptional measure by French standards for decisions by investigating judges).

In the case, Dr. Joel de Bourayne, a cardiologist, was accused of having administered "sedating cocktails" to his patients, i.e. DLP cocktails (made out of Dolosal an opioid pain-killer, of Largactyl, a tranquilizer and Phénergan , a sedative). The doctor maintained that he had been only applying the doctrine of "double effect" medications (the first, most important effect is that of allievating pain, the second can be that of shortening life for the patient). In this case, the news came to the open only after a member of the personel spoke out, according to the judge, by vengeance. According to this decision, the "double-effect" medications were used in an optic of palliative care. You may read a resume (in French) on the site of Le Monde : http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3226,36-398278,0.html

Since I do not know precisely the facts of the case, I cannot validly express an opinion. However a couple of remarks might be interesting:

1° The "cocktail" of medicaments used is not a "lytic cocktail", since it does not provoke death in itself (except when there is overdose). It might be, in fact, case of "double effect" medication.

2° This case will probably be used by euthanasia proponents to maintain confusion between what they call "passive euthanasia" (which ranges widely from abstaining from curing some illness, to double-effect medication in passing by switching off a respirator), and active euthanasia (deliberately injecting a substance to a patient, in order to provoke his death).

The causes for police violence... A special Belgian approach to police alcoholism

In the course of my studies on the internal rules applying to police in Belgium, I came across to a Belgian project of Code of deontology which has some very interesting articles. Before reading that document which is only a project (and requires knowledge of French or Dutch), I suggest you however to log on to this site of Pr. O'Connor & Craven who have a course at the North Carolina Wesleyan College on "Police in society" and a special chapter dedicated to "police deviance". I suggest your reading the part "Drinking & drugs abuse on or off duty". The lecturer stresses that "there are endless opportunities to drink or take drugs while on duty (...) and the reasons for it are many: to get high, addiction, stress, burnout, or alienation from the job. (...) It sets a bad example for public relations. It will affect judgment, and lead to the greater likelihood of deadly force or traffic accidents".

That is setting the framework of the consequences of alcohol abuse. Now, in France (and in Belgium, of course), there is a certain reticence to consider the effects of alcohol on the behaviour of police, though the rules are clear: no alcohol while on duty. There is a subculture of heavy drinking among the oldest policemen, subculture which has had its use for the police authorities: riot policemen are certainly more keen on beating demonstrators after having had some alcohol to keep their spirits up... But since alcohol is a problem, and since it often is used to mask the use of drugs, authorities are starting to take interest into that problem. Some recent incidents (on the 17th October 2004, a policeman killed one of his colleagues in the police precinct of the city of Nantes in France) have prompted a heightened repression for alcohol on duty. Read for instance the article of the French newspaper Le Monde over here for an update on internal sanctions in the National Police in France.

But this lengthy introduction was essentially meant to attract your attention on the article 42 of the Belgian project of Deontology Code for policemen. This article foresees that while policemen cannot consume alcohol on duty, the chief of service may authorise "for exceptional circumstances" a consumption of alcohol. Even if it is precised that this authorisation may not cover up "any abuses", it is easy to conceive a police commissionner authorising his men to drink alcohol while they are expecting a demonstration in overheated vans. The fact that drunk policemen are more easily violent, probably does not enter into account... That disposition is the door open to all abuses and should be stricken down from the code!

In a conclusion, we might thus notice the instrumental use of alcohol to control policemen... at the cost of the security of citizen.

Some comments on copyright and the use of online resources...

While I am updating my blog some words on copyright... but don't get afraid! According to the laws on copyright, whether in the States or in Europe, you are allowed to freely quote short extracts (what actually is short...) provided that you quote the source. As far as I am concerned, this blog having a scientific aim, I don't mind your quoting the whole blog, as long as you mention your source! The next update today will target the question of police alcoholism... as a cause of police violence.

Monday, February 14, 2005

An article on the Dutch taste for euthanasia...

While surfing on the site of the IAETF (International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force), http://www.internationaltaskforce.org , I found an interesting link to an opinion column by Bob Barr (a former Republican representative of Georgia, US), "Euthanasia... or a Dutch treat". You can read it here: http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20041226-123251-5015r.htm

His parallel with involuntary commitment to psychiatric asylums seems to me quite illustrative and striking of the way in which bioethics and basic human rights tend to interact always more today. When Barr stresses that the preservation of life is the paramount objective of any doctor, that lets me think about my own studies of bioethics in a Catholic university (the UCL as mentionned in my previous post). Well, "Catholic university" evokes Evangelium vitae, and its worry for the preservation of life... But I had it all wrong. I shared some courses of ethics with students in their third year of medicine. The first thing lecturers told them was to forget about preserving life at all costs! There was no mystery that one of the above-mentioned lecturers was a strong proponent of active euthanasia within this "Catholic" hospital. Thus, doctor students have their whole concepts of saving life taken away from them and replaced with such abstract and contextually dangerous notions as preseving the autonomy of the patient, cost compression, economy of health care... at the end, the young students are ready to euthanize any patient who is feeling pain and who asks an euthanasia because his pain is not adequately treated!

Is this type of very special lessons being given also in other faculties of medicine, around the world, or is that specific to the "land of compromise", Belgium?... and its sister, Netherlands.

Tuesday, February 08, 2005

Fighting against euthanasia in Europe: a fight lost in advance?

Fighting against euthanasia in Europe: Belgium on the path of nazi Germany?


Welcome to this new blog. As indicated, it will be consecrated to questions of human rights and bioethics in Europe. The author is a law graduate and has a diploma in biomedical ethics from the "Catholic University of Louvain-la-neuve" (UCL - Belgium). He has also studied human rights and canon law in the framework of his studies.

The aim of this blog is to give you up to date information on all latest developments in law and discussions on Human rights (especially from the point of view of the action of police and law-enforcement forces) and on bioethics (where we shall specialize on the question of vulnerable persons and their protection in today’s society).

You can visit regularly this blog to keep up to date with our latest articles. Today, the question considered will be the subject of euthanasia in Europe, and more particularly in Belgium. Active euthanasia has been depenalised (actually legalised) in Belgium since the Act of 28 May 2002 relating to euthanasia (M.B., 22 June 2002). If you understand French or Dutch, you can research the act on this site of the Belgian government: http:/www.moniteur.be

The situation of euthanasia in Belgium has been getting even worse since a new bill was introduced in July 2004 by senators Jeanine Leduc and Paul Wille, preconising involuntary euthanasia (euthanasia which is not asked for by persons having the capacity to decide for themselves) for patients suffering of dementia or minors (children). Have a look at that bill on the site of the Belgian Senate over here: http://www.senate.be/wwwcgi/get_pdf?50332915

The legalisation of euthanasia in two countries of Europe (Belgium and the Netherlands) is caused by a growing movement of anti-religious lobbying, and of lay militantism which often negates to its opponents any right to fundamental freedoms recognized by the European convention of Human rights.

This saddening evolution of « old Europe » took place in Belgium because the Belgian society is based on compromise as a political system. Hence, according to Bishop André-Mutien Léonard of Namur, the Belgian society and the Belgian Catholic Church have not discussed to the bottom the implications of legalising euthanasia (Dimanche Catholic newspaper, dated 13/02/2005).

In our opinion, if the bill of Leduc and Wille was to be approved, it would mean that Belgium is being directed on the path that was once followed by nazi Germany, when they "euthanized" people who were mentally ill, and “non-productive” beings. The essence of the debate around euthanasia amounts to this: are we willing to be a humane society with enough time and incentive to take care of the weakest among us? Belgium and the Netherlands seem to have already replied by the negative, and the few opponents who are still present in those two countries seem to have chosen silence, instead of fighting strongly those terrible deviations.


An article published in 2003 in the French Jésuit publication Esprit wrote then about the sick person being transferred to palliative care: "the status of this patient is now commanded by his end", in that most services sought to get rid of their dying patients. At the same time, continued the article, there is a "psychologisation of death", the patient being viewed as a victim of his fate. And the author pointed out the practices of medical teams which increase brutally the doses after a patient has been viewed by the palliative care team. Hence the dying patient became, in a way, a "Job" who received from his doctors only unsatisfying replies (R.W. HIGGINS, "L’invention du mourant. Violence de la mort pacifiée", Esprit, January 2003, p. 139-168).

If you are interested in having a complete survey on the situation of euthanasia and assisted suicide around the world, then visit this site: http://www.internationaltaskforce.org/
An American site, it has regularly updated information and scientific comments.







Google

















Web


dawnofeurope.250free.com


dawnofeurope.blogspot.com