3 ms·

Hmm, a miscarriage is not an intentional act, whereas there is intention in this case. It is moreso analagous to someone at planned parenthood not authorizing a

Hmm, a miscarriage is not an intentional act, whereas there is intention in this case. It is moreso analagous to someone at planned parenthood not authorizing an abortion but providing either direct or indirect assistance for the woman to perform the abortion herself.

ajross 7y ago
I'm sorry, what on earth is "indirect assistance" to someone refusing to eat? What people seem to be conflating here is the idea of involuntary care and "euthanasia". It's true that sometimes courts will allow doctor's to force-feed patients through an IV. For various reasons (I'm no expert on Danish medical law) that didn't happen here. And that is a controversial area of medical ethics and worth discussing calmly and rationally. But to freak out, shriek on social media and HN, and call this "euthanasia" is straight up ridiculous spin. And the ONLY reason this story even has legs is because of the facility. If this happened in a hospital it would be a routine tragedy and not a political flytrap for right wing moralists.
- candiodari 7y ago
  > I'm sorry, what on earth is "indirect assistance" to someone refusing to eat? Making them comfortable. Taking care of other needs (washing, teeth, ...). Some level of pain medication. General support. > It's true that sometimes courts will allow doctor's to force-feed patients through an IV Which did happen in this case by the way (with a stomach probe not with an IV). For years. Including months spent by this girl in isolation cells. > routine tragedy and not a political flytrap for right wing moralists. I'm not sure I've seen this used as a right wing moral cause (I don't understand why you'd say this, it's not about immigration, it's not about money, ...). Or if it's just that the state and the help system spectacularly failing this girl (in fact arguably causing her suicidal tendencies while attempting to solve other problems with brutal repression). Yeah perhaps. It did happen though.
  - ajross 7y ago
    All of which are excellent moral questions and absolutely worth debating without senselessly and incorrectly accusing the Dutch (I wrote Danish above, sorry) government of euthanizing teenagers. If you want to talk about care, talk about care. Medical ethics is a hard problem.
    - candiodari 7y ago
      Several of the government's decisions relating to locking up this girl were very likely taken for financial reasons, where brutal repression against the will of the girl and the parents was used to avoid difficulties for government employees or even purely for financial reasons of institutions. There is a very good basis in this case to accuse the Dutch government, more specifically the Dutch youth care system, even of murdering this girl. By torturing her for years, at times for self-serving reasons, until she took her own life.

ajross 7y ago

I'm sorry, what on earth is "indirect assistance" to someone refusing to eat? What people seem to be conflating here is the idea of involuntary care and "euthanasia". It's true that sometimes courts will allow doctor's to force-feed patients through an IV. For various reasons (I'm no expert on Danish medical law) that didn't happen here. And that is a controversial area of medical ethics and worth discussing calmly and rationally. But to freak out, shriek on social media and HN, and call this "euthanasia" is straight up ridiculous spin. And the ONLY reason this story even has legs is because of the facility. If this happened in a hospital it would be a routine tragedy and not a political flytrap for right wing moralists.

candiodari 7y ago
> I'm sorry, what on earth is "indirect assistance" to someone refusing to eat? Making them comfortable. Taking care of other needs (washing, teeth, ...). Some level of pain medication. General support. > It's true that sometimes courts will allow doctor's to force-feed patients through an IV Which did happen in this case by the way (with a stomach probe not with an IV). For years. Including months spent by this girl in isolation cells. > routine tragedy and not a political flytrap for right wing moralists. I'm not sure I've seen this used as a right wing moral cause (I don't understand why you'd say this, it's not about immigration, it's not about money, ...). Or if it's just that the state and the help system spectacularly failing this girl (in fact arguably causing her suicidal tendencies while attempting to solve other problems with brutal repression). Yeah perhaps. It did happen though.
- ajross 7y ago
  All of which are excellent moral questions and absolutely worth debating without senselessly and incorrectly accusing the Dutch (I wrote Danish above, sorry) government of euthanizing teenagers. If you want to talk about care, talk about care. Medical ethics is a hard problem.
  - candiodari 7y ago
    Several of the government's decisions relating to locking up this girl were very likely taken for financial reasons, where brutal repression against the will of the girl and the parents was used to avoid difficulties for government employees or even purely for financial reasons of institutions. There is a very good basis in this case to accuse the Dutch government, more specifically the Dutch youth care system, even of murdering this girl. By torturing her for years, at times for self-serving reasons, until she took her own life.