Medical Committee Says There Was “No Reasonable Alternative” but Euthanasia for Dutch Toddler
A medical review committee in the Netherlands says there was “no reasonable alternative” but euthanasia for a two-year-old child — even though the child did not have a terminal illness — and determined that the physician who euthanized the child “acted with due care.”
The Netherlands first legalized assisted suicide and euthanasia in 2002, and the practice has expanded drastically over the years. In 2022, a staggering one out of every 20 deaths in the Netherlands were the result of euthanasia. The country has made headlines for letting “mobile euthanasia units” make house calls as well as for euthanizing people suffering from conditions like macular degeneration and mental illness.
But this month, the country drew attention after reports surfaced that a Dutch doctor euthanized a two-year-old child under the nation’s law.
The Dutch Assessment Committee for Late Termination of Pregnancy and Termination of Life in Newborns and Children Aged 1 to 12 Years reviewed the case and determined the doctor who euthanized the child had no other reasonable choices and acted appropriately.
The committee’s report indicated the child was born prematurely at 26 weeks and three days and suffered serious medical complications. The child suffered from brain damage, visual impairment, and epilepsy, which caused developmental delays and made it difficult for the child to communicate. The child’s doctor concluded the child had “a limited life expectancy, with no prospect whatsoever of a better quality of life.”
In other words, the child was euthanized despite not being terminally ill.
Obviously, the child’s medical condition was very serious, but that should not be a death sentence.
An English translation of the medical review committee’s report describes the euthanasia process in chilling detail:
“There are as yet no guidelines for performing the procedure for termination of life in children aged under 12. Based on the parents’ wishes, the physician opted for the method whereby the child was gradually placed under sedation. The physician began the sedation (lowering the level of consciousness) by administering increasing doses of midazolam and morphine through an IV cannula. The physician then administered coma-inducing substances (propofol and thiopental), after which the child reached a state of very deep sedation, and died.”
By now, there should be no doubt that when it comes to assisted suicide and euthanasia, the slippery slope keeps slipping.
Assisted suicide and euthanasia devastate families and rob patients of compassionate care.
In 2018, we shared news out of Belgium that euthanasia and assisted suicide are forcing hospice workers and other palliative care experts to quit. One Belgian doctor said, “palliative care units are . . . at risk of becoming ‘houses of euthanasia’, which is the opposite of what they were meant to be.”
Being pro-life means believing innocent human life is sacred from conception until natural death.
Just like abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are murder, and they violate the sanctity of human life.
That’s why Family Council helped defeat a very bad bill in 2019 that would have let doctors prescribe lethal drugs to patients in Arkansas and two bad end-of-life bills in 2021. These were flawed measures that fundamentally disrespected the right to life.
Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.
