That phrase was coined by Dr Kevin Fitzpatrick, a doctor in the UK who is part of the group, Not Dead Yet, and who noted,
"death in Belgium was now regarded 'as lightly as stepping off a bus'.
Well, for a variety of reasons a couple from Belgium (who are still at home, only suffering from age-related illnesses) have chosen their 64th wedding anniversary next February to end it all:
An elderly husband and wife have announced their plans to die in the world's first 'couple' euthanasia - despite neither of them being terminally ill. Instead the pair fear loneliness if the other one dies first from natural causes.
Identified only by their first names, Francis, 89, and Anne, 86, they have the support of their three adult children who say they would be unable to care for either parent if they became widowed.
Now that last line about the three children is curious, since the couple themselves were unable to find the right doctor to accomodate this wish. The children graciously took the time to make the arrangements, for which the parents are "grateful." This plan, they say, is necessary because of their myriad fears about the future: the cost of nursing homes, the incapacity of illness, the inability to choose this plan later if they were not still independent, but also the fears of how else to die:
He told Moustique, a Belgian online news service, that they eventually opted for euthanasia because they were too scared to attempt to commit suicide. 'It takes courage to jump from the 20th floor and I am unable even if I wanted to do it,' said Francis. 'It takes courage to hang, it takes courage to jump into the canal. But a doctor who makes you a shot and lets you gently fall asleep? It does not take courage.'
Evidently those three children have no fears about killing their parents, nor fears about the sort of self-reflection that would crystallise many frightful defects of character that would allow such an act. Rather the only thing they do fear is the prospect of rearrange their lives around the needs of the parents who took care of each of their needs for at least twenty years -- for that burden is the only horror in their minds.
Interestingly, there is something macabre about this case that grabs the attention -- even in a country that shrugs over euthanasia which occurs on a daily basis. It also brings to mind the excellent novel, Children of Men, by P. D. James (although I heard that the movie buried the larger point about fertility and dying). Below is a clip that includes a chilling commercial for the suicide drug, Quietus, for those who didn't choose to take part in the mass drownings that happened regularly (on barges with dinner, music, and dancing before the Big Event).
Kindly remember that actions that are shunned and discouraged happen rarely. Those that are indulged happen with greater frequency. And those that become commonplace may very well become mandatory once the horror has worn off. The people of Belgium have lost most of their distaste for euthanasia, and have instead adopted a distaste for suffering. It's a small step, this family reveals, from ending suffering to opting out at the mere thought of it, and what follows will be the pressure for everyone to follow suit: to save money, protect resources, and unburden the next generation.
The couple's daughter has remarked that her parents are talking about their deaths as eagerly as if they were planning a holiday.
John Paul said the double euthanasia of his parents was the 'best solution'.
'If one of them should die, who would remain would be so sad and totally dependent on us,' he said. 'It would be impossible for us to come here every day, take care of our father or our mother.'
The double euthanasia will not be first in Belgium, a country where an average of five people a day die by lethal injection.
Keep in mind the Scripture: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" (Isaiah 5:20). Thankfully, there is still much time for them to turn away from this deadly plan -- for every element of an authentic family bond cries against it.
From Benedict XVI “People have realized that the complete removal of the feminine element from the Christian message is a shortcoming from an anthropological viewpoint.
It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity."
Anger and Patrimony (from Donna) This is just another of the unintended consequences of the cultural acceptance of contraception and abortion! Men's sexuality has been robbed of its creative essence. It is now viewed as something that imposes a burden on women (when conception happens to occur), something used to control women or something that is purely recreational. Why would men bother?? In taking away their responsibility, we've also robbed them of their significance! In the big picture of humanity, men have been made into nothing more than a nuisance women have to figure out how to control in order to bring about the next generation. Men don't see it as their task to protect the vulnerable because they see themselves as the vulnerable ones. A few well preserved vials of sperm would make men entirely obsolete in the world's ethos today!!
Excellent, Dom! (from Teresa) That is astounding Robin, and good for you for standing up. At the heart of that matter, I think, is even worse than a gender mixing message. There is an increased sharper and sharper focus on the "self." Solid Catholic teaching returns our focus away from ourselves to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The original sin, Eve denied her womanhood when she desired to be like "gods." Since the only god she knew was the Father. Where was Adam? He stood impotent... in other words, they were divorced. There's a young girl at Robin's son's high school who was just told that she is the center of the universe and it's a tragic disservice to her.
Find the logic (from "me") Ditto what Mary said! A lot of high schools have very poor math and science depts, for boys and girls. I also am educated as a chemical engineer, but chose to teach the two years before we had children because its hours were more suited to spending time with children. (I was looking ahead). When it came time and I was pregnant with our first, I realized that I did not want to leave him with someone else, and was able to stay home full time. I am not sure it would have been that easy if we were used to another engineering income and not just a private school teacher income. Also some of my first job offers were out on oil rigs - I had no interest in that at all even though I enjoyed my engineering classes and did well in them. No one discouraged me from an engineering job, on the contrary I got a lot of flack for my decision not to pursue an engineering career.
Find the logic (from Mary) I've been lurking, but this is one that irritates me. Beats the heck out of me what these "barriers" are. I was educated as a chemical engineer, where 1/3 of our class was women. However, in electrical engineering, only 1 or 2 out of 30 were women. Is it possible that women are Just Not Interested in some areas? Nah, it must be The Man keeping us down so we must legislate (and, I agree -- when they say "legistlate", I hear "quota"). And actually, I have a friend that was also a chemical engineer. When she lost her job, she decided not to go back into engineering and started working from home so she could spend more time with her 3 kids. Also, if nothing else, there are all kinds of incentives for women to enter science and engineering -- scholarships not available to men, guaranteed housing on campuses that do not guarantee housing to the general population, etc. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that schools in general are not preparing students for the hard sciences. It is truly a sad state of affairs, the lack of science education these days.
Comments