The Sunday Times March 05, 2006
Holland to allow ‘baby euthanasia’
Matthew Campbell, Groningen

WHEN Frank and Anita’s daughter Chanou was born with an extremely rare, incurable illness in August 2000, they knew that her life would be short and battled against the odds to make it happy.

They struggled around the clock against their baby’s pain. “We tried all sorts of things,” said Anita, a 37-year-old local government worker. “She cried all the time. Every time I touched her it hurt.”

Chanou was suffering from a metabolic disorder that had resulted in abnormal bone development. Doctors gave her no more than 30 months to live. “We felt terrible watching her suffer,” said Anita at their home near Amsterdam. “We felt we were letting her down.”

Frank and Anita began to believe that their daughter would be better off dead. “She kept throwing up milk that was fed through a tube in her nose,” said Anita. “She seemed to be saying, ‘Mummy, I don’t want to live any more. Let me go’.”

Eventually, doctors agreed to help the baby die at seven months. The feeding was stopped. Chanou was given morphine. “We were with her at that last moment,” said Anita. “She was exhausted. She took a very deep last breath. It was so peaceful. It made me feel at peace inside to know that she wasn’t suffering any more.”

Even so, they felt that the suffering had gone on too long. Child euthanasia is illegal in Holland and doctors were afraid of being prosecuted. “It was a long road to find the humane solution that we reluctantly decided we wanted,” said Frank, a bank worker.

Each year in Holland at least 15 seriously ill babies, most of them with severe spina bifida or chromosomal abnormalities, are helped to die by doctors acting with the parents’ consent. But only a fraction of those cases are reported to the authorities because of the doctors’ fears of being charged with murder.

Things are about to change, however, making it much easier for parents and doctors to end the suffering of an infant.

A committee set up to regulate the practice will begin operating in the next few weeks, effectively making Holland, where adult euthanasia is legal, the first country in the world to allow “baby euthanasia” as well.

The development has angered opponents of euthanasia who warn of a “slippery slope” leading to abuses by doctors and parents, who will be making decisions for individuals incapable of expressing a will.

Others welcome more openness about a practice that, according to doctors, goes on secretly anyway — even in Britain — regardless of the law. “It is a giant step forward and we are very happy about it,” said Eduard Verhagen, clinical director of paediatrics at the University Medical Centre in Groningen, northern Holland.

Rest of article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2069963,00.html)

My heart goes out to the parents of the poor little girl. How terrible it must be to see your child like this, knowing that there is nothing to be done, to ease the suffering. I think I speak for all parents, when I say that this is every mom and dad's deepest fear.

Yet, I find this statement from the article disturbing too:

The development has angered opponents of euthanasia who warn of a “slippery slope” leading to abuses by doctors and parents, who will be making decisions for individuals incapable of expressing a will.

I'm wondering if there's a middle ground with this?
Perhaps when the child gets older, and can make or express a desire to end their own life--I would have an easier time with this. As it stands now, it appears that others are deciding what suffering is, when the patient himself is unable to do so. This seems extreme.

Originally posted by rendova
Yet, I find this statement from the article disturbing too:

The development has angered opponents of euthanasia who warn of a “slippery slope” leading to abuses by doctors and parents, who will be making decisions for individuals incapable of expressing a will.

I'm wondering if there's a middle ground with this?
Perhaps when the child gets older, and can make or express a desire to end their own life--I would have an easier time with this. As it stands now, it appears that others are deciding what suffering is, when the patient himself is unable to do so. This seems extreme.

People are called on to make those decisions every day, although mostly for older people. Medical powers of attorney often obligate one person to make the decisions for another, including when to withhold treatment and allow someone to die. Often it is children making the decisions for a parent, or a spouse making the decision for their mate at a time when the patient can't do so for themself.
The Terry Schaivo case might indicate how difficult and contentious the decision can be. I think that it is never easy to let someone you love go, but it must be done sometimes. I think the best person to make the decision is always the patient, but there are situations when patients can't do that. In those cases, someone else must decide. It is a heartbreaking and difficult decision, but sometimes the best decision in a hopeless case is to end the suffering.

Yes, that's true, and I can't imagine having to make a harder decision.
But, and this is for the sake of argument, didn't Terri Schiavo make her desires known to her husband--that, if ever a vegetable, she would not want to live?
Her husband said so, and i believe that this entire case rested on that--a decision that Terri herself had made.

Also, in cases of older or other terminal patients, don't they expressly tell the doctors/caregivers/families--no extraordinary measures? In case it looks hopeless? I believe that this must be put in writing--could be wrong.

I guess what I'm getting at it--these people were able to make their wishes known. An infant/young child is not. To me, this seems very wrong.

Here's a link to medical power of attorney, from the Texas Medical Association. I'd imagine other states have similar guidelines.

http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=65

I agree that it is different to make the decision for an infant. An adult can make their wishes known, and even if they haven't done so, they are at least a known person. It may be possible to guess what they would want.
A baby can't have made such a decision. They do not know enough to make any informed decision for themself. TYhe decisiopns must be made by the parents. It is difficult at best to know what to do. To make a child sufffer needlessly is cruel. If there is no hope for survival, a swift and painless end might be the best thing. Only the parents should make such a decision. It should never be easy, but only a last and final mercy for a loved child.

Sometimes death is the most humane option

I had a cousin years ago who had to make a decision to end her baby's suffering. The baby was born terribly sick and she seemed to never get better. It was heartbreaking to see this baby in and out and in so much pain. I know my cousin would have taken her daughter's place in a heartbeat if she could have. At one point it got really, really bad and her brain was swelling and it wouldn't go down. She just kept getting worse and worse. Her and her husband made the hard decision to turn off the machines. I'm sure she's not suffering now. It's taken my cousin years to heal from this.

I just wonder though if there will be doctors who will almost abuse this power. Are there going to be some doctors who say take the child out just so he/she can make some money? Are there going to be some parents who have a child who has a disease (that can be dealt with) but they want to kill the child anyways because the baby isn't perfect? But to see a child suffer for weeks and months on end, with no hope of getting better has got to be one of the most devasting things on the planet.

Originally posted by southernlady
Are there going to be some doctors who say take the child out just so he/she can make some money?There's more money to be made keeping the child alive and prolonging treatments. Are there going to be some parents who have a child who has a disease (that can be dealt with) but they want to kill the child anyways because the baby isn't perfect?Probably, but a panel of doctors will have to certify that the child is terminally ill before the parents can decide.