ACIM ASIA
 

  mission statement
  medical mission
  documents
  news
  press releases
  links
  contact us
  home

 

     

   


The doctor: executioner of the future?
October 2, 2003.

The media horror has transformed an incident into a symbol. The circumstances of the death of young Humbert should have never gone beyond the consciences of the persons involved and in any case not beyond the walls of the Helio-marins hospital in Berck. It’s true that this death came at about the same time as the release of a book written by the patient through the intermediary of his mother. Chance they say…

The mother of this young man, at the time of his accident on the highway, knowing that her child was an incurable paraplegic, in all likelihood insisted that his life be saved at all costs. She paid the price. Her child did as well. The Church has always disapproved going to outrageous lengths to keep alive someone that has no chance of recovery. But she does ask that men be given the possibility of preparing themselves to face God. What exactly happened? One hardly knows. Only that at some point this young man slipped into a coma. Perhaps it was because of a dose of barbiturates injected by his mother; perhaps not. Considering his condition, it was legitimate to not want to resuscitate him. The action of the head doctor, Chassoy, in pulling the plug on the respirator, made sense. It was a simple acknowledgement that every human life has an end. In no way is it possible here to speak of active or passive euthanasia. May the Divine Mercy welcome the young Vincent Humbert in Eternity.

Alas, the impudence of the media took up this affair to use it as a ram to smash French legislation (all in all somewhat ambiguous). Initially it will be tolerance for passive euthanasia and its legitimization; then the legalization of active euthanasia so as to reach the acceptance of assisted suicide. We respond with two short texts which, we hope, will enlighten our readers.

“The Reichleiter Bouhler and the medical doctor Brandt, under their responsibility, are charged with extending the authority of certain doctors, designated by them, so that these may, through death, deliver persons who, within the limits of human judgment and after a thorough medical examination, will have been declared incurable. ” Signed, Adolf Hitler. Berlin, the 1st of September, 1939.

On February 4, the above-named Dr. Karl Brandt was judged at the Nuremberg trials. At the time, he declared regarding euthanasia:

“Euthanasia may seem horrible, inhumane, but human beings who can no longer take care of themselves and whose life is nothing but suffering must be helped; this consideration is not inhumane. I have never thought that this was contrary to ethics or morals. ”Records of the Nuremberg trials on the human experiences in Germany during the Second World War, pages 725 and 803, published in 1950. “The Swastika against the Caduceus” Dr. François Bayle.

Thus we have the plan for euthanasia that the deputies have to debate. Considered as a war criminal, Dr. Karl Brandt was condemned to death on August 20, 1947 and executed.

Dr. J. P. Dickès, President of ACIM.

date : 18/10/2003


home
| top of page