Jewish World Review Feb. 27, 2001 / 4 Adar, 5761
Are certain lives
not worth living?
Dr. Leo Alexander served with the Office of the Chief Counsel for War Crimes in Germany after Hitler was defeated. He interviewed the physician defendants, German doctors who had been involved in practices such as euthanizing mentally handicapped Germans that led to the "final solution" for Jews and others.
In a prophetic article in the July 14, 1949, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, Alexander examined the initial causes of the Holocaust. "The beginnings," he wrote, "were merely a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of the physicians. It started with the acceptance, basic in the euthanasia movement, that there is such a thing as life not worthy to be lived."
The Nazis described the patients they killed as "useless eaters."
Not long before Alexander's death in 1984, he warned that the same lethal attitudes were taking root in this country. He cited the rise of the "death with dignity" movement, which advocated what later became more widely known as assisted suicide -- doctors providing the means for patients to kill themselves, which is now legal in Oregon.
Recalling his research for the Nuremberg trials, Alexander said of what was happening here: "The barriers against killing are coming down."
A new book by Wesley Smith, "The Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America," documents Alexander's concerns more fully and lucidly than any volume yet published on whether humanity will be able to remain humane.
Writing about "The Culture of Death," Dr. N. Gregory Hamilton, president of Physicians for Compassionate Care, points out that "prominent bioethicists now claim the value of each human life can be traded off in complex cost-benefit ratios. ... Members of the bioethics elite have quietly convinced many of our judges, hospital administrators and doctors that some human lives have relatively less value, and therefore less right to equal protection."
I have known and read Wesley Smith for a long time, and I have often cited him in this column because of the range, depth and accuracy of his research. His new book names a number of these bioethicists -- whom I called, years ago, "the new priesthood of death." He shows how their influence began and grew, and tells of patients who have been subject to final decisions by doctors -- often against the patients' wishes and the wishes of their relatives -- because it was thought that their lives were no longer worth living. It's called involuntary euthanasia.
As Smith says in "The Culture of Death": "With the exception of assisted suicide -- due mostly to the widespread media coverage of Jack Kevorkian -- most people are but dimly aware of what is happening."
"Popular culture," he adds, "promotes many of these practices as a compassionate response to the trials and tribulations of illness."
Like Alexander in 1949, Smith is trying to alert all of us to the falling barriers against killing. Moreover, he warns that a consequence of this devaluing of disabled and otherwise fragile lives is the creation of "a duty to die." I have debated academics who seriously believe that people who are no longer "productive" should die rather than expect their families and the rest of society to pay what it costs to keep them alive.
In the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics last fall, there was this medical advice by Drs. Lawrence J. Schneiderman and Alexander Morgan Capron:
"A judge who orders that a severely disabled child be kept alive rarely sees firsthand the long-term consequences of that decision, which remain a continuing vivid experience for the health professionals who must provide care for the child."
Therefore, so that these "professionals" can be relieved of such a "vivid experience," a compassionate judge should order that the child not be kept alive. That is the culture of death.
Smith ends "The Culture of Death" with the following words: "We all age. We fall ill. We grow weak. We become disabled. A day comes when our need to receive from our fellows adds to far more than our ability to give in return. When we reach that stage of life ... will we still be deemed persons entitled to equal protection under the law?"
If only in self-defense, you ought to read "The Culture of Death" and discuss it with your doctors and your family. And put your wishes in
JWR contributor Nat Hentoff is a First Amendment authority and author of numerous books. Send your comments to him by clicking here.
02/20/01: Misteaching the rule of law
02/13/01: What a web!
02/06/01: All that jazz
01/30/01: History will also judge Robert Ray
01/23/01: History will not absolve him
01/08/01: Will Rice remember Rwanda?
01/02/01: Expanding the culture of death
12/26/00: Media should stop misleading public about High Court's actions
12/18/00: A government that executes children
12/11/00: Caucus speaks out on slavery in Sudan
12/04/00: This year, give the gift of the Constitution
11/27/00: Is capital punishment a deterrent?
11/20/00: Punishing the Boy Scouts
11/06/00: Joe Lieberman's excommunication
10/30/00: CNN discards journalistic responsibility
10/23/00: The basic flaw in the debates
10/16/00: Nader's American history lesson; or: Silencing Jesse Jackson
10/06/00: Hate-crime laws: The real message
10/03/00: Why Clinton was not convicted
09/25/00: Protecting babies born alive
09/25/00: A selective zeal for justice
09/06/00: The power of nonviolence
08/28/00: Should Dr. Laura be silenced?
08/22/00: Trashing the Bill of Rights in Philly
08/14/00: The repressive hand of China
08/07/00: A racial incident on a train
07/31/00: Attention Jesse Jackson: Sudanese children are still branded and enslaved
07/24/00: Open up the presidential debates!
07/17/00: A stealth attack on privacy
07/03/00: Plea to the Congressional Black Caucus
06/26/00: Burning 'bad' ideas at college
06/19/00: Affirmative action beyond race
06/12/00: Students discover the Constitution
06/06/00: The Liar's legacy and America's delusions
05/30/00: Reining in the majority's will
05/23/00: Press swoons for a bunco artist
05/15/00: The China that tourists don't see
05/08/00: The coverage of Reno's lawless raid
05/01/00: In Clinton and Castro's best interests
04/24/00: Elian's human rights
04/17/00: Crime's down, but arrests keep rising
04/10/00: Teacher brings Constitution to life
04/03/00: The Americans who keep disappearing
03/27/00: The censoring of feminist history
03/20/00: Should there be a chaplain in Congress?
03/13/00: Big labor, big China, spinning Gore
03/03/00: The ACLU violates its principles --- yet again!
02/28/00: Still two nations?
02/11/00: You bet we should disbar Bubba
01/31/00: Where was Jesse?
01/24/00: Is suing church for sexual harassment an entanglement?
01/18/00: Will Miranda make it?
01/11/00: ACLU: Guilty until presumed innocent?
01/03/00: Liberty lion should be Man of Century
12/28/99: Drug tests that tear families apart
12/20/99: Get ready for decisive ruling on school vouchers for religious schools
12/13/99: Guess who is taking the lead in anti-slavery movement? Hint: It ain't Rev. Jesse
12/06/99: When we refuse to buy the 'otherly-challenged' excuse
11/29/99: Expelling 'Huck Finn'
11/22/99: Pleading the First
11/16/99: Goal of diversity needs rethinking?
11/08/99: Prosecution in darkness
11/02/99: The accuracy that's owed to readers
10/26/99: Disappeared Americans
10/18/99: The blue wall of silence
10/11/99: Bill Bradley's speech tax
10/04/99: 'Technicalities' that keep us free
09/27/99: Our 'Americanism'-ignorant generation
09/20/99: ACLU better clean up its act
09/13/99: A professor of infanticide at Princeton
09/07/99: The Big Apple's Rotten Policing
08/23/99: Lawyerly ethics
08/16/99: To Get a Supreme Court Seat
08/02/99: What are the poor people doing tonight?
07/26/99: Lady Hillary and the press
© 2000, NEA