Category Archives: Euthanasia

Rhodes Colleges philosophy department hosted a conversation with controversial bioethicist Peter Singer Wednesday, as planned, despite opposition to the event from faculty members from several other programs.

Singer has consistentlyarguedthat parents should have the right to choose euthanasia for their severelydisabled infants.

Prior to the virtual event, billed as a talk on pandemic ethics, the department of anthropology and sociology and the Africana studies program sent an open letter to the campus expressing deepest dismay that Singer would be welcomed, along with concern that the event could worsen the campus racial climate. The letter cited Singers longstanding advancement of philosophical arguments that presume the inferiority of many disabled lives. The creation of a hierarchy of lives as a justification for the allocation or denial of limited resources (whether pleasure, medical care, insurance, etc.) is a logic that has a long and violent history, and one that underlies eugenicist arguments, the letter also said.

The faculty letter further questioned why Singers talk included no disability scholars, given that COVID-19 is one of the most profound disability rights issues of our lifetimes.

A group of Rhodes historians sent the campus a similar letter of its own, saying, Hypothetical philosophies on morality cause real violence, and that Singers blatant inhumanity has no place in serious academic exchange here at Rhodes.

While Singer's thoughts on disability invite criticism, more of his work is focused on what he calls animal liberation,and onglobal poverty. Singer, a vegetarian, has previously warned that human's treatment of animals, especially livestock,makes pandemics more likely.He's also advocated for equitable vaccine distribution around the globe.

In response to various calls to cancel or alter the format of the event, Rhodes said in a statement that our institutions spirit of supporting expressive speech does not prohibit Professor Singers participation in this virtual panel. At the same time, our communitys values compel us to denounce some of the views he has expressed repeatedly over years through various addresses, writings, and media interviews.

The statement included a series of affirmations, including the strong belief in an inclusive, diverse, equitable, and accessible community -- as outlined in the colleges IDEAS framework -- one in which the worth and dignity of all persons is championed and supported.

Rebecca Tuvel, chair of philosophy at Rhodes, responded via email to some initial criticism of the event, according to the philosophy blog Daily Nous.

Serious intellectual exchange about matters of significance cannot avoid sometimes causing anger, offense, and pain and no one should be cavalier about that fact. It is not clear to us, however, what follows from our colleagues understandable expression of disturbance at some of Professor Singers views, Tuvel wrote. Do those views disqualify Singer from participating in the exchange of ideas that ought to occur at a liberal arts college? If that is the conclusion, we respectfully disagree, for its premise is that ideas that cause anger and dismay ought not, for that reason, be part of the exchange and that premise, we think, is incompatible with our mission to teach students how to engage in productive dialogue even, and indeed especially, with thinkers with whom they vehemently disagree.

A speak-out in support of people with disabilities took place earlier Wednesday at Rhodes, according to Daily Nous.

Singer, the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, told Inside Higher Ed via email that its disappointing these Rhodes faculty members place so little value on the role of a university education in challenging students to think about some of the underlying presuppositions of positions they hold, that they seek to prevent the expression of views with which they disagree.

He continued, Clearly, these faculty have not thought very deeply about these questions. They say that they object to my advocacy of allowing parents to choose euthanasia for severely disabled newborn infants (as they may do in the Netherlands, for example, in accordance with the Groningen Protocol). They say that this is eugenicist and denies the very humanity of people with disabilities. I challenge these faculty to explain to their students and the wider public their position on abortion following prenatal diagnosis that indicates a serious disability, or on allowing parents to choose to withdraw life-support from severely disabled infants in neonatal intensive care units, knowing that the infants will then die.

Singer asked if his faculty critics would consider such choices to be similarly offensive. Would they also argue that speakers who defend these choices should not be heard at Rhodes? If not, how do they distinguish the attitudes implied by these choices from those that I have expressed?

With philosophers Francesca Minerva and Jeff McMahan, Singer recently launched the Journal of Controversial Ideas, an open-access publication that allows scholars to publish under a psuedonym if they so choose.

Here is the original post:

Rhodes sticks with invitation to Peter Singer - Inside Higher Ed

What impact does legalisation of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have on a countrys suicide rate? This question was explored at the symposium Voluntary Assisted Dying and Suicide Prevention through a presentation by Professor David Albert Jones, Director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre in Oxford and Professor of Bioethics at St Marys University, Twickenham, with a response from Professor David Kissane, from the University of Notre Dame Australia. The event was moderated by Associate Professor Megan Best (The University of Notre Dame Australia).

The symposium was hosted by the Bioethics and Healthcare Ethics program of the Institute for Ethics & Society as part of a research initiative addressing ethics at the end of life. The timeliness of this event was reflected in the attendance, the symposium drawing 175 registrations comprising an international audience.

The full impact on a society when euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are legalised is only gradually becoming clear, said A/Prof Best. We need to understand the risks that such laws hold for vulnerable members of our community, and Notre Dame Australia is well placed to facilitate this.

View original post here:

Voluntary assisted dying and suicide prevention - Mirage News

Addressing participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life on Monday, 27 September, Pope Francis spoke against the throwaway culture that allows the murder of children through abortion and a hidden euthanasia against the elderly that limits expensive medicine offered to them. The following is a translation of the Holy Fathers words which he shared in Italian in the Clementine Hall.

Dear sisters and dear brothers,

I am happy to be able to meet you on the occasion of your General Assembly and I thank Msgr Paglia for his words. I extend a greeting also to the many Academics who are connected.

The theme you have chosen for these three days of workshops is particularly timely: that of public health in the horizon of globalization. Indeed, the crisis of the pandemic has made both the cry of the earth and the cry of the poor reverberate even more strongly (Enc. Laudato Si, 49). We cannot remain deaf before this dual cry. We have to listen to it well! And it is what you are setting out to do.

Examination of the numerous and grave issues that have emerged in the last two years is not an easy task. On the one hand we are worn out by the Covid-19 pandemic and by the inflation of issues that have been raised: we almost do not want to hear about it any more and we hurry on to other topics. However, on the other hand, it is essential to reflect calmly in order to examine in depth what has happened and to glimpse the path towards a better future for all. Truly, even worse than this crisis is the tragedy of squandering it (Pentecost homily, 31 May 2020). And we know that we do not emerge from a crisis the same: we will either emerge better or we will emerge worse. But not the same. The choice is in our hands. And I repeat, even worse than this crisis is the tragedy of squandering it. I encourage you in this effort. And I think the dynamic of discernment in which your meeting is taking place is wise and timely: first and foremost, listening attentively to the situation in order to foster a true and proper conversion and identify concrete decisions to emerge from the crisis, better.

The reflection that you have undertaken in recent years on global bioethics is revealing itself to be precious. I had encouraged you in this perspective with the letter Humana communitas on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of your Academy. The horizon of public health in fact offers the possibility to focus on important aspects for the coexistence of the human family and to strengthen the fabric of social friendship. These are central themes in the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (cf. Chapter 6).

The crisis of the pandemic has highlighted the depth of the interdependence both among ourselves and between the human family and our common home (cf. Laudato Si, 86; 164). Our societies, especially in the West, have had the tendency to forget this interconnection. And the bitter consequences are before our eyes. In this epochal change it is thus urgent to invert this noxious tendency and it is possible to do so through the synergy among different disciplines. Knowledge of biology and hygiene is needed, as well as of medicine and epidemiology, but also of economy and sociology, anthropology and ecology. In addition to understanding the phenomena, it is a matter of identifying technological, political and ethical criteria of action with regards to health systems, the family, employment and the environment.

This outlook is particularly important in the health field because health and sickness are determined not only by processes of nature but also by social life. Moreover, it is not enough for a problem to be serious for it to come to peoples attention and thus be addressed. Many very serious problems are ignored due to lack of an adequate commitment. Let us think of the devastating impact of certain diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis: the precariousness of health and hygiene conditions cause millions of avoidable deaths in the world every year. If we compare this reality with the concern caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, we can see how the perception of the seriousness of the problem and the corresponding mobilization of energies and resources are very different.

Of course, taking all measures to stem and defeat Covid-19 on a global level is the right thing to do, but this moment in history in which our health is being threatened directly should make us aware of what it means to be vulnerable and to live daily in insecurity. We could thus assume the responsibility also for the grave conditions in which others live and of which we have so far been little or not interested at all. We could thus learn not to project our priorities onto populations who live on other continents, where other needs are more urgent; where, for example, not only vaccines but also drinking water and daily bread are in short supply. I dont know if one should laugh or cry, cry sometimes, when we hear government leaders or community leaders advise slum dwellers to sanitize themselves several times a day with soap and water. But, my dear, you have never been to a slum: there is no water there, they know nothing about soap. No, do not leave your home!: but there the whole neighbourhood is home, because they live... Please, let us take care of this reality, even when we reflect on health. Let us welcome then, any commitment to a fair and universal distribution of vaccines this is important , but taking into account the broader field which demands the same criteria of justice for health needs and for the promotion of life.

Looking at health in its multiple dimensions at a global level helps to understand and take on with responsibility the interconnection between the phenomena. In this way, we can better observe how even the conditions of life that are the result of political, social and environmental choices have an impact on the health of human beings. If we examine in different countries and in different social groups the hope of life and of a healthy life we discover great inequalities. They depend on variables such as the amount of wages, the educational level, the neighbourhood in which one resides even though it is in the same city. We state that life and health are values that are equally fundamental for all, based on the inalienable dignity of the human person. But, if this statement is not followed by an adequate commitment to overcome inequality, we are de facto accepting the painful reality that not all lives are equal and health is not protected for everyone in the same way. And here, I would like to repeat my concern: that there always be a free healthcare system. May the countries which have them, not lose them, for example Italy and others, which have a good free healthcare system: do not lose it because otherwise we would end up with only members of the population who can afford it, having the right to healthcare and the others not. And this is a very big challenge. This helps overcome inequality.

Therefore, international initiatives are to be supported I am thinking for example of those recently promoted by the G20 aimed at creating a global governance for the health of all the inhabitants of the planet, that is, a set of clear rules agreed at the international level that respect human dignity. In fact, the risk of new pandemics will continue to be a threat also for the future.

The Pontifical Academy for Life can also offer a precious contribution in this sense, seeing itself as a travelling companion of other international organizations committed to this same aim. With regards to this, it is important to participate in shared initiatives and in the appropriate manner, to the public debate. Naturally, this requires that, without watering down contents, attempts be made to communicate them in a language that is suitable and topics that can be understood in the current social context, so that the Christian anthropological proposition, inspired by Revelation, can also help todays men and women to rediscover the primacy of the right to life from conception to its natural end (Discourse to participants in the Meeting sponsored by the Science and Life Association, 30 May 2015).

Here too, I would like to mention that we are victims of the throwaway culture. In his presentation, Msgr Paglia referred to something: but there is the throwing away of children that we do not want to welcome, with that abortion law that sends them back to their sender and kills them. Today this has become a normal thing, a habit that is very bad; it is truly murder. In order to truly grasp this, perhaps asking ourselves two questions may help: is it right to eliminate, to end a human life to solve a problem? Is it right to hire a hitman to solve a problem? Abortion is this. And then on the other side, are the elderly: the elderly who are also a bit of throwaway material because they are not needed.... But they are the wisdom, they are the roots of the wisdom of our civilization, and this civilization discards them! Yes, in many places there is a hidden law on euthanasia, as I call it. It is the one that makes us say: medicines are expensive, only half should be given. This means shortening the lives of the elderly. In so doing, we deny hope, the hope of the children who bring us the life that makes us go forward, and the hope that is in the roots that the elderly give us. Instead, we discard both. And then the everyday throwing away, that life is thrown away. Let us be careful about this throwaway culture. It is not a problem of one law or another. It is a problem of throwing away. And on this point, you academics, the Catholic universities and also Catholic hospitals cannot allow themselves to go this way. This is a path which we cannot take: the throw away path.

Therefore, the work that your Academy has undertaken in recent years on the impact of new technologies on human life and more specifically on algorethics should be looked upon favourably in such a way that science may truly be at the service of mankind, and not mankind at the service of science. (ibid). I encourage in this regard, the work of the fledgling foundation, renAIssance, for the spreading and deepening of the Rome Call for AI Ethics which I strongly hope many will join.

Lastly, I wish to thank you for the commitment and contribution that the Academy has provided by actively participating in the Vatican Covid Commission. Thank you for this. It is beautiful to see cooperation within the Roman Curia in the fulfilment of a shared project. We have to increasingly develop these processes brought forth together, in which I know many of you have participated, urging greater attention to vulnerable people such as the elderly, the disabled and the younger ones.

With these feelings of gratitude, I entrust the work of this Assembly and also your activity as an Academy on the whole in favour of the defence and promotion of life, to the Virgin Mary. I offer my heartfelt blessing to each of you and your loved ones. And I ask you please to pray for me because I need it. Thank you.

Excerpt from:

To discard the unborn child and the elderly is to deny hope - L'Osservatore Romano - L'Osservatore Romano

The second Interdenominational Evangelical Reflection Forum brought together around one hundred Spanish leaders to address the issue of euthanasia.

Through a mixed event, held in person in Madrid, with 52 people, and by simultaneous online transmission with 43 others, the day focused on the recently approved euthanasia law in Spain.

The aim of this forum is to build tools to help us make decisions and deal with this complex issue in the best way possible, said Jess Londoo, director of the missionary association SEPAL Spain and international leader of the 'Back to Europe' movement.

During the event, organised by the Federation of Evangelical Religious Entities of Spain (FEREDE), there were 4 presentations on the following topics: God, life and euthanasia; Euthanasia from science and medicine"; Ethical-legal perspective on euthanasia and Euthanasia: different points of view.

That was followed by the panel Pastoral praxis: what to do when facing euthanasia.

The day ended with the reading of the preliminary conclusions. The final conclusions will soon be published in Spanish in a format accessible to the public.

After a time of discussion, consensus was reached on some key issues, such as the sovereignty of God in the face of life and death, the dignity of human life regardless of its condition, and the need to guarantee a universal law on palliative care.

The participants also reflected on pastoral care in the face of death and the end of life, emphasising the need for training, empathy and sensitivity for the leaders who have to deal with these situations.

They also stressed that it is essential to have a pastoral care that accompanies people in their last moments with love and mercy.

The euthanasia law was passed in Spain in December 2020 with a majority of 198 votes. Spain became the fourth country in Europe and the sixth worldwide to legalise euthanasia, after the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Canada and New Zealand.

According to the law anyone with terminal or incurable illness causing intolerable physical and mental suffering have now access to euthanasia in Spain.

Prior to the approval, the Spanish Evangelical Alliance (AEE) had released a statement, warning that it is dangerous to build a social opinion that says that terminal patients are a burden and calling on the government to promote a model for those that combines access to palliative care with family and economic support.

The Spanish Bioethics Committee also pointed out that there were solid health, ethical, legal, economic and social reasons to reject the transformation of euthanasia into a subjective right and a public service.

Religious groups and medical institutions also raised their voices against the approval of the law and called on for better palliative care measures.

Published in: Evangelical Focus - life & tech - One hundred Spanish evangelical leaders gather to reflect on euthanasia

View post:

One hundred Spanish evangelical leaders gather to reflect on euthanasia - Evangelical Focus

QUEENSLANDS members of parliament voted emphatically to legalise euthanasia last week, reflecting public opinion, but without heeding Church, medical and ethical advice that it signals a life-or-death societal shift.

MPs in the states single chamber parliament backed a Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill (VAD) in a conscience vote 61-30 a move that will legalise euthanasia for eligible Queenslanders from January 2023.

The die is cast and across the Rubicon we go: some kind of victory for the government but a real defeat for Queensland, a victory for death but a defeat for lifenow we await the dark spectacle of unexpected consequences, Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge tweeted soon after the bill passed on September 16.

Over two days MPs debated long into the night, fighting back tears as they told personal storiesand revealing the difficulty of weighing up opposing views on euthanasia and assisted dying.

The new laws will allow people suffering from a disease or medical condition that is advanced, progressive and terminal to access voluntary assisted dying.

Their condition must be expected to cause death within a year, they must have decision-making capacity, and proceed without coercion.

Deputy Premier Steven Miles said the law would ease pain and suffering, but there were some in his own party who begged to differ.

Labors Joe Kelly, a nurse representing the Brisbane seat of Greenslopes voted against VAD. He told parliament that in his professional view good palliative care could provide a dignified death.

Another Labor member, Linus Power representing Logan, said he was disappointed that all 54 amendments were defeated

Dr Christian Rowan the LNP member for Moggil, a former president of the Australian Medical Association of Queensland and the Rural Doctors Association of Queensland said MPs had a duty to consider every legislative clause, all intent, every oversight and review aspect, every clinical process within State and Federal clinical governance health standards, and importantly, every purported safeguard for vulnerable and at-risk individuals.

Dr Rowan said the legislation does not require neither the co-ordinating or consulting doctor on voluntary assisted dying to have any expertise in the particular terminal disease, illness, or medical condition, nor in end of life (or palliative care) of patients.

Quoting a letter signed by 19 former AMA presidents, Dr Rowan said, these lack of requirements were certainly not medical best practice and could not ensure the patient was adequately informed on possible treatments or palliative care options.

Without any amendments the new bill fails to address many key issues.

An amendment that sought so-called institutional conscientious objection would have allowed faith-based hospitals and aged care facilities the right to exclude VAD from taking place in their facilities.

Catholic Health Australia had run a concerted campaign to protect Catholic-run facilities that provide about 20 per cent of hospital and aged care beds in Queensland.

The new VAD law will allow terminal patients at faith-based hospitals and aged care facilities to end their lives there, if they are too sick to be moved somewhere else.

It is deeply troubling for the wonderful men and women who run these hospitals, Opposition deputy and member for Toowoomba South, David Janetzki, said.

Dr Mark Robinson, opposition member for Oodgeroo told the parliament that without this particular amendment thousands of hospital beds in Queensland are at risk.

The leaders of St Vincents and the Mater appealed to MPs not to force them into a position against their convictions, and I think we should listen, he said.

If we dont we may pay a very high price for forcing this on these institutions that have served us well for a very long time.

Many MPs cited a lack of palliative care services available to all Queenslanders as a sound reason to reject VAD.

The Member for Scenic Rim Jon Krause was one of many regional voices to speak against the bill.

We are chipping away at an absolute protection of life, Mr Krause said.

He said palliative care could alleviate most suffering for most people but pointed out it is not easily accessible to many in regional Queensland.He said he was fearful people would access VAD so as not to be a burden on their family.

Treasurer Cameron Dick said he supported passing VAD into law, but did so with a troubled conscience.

Mr Dick said he feared the laws would change how our society viewed the sanctity of life.

Queensland has joined Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania in passing euthanasia laws. Only New South Wales remains. Its Upper House rejected a VAD Bil in 2017 by just one vote.

More here:

Queensland crosses the Rubicon by passing laws to legalise euthanasia - Catholic Leader

A mission to reunite a baby orca with its pod after becoming stranded near Wellington was always unlikely to succeed, newly released documents show.

Despite this, conservation officials spent nearly $130,000 trying to keep the male calf they named Toa alive.

The Department of Conservation has released vet reports, costings, and communications around the stranding, care and the search for his missing pod, which show reservations over early efforts to look after the orca.

Toa stranded near Plimmerton on July 11 when a wave swept him on to rocks. Significant efforts were made to keep him alive until he could be repatriated with his pod. However, he died on July 23.

READ MORE:* Public efforts to save Toa the orca were worth every cent* 'We are devastated': Toa, the stranded baby orca, dies * Stranded baby orca Toa's pod sighted off Kpiti Coast, but wild weather delays reunion

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

The operation in July to care for and repatriate Toa, the baby orca, with his pod cost nearly $130,000, Department of Conservation documents show. (File photo)

Screenshots of a WhatsApp chat between experts worldwide who were consulted about Toas care show one was horrified he was taken out of the water following the initial rescue.

The total cost of the operation was $129,780. Nearly half, $62,060, covered staffing, while operating costs for expenses, including equipment, helicopter hire, and food for volunteers, came to $67,720.

Euthanasia was mentioned as early as the day after the stranding, because Toa was still entirely dependent on his absent mother.

One expert cautioned against raising public expectations: I agree it is too soon to make plans but it is maybe not too soon to manage public expectations regarding the unlikely ultimate happy ending?

An expert from the International Fund for Animal Welfare said they would euthanise given the likelihood of success was almost non-existent.

Pods don't abandon calves without reason.

Text messages show shooting Toa while under sedation was the preferred method of euthanasia.

Supplied

Cost of baby orca Toas rescue operation.

The orca was kept in a makeshift sea pen at Plimmerton Boating Club, and was briefly moved into a collapsible pool when the sea became rough.

All scenarios mapped by DOC showed none had more than a moderate chance of success.

Experts endorsed the idea of tagging the calf in order to track him if released, but this was never followed through the calf died the next day.

Whale Rescue/Orca Research Trust, which worked with DOC to care for the orca, said Toa died after he rapidly deteriorated and on-site vets were unable to save him.

It came just in time for DOC. A subcommittee of the Animal Ethics Committee reached a unanimous decision that the best ethical outcome for the calf was euthanasia, prior to further deterioration, on July 22 the day before he died.

A postmortem was vetoed by iwi for cultural reasons, and although a CT scan was floated as a viable idea, it was too late to be undertaken.

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

Toa does orca yoga in his pool ahead of a planned move back to the ocean pen. (File photo)

Documents show DOC and Orca Research Trust/Whale Rescue were not always singing from the same song sheet.

On July 20, Whale Rescue posted on Facebook: There have been some disturbing reports in the media of his health deteriorating, we want to reassure everyone he is fine and doing well, these reports are totally false.

However, a statement from DOC the following morning said some of the injuries sustained by the calf during the stranding are healing well, but others require ongoing monitoring.

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

The area of the boat club where Toa was kept while the hunt for his family continued. (File photo)

The calf did display some short-term signs of discomfort in his gut, likely associated with trying to get the delicate balance of feeding requirements right. Vet reports confirm DOCs statement.

Internal communications between DOC staff raised concerns over Whale Rescues messaging.

Communications by [Ingrid] Vissers organisations have built public expectations that a successful release is possible and that absolutely every effort will be made to make this happen. There is likely to be a very strong negative reaction at site and online.

Here is the original post:

Chances of survival for baby orca Toa were low, euthanasia the 'ethical' choice - Stuff.co.nz

Image via YouTube

THE Archbishop of Oviedo Jesus Sanz Montes, above, set himself up for a fall when he recently declared that Spains socialist-led government provides better protection for bulls than unborn children and the terminally ill.

He was speaking months after euthanasia, supported by a majority of Spaniards, was legalised in March.

According to The Tablet, he was immediately mocked and ridiculed on social media. This so upset his faithful supporters that thousands of Spanish citizens have signed a petition defending Montes.

The petition on the civic Hazte-Oir platform said:

These insults for criticising abortion and euthanasia in a homily have not been long in coming the pro-abortion mob have placed him on their media target list. The radical left does not allow anyone to dare touch the dogmas of abortion and euthanasia whoever dares try gets torn apart, and whoever defends them gets dragged through the mud.

Montez said:

I wish aborted children or the elderly and sick euthanised without palliative care enjoyed the protective legislation now provided to bulls. Instead, some laws are now drawn up without social debate, helped by opportunistic government demagoguery which continues to sow tension by imposing social transformation at the mercy of various ideologies

The Catholic Church makes up 62 per cent of Spains 47 million inhabitants, according to 2020 data, and has criticised laws backed by the socialist-led government of premier Pedro Sanchez, in power since January 2020, facilitating same-sex marriage, secularised education, state-funded euthanasia and abortion.

A draft Trans Law, enabling over-16s to re-register their gender through a court declaration without medical or legal procedures, was also approved for enactment in June, while a Statute of Secularism, enforcing strict separation between politics and religion, law and morality, crime and sin, is to be adopted this October.

More than 20,000 Spaniards have also signed a Hazte-Oir petition to the Cortes parliament against socialist legislation imposing jail terms for pro-lifers who harass or restrict the freedom of women by staging protests or offering help outside abortion clinics.

Both petitions coincided with new data showing Catholic affiliations at their lowest ever in Spain, with four out of ten citizens, and 60 per cent of 18-34s, describing themselves as atheists or non-believers.

A while back, in the comments section of the Freethinker, an American reader asked me whether Spain would be a good choice if he ever decided to leave the US. I replied:

Absolutely. Spain transitioned from a fascist dictatorship that was fully supported by the RCC in 1978. Today the church, to the chagrin of the Vatican, has no say in the running of a liberal, left-of-centre democracy that was the first in Europe to approve gay marriage, banned conversion therapy and, most recently, legalised euthanasia. It is a beacon of tolerance.

It has a first-rate health service, very generous pensions, pays for holidays for the elderly and the cost of living is ridiculously low.

Of course, its not without those especially British expats who hanker after the good old days of Francos rule. These are the same fools who voted for Brexit and are now being extradited back to the UK because they never bothered to apply for Spanish residency permits.

In 2016 a right-wing columnist for a local English newspaper, John Smith, wrote: Like so many other nations, Spain has also entertained a certain amount of political correctness which has to some extent seen a reduction in the machismo of the younger Spanish male and an ability for women to not just be vocal at home but to have a voice which can be heard across the country.

Worse, he said there are now homosexuals with voices, voices so shrill that they can force local authorities into coughing up dosh to fund parades and fiestas at which perverts can flaunt their filthy lifestyles.

When I pointed out to the editor that praising Franco and fascism constitutes a criminal offence, she went into full-on panic mode and asked me to write a rebuttal. The hack was sacked, and his column was taken offline.

I wrote about Smith here.

Hat tip: Keith Porteous Wood

Id love a cup of coffee

Read this article:

Catholics aghast at the pace of positive change in Spain - Patheos

LUTZ, Fla. Lap of Love, an in-home veterinary hospice and euthanasia service, got its start in Lutz.

Dr. Dani McVety-Leinen said she found a passion for this in-home service and it all started off as a part-time job.

Then, she saw the need for this service from the community and now it's nationwide.

"We help close to 500 families a month now in the Tampa Bay area," Dr. Dani McVety-Leinen, Lap of Love Founder said. "So many families, I've been in some homes five and six times over the years. And it's such an honor because you don't see them in between, but then you come back for that end-of-life experience. And it's like a shared experience that you get to hang out with them again and again."

Lap of Love also added a pet end-of-life support team. Click here for more information on their services.

View original post here:

Lap of Love got its start in Lutz - ABC Action News

news, latest-news,

SIX WEEKS after Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall took the issue to the public, Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson will ask the community whether he should vote for a new bill to legalise euthanasia. The MP kicked off an electorate-wide consultation process on a new bill to legalise and regulate medically-assisted suicide on Thursday. Deputy Premier and Nationals leader John Barilaro told media this week that every Nationals MP but one would likely back the Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2021, introduced by Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich. The bill will be a conscience vote, with government MPs not bound by the party to vote either way on the legislation. READ MORE: Mr Anderson said "the majority view of the electorate" will be the position he will take to NSW parliament. He received the final draft of the bill on Wednesday afternoon and, on Thursday, announced he will undertake an election-wide consultation process. The campaign will include a survey on his website, a mail-out, an email blast and an "extensive media campaign". "The Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill covers a very important issue and the community deserves the opportunity to drive the decision making on this," he said. "Significant changes have been made since early drafts of the bill were distributed, which is why I wanted to ensure the final draft, which will be presented in parliament, went to the public for consultation." Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall started his own consultation campaign in August. Of 2,671 responses so far, nearly 80 per cent were in favour of the bill, he said on Thursday. "I have my own strong personal views on this issue and the bill, however, I will be speaking and voting on the bill in accordance with the wishes of the Northern Tablelands community," he said. "That's why I want to hear from as many people as possible, to ensure I can reflect as best I can the overall views of our region." Only people who are terminally ill and diagnosed to die within six months, or 12 months for a neurodegenerative condition, will be eligible for medically-assisted suicide under the bill. The patient must also be enduring extreme suffering that cannot be alleviated. Approval requires two doctors, and both must undertake training to be eligible to assess a patient for eligibility. Want more local news? Subscribe to the Leader to read it here first There will also be multiple assessments to ensure the patient is acting voluntarily, and severe new punishments for people who put someone under duress to die. The bill will also allow doctors and other health practitioners to conscientiously object to the process and exempt themselves from being involved. Mr Anderson encouraged everyone in the community to have their say on the bill. "Thank you to all those in our community who have already contacted my office on this important issue. Please be assured that your voice will be heard," he said. The bill may be introduced to parliament at the end of this year, or in 2022. Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/andrew.messenger/49a75f22-33c9-4cd4-9010-00293eb6e2db.jpg/r0_306_6016_3705_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

September 23 2021 - 3:00PM

SIX WEEKS after Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall took the issue to the public, Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson will ask the community whether he should vote for a new bill to legalise euthanasia.

The MP kicked off an electorate-wide consultation process on a new bill to legalise and regulate medically-assisted suicide on Thursday.

Deputy Premier and Nationals leader John Barilaro told media this week that every Nationals MP but one would likely back the Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2021, introduced by Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich.

The bill will be a conscience vote, with government MPs not bound by the party to vote either way on the legislation.

Mr Anderson said "the majority view of the electorate" will be the position he will take to NSW parliament.

He received the final draft of the bill on Wednesday afternoon and, on Thursday, announced he will undertake an election-wide consultation process.

The campaign will include a survey on his website, a mail-out, an email blast and an "extensive media campaign".

"The Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill covers a very important issue and the community deserves the opportunity to drive the decision making on this," he said.

"Significant changes have been made since early drafts of the bill were distributed, which is why I wanted to ensure the final draft, which will be presented in parliament, went to the public for consultation."

Of 2,671 responses so far, nearly 80 per cent were in favour of the bill, he said on Thursday.

"I have my own strong personal views on this issue and the bill, however, I will be speaking and voting on the bill in accordance with the wishes of the Northern Tablelands community," he said.

"That's why I want to hear from as many people as possible, to ensure I can reflect as best I can the overall views of our region."

Only people who are terminally ill and diagnosed to die within six months, or 12 months for a neurodegenerative condition, will be eligible for medically-assisted suicide under the bill. The patient must also be enduring extreme suffering that cannot be alleviated.

Approval requires two doctors, and both must undertake training to be eligible to assess a patient for eligibility.

There will also be multiple assessments to ensure the patient is acting voluntarily, and severe new punishments for people who put someone under duress to die.

The bill will also allow doctors and other health practitioners to conscientiously object to the process and exempt themselves from being involved.

Mr Anderson encouraged everyone in the community to have their say on the bill.

"Thank you to all those in our community who have already contacted my office on this important issue. Please be assured that your voice will be heard," he said.

The bill may be introduced to parliament at the end of this year, or in 2022.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

Continued here:

Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson begins consultation on NSW Parliament's Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill as Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall reports...

AUSTIN (KXAN) Negotiations between Austin Pets Alive! and the city of Austin have stalled for a new long-term land-use agreement that would allow APA! to continue operating at the citys old animal shelter, the two parties tell KXAN.

Since 2011 Austin Pets Alive! has occupied the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) on Cesar Chavez Street in exchange for taking in thousands of at-risk animals from the city. The nonprofit aids the city in its goal to be no-kill. Under city of Austin standards, no-kill means a minimum of 95% of homeless animals who enter shelters must leave alive.

The city says its current rate is at 97%.

The two sides have been working under a short-term agreement, allowing APA! to continue occupying TLAC. However, this agreement ends Nov. 23, and the organization says it may have to move its operations outside city limits if the partners cant reach an agreement.

Significant changes in animal services at the city that jeopardize the sustainability of No Kill, as well as the declining state of the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) property, create the need for immediate council action to ensure Austin stays No Kill now and for evermore, reads a post on APA!s website from Sept. 15.

Austin Pets Alive! notes a potential move out of Austin is more than a threat. The organization plans to tour nine facilities in the next week; APA! said that all are at least 20 miles outside city limits.

In an interview with KXAN, APA! President and CEO Dr. Ellen Jefferson added: We recognize theres a high likelihood that were going to have to find another property and build elsewhere.

At the heart of the disagreement between the two sides is how many animals APA! will agree to take in from the city, along with the organizations interest in helping at-risk animals from outside the Austin area.

We have been helping shelters battling high kill rates all over [Texas] for 11 years and in rarecircumstances like Hurricane Ida, we take from beyond Texas, said an Austin Pets Alive! spokesperson. This is nothing new. We are asking for our agreement to allow us to utilize the resources we have at our future building to treat any animal, even if not from the greater Austin area, which is currently not allowed.

In an additional statement to KXAN, APA! implicated that the city was trying to micromanage it.

ACL is not restricted to only hire bands from Austin for their shows, said the statement. Here at Austin Pets Alive! we only ask that we be given the same respect as other organizations using city land.

The organization is appealing to City Council to approve a new agreement with terms more favorable to it, since [city] staff will not agree to the License Agreement terms.

Austin Animal Center has a different perspective.

The current facility is on City owned land which ultimately was paid for with tax dollars. APA! is using that land for free, in exchange for helping AAC and pulling animals, said an Austin Animal Center spokesperson. They are asking to help AAC less and use the same tax-funded property to help animals from other cities and states.

She added: The current license agreement allows animals from a five-county region to be housed at TLAC. But not animals from beyond that region.

We asked Austin Animal Center about their nonprofit partners claim that the city would be in jeopardy of losing its no-kill status if it werent able to come to an agreement with Austin Pets Alive!

Austin will remain No Kill regardless of the outcome of these negotiations, the department spokesperson said. We are sure that AAC will remain No Kill, first and foremost, because we are committed to doing the right thing for the animals in our community. We are also required by City Council to maintain a 95% live outcome rate.

Earlier this summer, the Austin Animal Center reported not having any additional capacity to house animals and that staff is doubling up dogs in each suite. A June 25 memo from Chief Animal Services Officer Don Bland said staff may possibly need to resort to euthanasia.

Last week, the citys Animal Advisory Commission voted unanimously to form a committee to monitor and provide oversight over Austins no-kill policy. City Councils Audit and Finance Committee will need to approve the commissions request to change its bylaws for this to happen.

Visit link:

Austin Pets Alive! says it may have to move amid stalemate with city - KXAN.com