British Section of the World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life

“The wife of a millionaire industrialist has shocked Indian high society by accusing her husband of forcing her to abort two baby girls after taking illegal tests to determine their gender,” The Times reported on 28 July 07, “Her allegations against 15 people have sent shockwaves across India by breaking a strict code of silence on such matters and exposing the extent of female feticide among the urban upper and middle classes.

“Mrs. Salotia told The Times from Gujarat, where she has gone into hiding after the release on bail of everyone except her husband. ‘In our culture, girls are not important. But I can’t tolerate it any more because it’s insulting.’ ” Ultrasound gender tests have been illegal since 1994, but the law is not enforced. “A recent survey indicated that there were only 882 women for every 1,000 men in Defence Colony, one of Delhi’s upmarket districts.”

“March 20 2007, LifeSiteNews.com reported that a woman who had been denied an abortion in Poland had sought and won damages against the Polish government in the European Court of Human Rights. . . Eva Kowalewska, President of the Forum of Polish Women, called the Court’s decision “the greatest legal curiosum in Court history of the European Council.”

Speaking in Heidelberg, Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister, Roman Giertych, called abortion “a new form of barbarism”, and warned “A nation which kills its children is a nation without a future. A continent which kills its children will be settled by people who do not kill theirs” (Endeavour Forum Inc Newsletter, May 2007).

Melanie McDonagh wrote in The Times of 6 June 07: “In Poland, where the abortion laws were radically tightened after Communism – an epidemiologist’s dream of a nationwide experiment in public health – there was a national drop in the rate of premature birth from about 7 per cent to about 3 per cent.”

“Amnesty International risks alienating some of its high profile rock star backers in the row over its decision to support women’s access to abortion,” the Sunday Times reported on August 20 2007. “The group has been accused of ‘duping’ the singers Chrstina Aguilera and Avril Lavigue, who have both made statements against abortion and are among contributors to an Amnesty CD released to raise money for survivors of the atrocities in Darfur.”

“Eric Whittington, director of Rock for Life, said ‘The human suffering going on right now in Darfur is horrific. To add insult to injury, however, using this tragic abuse of human rights to raise money for a pro-abortion organisation is hypocritical and beyond belief.”

“We don’t know if we are missing a great man or woman because of population control,” wrote Joseph A. D’Agostino from the Population Research Institute, 6 Oct 06. “But we do know what we will be missing soon: workers. According to the pro-population control United Nations, the proportion of the world’s population between 15 and 24 – those who are about to enter or who have just entered the workplace – will decline from 17% today to 15.3% in just 20 years. At the same time, those 65 or over will go from 7.4% to 10.5%. And the trend will continue indefinitely afterwards.”

The outlook for pensioners is poor. Unacknow-ledged British official policy seems to aim to make them die sooner.

“A disturbing picture of the abuse and neglect suffered by elderly people in care homes and hospitals is revealed today in a parliamentary report.” (Daily Telegraph, 15 Aug 07). “The Joint Committee on Human Rights condemns the Government for failing to provide ‘leadership and guidance’ and says ‘an entire culture change’ is needed to transform the system.”

Rachel Hurst, writing in Disability Now, Aug 2007, reported:

“In 2002 the Court of Appeal judged that a private entity, even though carrying out the work of a public authority, was not bound by the Human Rights Act.” This was recently confirmed, leaving disabled and elderly people in a vulnerable position.

“Internal complaints often bring retribution. Only when rights-based law is invoked will service providers begin to understand that the constraints imposed on them by competitive tendering, threats of commercial take-overs and government abnegation of their responsibilities, may risk turning honest endeavours to make a home for disabled people into a place of degrading and inhuman treatment.”

“Hundreds of thousands of elderly people will no longer get home care services because of a funding shortfall and the widening impact of NHS cuts, the social care watchdog says” (The Times, 30 Nov 2006). “The Commission for Social Care Inspection reports today that nearly two thirds of the 150 councils that provide social services changed their criteria last year to provide social care only for the most dependent people.”

At the same time, “Nursing home care is moving towards residential home care, and residential home care is moving towards domiciliary home care,” according to William Laing, an economist, in Nursing Standard, 26 March 07, quoted in The Times Public Agenda, 3 Apr 07.

The Office for Disability Issues is to hold a review of Independent Living (Disability Now, Nov. 06). Andy Rickell has his doubts about it. “Providing the right to independent living could cost the taxpayer money, which politicians think will cost them votes.

“But much of the funding needed is available already. The Government spends billions of pounds on disability annually; however it spends this badly – sometimes resulting in dependency.

“If we had a system that put disabled people in the driving seat and allowed them to choose how government money is spent on support and services – whether through direct payments or individual budgets – that money would be better spent. We could get what we need, not what the Government guesses we need.”

Lord Ashley of Stoke’s Disabled Persons (Independent Living) Bill received its 2nd Reading in the Lords on 15 Dec. 06 and had a First Reading in the House of Commons on 24 Apr 07.

In a review of Changing Gear (Revised version. Ed. Ellershaw) published by the National Council on Palliative Care, Dr. Gillian Craig, MD, FRCP, makes ten points, of which we only have space for three:

“1. This publication highlights some principles for the care of people dying of malignant disease and non-malignant disease in hospitals, care homes, private residences and hospices, as set out in the Liverpool Care Pathway. This approach is being promoted throughout the country with government backing, a stated aim being to reduce emergency admissions and reduce transfers of patients from care homes to hospital at the end of life. . . . .

“4. Changing Gear has remarkably little to say about the value of hydration at the end of life. The guidelines fail to mention the work of Fainsinger and Bruera who give subcutaneous hydration to all their dying cancer patients who are dehydrated or at risk of becoming so, and by so doing reduce the incidence of distressing terminal delirium.

“5. Changing Gear fails to mention that subcutaneous hydration can be given in the patient’s home to prevent dehydration, fails to list thirst as a commonly reported symptom (see p.10), and considers it ‘best practice’ to discontinue intravenous infusions in the last hours or days of life (p.18). This advice is dangerous, for it can be difficult to predict how long a patient has to live. . . .”

Radio Netherlands, 29-31 May 06 reported that the chairperson of the five regional monitoring committees for euthanasia, Reina de Valle, says she does not know how often palliative sedation is used in patients because doctors are only obliged to report cases of actual euthanasia. She doubts that it is being used as a way to avoid the paperwork. . . .

She is more concerned with the medical professionalism of doctors who apply palliative sedation prematurely. “It is just euthanasia by different means, because without food or water anyone dies after a week.”