Do you know that the Dutch can have three passports?
One is for proving nationality when they go on an overseas travel. The rest of the two are “euthanasia passport” and “life passport”.
“Euthanasia passport” is for asking doctors to carry out euthanasia if they fall into coma. People who want to get this passport can decide what the unbearable state is for them. So, if anything should happen to a euthanasia card possessor, doctors have to decide remedy in compliance with that card.
“Life passport” is for refusing euthanasia even if they fall into coma.
That is to say, these two passports are mobile living will to indicate how they die. Both of them are postcard size and published by NGO (NVVE).
Now, the number of euthanasia passport comes up to about two hundred thousand. This means that many Dutchman accept euthanasia. On the other hand, the number of life passport is about two thousand.
I’m surprise to know this fact, but I’m in favor of the system of these two passports. I think these cards are similar to a donor card. If people have one of these cards, their living wills are respected till the end of life. Being able to select the way of dying is one of people’s happiness, I think.
2007年6月27日水曜日
NVVE
Netherlands was the first country which legalized euthanasia in 2001.
NVVE (Nederlandse Vereniging Voor Een Vrijwilling Levenseinde) is NGO in Netherlands. This was founded in Friesland, a district in the north of the Netherlands, in 1973, and one of the biggest NGO in Netherlands. One of the important NVVE’s tasks is to broaden the limit of acceptable euthanasia. The following are aims of NVVE.
Aims of the NVVE:
a. The advancement of an as broad as possible use and social acceptance of the existing legal possibilities towards a free choice for the ending of life.
b. The advancement of the social acceptance and the legal regulation of a free choice for ending of life in situations which are not within the scope of the existing legal possibilities.
c. Striving towards the recognition of a free choice for the ending of life and assistance with it as a human right.
References: NVVE. 27 Jun 2007
< http://www.nvve.nl/nvve2/pagina.asp?pagkey=72177>
NVVE (Nederlandse Vereniging Voor Een Vrijwilling Levenseinde) is NGO in Netherlands. This was founded in Friesland, a district in the north of the Netherlands, in 1973, and one of the biggest NGO in Netherlands. One of the important NVVE’s tasks is to broaden the limit of acceptable euthanasia. The following are aims of NVVE.
Aims of the NVVE:
a. The advancement of an as broad as possible use and social acceptance of the existing legal possibilities towards a free choice for the ending of life.
b. The advancement of the social acceptance and the legal regulation of a free choice for ending of life in situations which are not within the scope of the existing legal possibilities.
c. Striving towards the recognition of a free choice for the ending of life and assistance with it as a human right.
References: NVVE. 27 Jun 2007
< http://www.nvve.nl/nvve2/pagina.asp?pagkey=72177>
Euthanasia related NGO
I was searching for an NGO which relates to euthanasia, wondering it could give us any hints on doing presentation. And I found 1 euthanasia related NGO which is in England and Wales.
Here is brief introduction of the NGO "Dignity in dying".
Up to 2006 it was named the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (VES).
It is a campaigning organisation in the field of medical issues that promotes patient choice at the end of life, and operates independently of any political, religious, medical or other organisations.
It campaigns for a change in the law to permit medically assisted dying (also termed "euthanasia") within strict safeguards.
It also promotes the concept and use of advance health care ("living wills") in England and Wales.
The mission of Dignity in dying is
1.Patient choice at the end of life
2.A dignified death for all
Their vision is to secure the right for everyone to be able to die with dignity at the end of their life.
what they mainly do is
I haven't read everything on the webpage, but I hope this NGO could be one example of our presentation.
Dignity in dying::: http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/
Here is brief introduction of the NGO "Dignity in dying".
Up to 2006 it was named the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (VES).
It is a campaigning organisation in the field of medical issues that promotes patient choice at the end of life, and operates independently of any political, religious, medical or other organisations.
It campaigns for a change in the law to permit medically assisted dying (also termed "euthanasia") within strict safeguards.
It also promotes the concept and use of advance health care ("living wills") in England and Wales.
The mission of Dignity in dying is
1.Patient choice at the end of life
2.A dignified death for all
Their vision is to secure the right for everyone to be able to die with dignity at the end of their life.
what they mainly do is
- Promotes patient choice at the end of life
- Campaigns for a change in the law to permit medically assisted dying within strict safe guards
- Believes that a change in the law will give terminally ill people more control at he end of life and enable people to keep living longer than they might otherwise have done
- Wants to see greater openness around the process of dying and better support for doctors and nurses
I haven't read everything on the webpage, but I hope this NGO could be one example of our presentation.
Dignity in dying::: http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/
2007年6月20日水曜日
United States
As to euthanasia, there are several ways of thinking in the United States. Such differences come out of the diversity of religion. According to the results from past General Social Survey, respondents who are secular are found to be support euthanasia more than those who are pious.
Moderate Protestants shows less support than secular people, but they are less opposed to euthanasia than conservative Protestants. Though Catholic Church has come out in firm opposition to physician-assisted suicide, they share the nearly same level of support as moderate Protestants.
The liberal protestants are the most supportive. They don’t affiliate with religious institutions so much, so their stance on euthanasia is similar to that of non-affiliates. Thus, religiosity is related to level of opposition towards euthanasia.
Monks of Theravada Buddhism can be expelled if they simply describe the miseries of life or the bliss of the after-life. Like these subjects are taboos for them.
Mahavira Varadhman, the founder of Jainism, plainly allows suicide.
In Hinduism, euthanasia is seen as murder. They think that any bad action happening in one life time will be reflected in the next. However, in case of vegetative state, and with no quality of life, they are allowed to choose whether they continue their life, or not.
Ethnicity is also related to stance on euthanasia. African-Americans are almost 3 times less likely to accept euthanasia than European-American. The main reason of this is attributed to the lower level of medical establishment. Researchers think that past history of medical abuses towards minorities have made this different way of thinking.
Some studies showed that there are differences in views between males and females. A recent Gallup Poll found that 84% of males supported euthanasia compared to 64% of females. One study found that African-American women are 2.37 times more likely to oppose to euthanasia than European-American. African-American men are 3.61 times more likely to oppose to euthanasia than European-American men.
"Euthanasia-Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Influence of various factors on opinion regarding euthanasia. 20 June 2007. 20 Jun 2007
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia>.
Moderate Protestants shows less support than secular people, but they are less opposed to euthanasia than conservative Protestants. Though Catholic Church has come out in firm opposition to physician-assisted suicide, they share the nearly same level of support as moderate Protestants.
The liberal protestants are the most supportive. They don’t affiliate with religious institutions so much, so their stance on euthanasia is similar to that of non-affiliates. Thus, religiosity is related to level of opposition towards euthanasia.
Monks of Theravada Buddhism can be expelled if they simply describe the miseries of life or the bliss of the after-life. Like these subjects are taboos for them.
Mahavira Varadhman, the founder of Jainism, plainly allows suicide.
In Hinduism, euthanasia is seen as murder. They think that any bad action happening in one life time will be reflected in the next. However, in case of vegetative state, and with no quality of life, they are allowed to choose whether they continue their life, or not.
Ethnicity is also related to stance on euthanasia. African-Americans are almost 3 times less likely to accept euthanasia than European-American. The main reason of this is attributed to the lower level of medical establishment. Researchers think that past history of medical abuses towards minorities have made this different way of thinking.
Some studies showed that there are differences in views between males and females. A recent Gallup Poll found that 84% of males supported euthanasia compared to 64% of females. One study found that African-American women are 2.37 times more likely to oppose to euthanasia than European-American. African-American men are 3.61 times more likely to oppose to euthanasia than European-American men.
"Euthanasia-Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Influence of various factors on opinion regarding euthanasia. 20 June 2007. 20 Jun 2007
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia>.
2007年6月13日水曜日
Apology
I apologize to everyone for telling incorrect information. The World Medical Association (WMA) is NOT an NGO. Jodias taught me, so I have to say thank you for him.WMA is not an NGO, but they dedicate themselves to better medical treatment.
It is not so easy to find NGOs which are related to our topic, but I hope to find them.
It is not so easy to find NGOs which are related to our topic, but I hope to find them.
2007年5月31日木曜日
NGO related with our issue
The world Medical Association (WMA) is related with our controversial issue, euthanasia, I think.This was founded on 17 September 1947 to ensure the independence of physicians, and to work for the highest possible standards of ethical behavior and care by physicians, at all time.
The WMA provides ethical guidance to physicians through its Declarations, Resolutions, and Statements.
The WMA is in official relations with the World Health Organization (WHO). Other health professional associations, governmental and non-governmental agencies and regional medical associations are supporting the work of WMA.
↓ The following is quotations of the WMA webpage. ↓
1. The World Medical Association reaffirms its strong belief that euthanasia is in conflict with basic ethical principles of medical practice, and
2. The World Medical Association strongly encourages all National Medical Associations and physicians to refrain from participating in euthanasia, even if national law allows it or decriminalizes it under certain conditions.
〔My overall impression〕
I found that WMA is absolutely opposed to euthanasia whether it is patient’s will or not. Moreover, although some countries approve euthanasia in law, they are against euthanasia. The point of view of WMA is based on ethics, so I think they are sensitive to life problem. As I said before, I haven't decided yet which sides I stand. However, I come to think that positive euthanasia isn't illegal act. In my opinion, WMA thinks that the only thing physicians have to do is doing their best to save patients life. Of course, this is not wrong, but I think physicians have to respect patients' will even if they wish to stop medical treatment.
I confuse little by little, so I'll put my thoughts together next time.
Citation site:
"Policy." THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. 30 May 2007.
http://www.wma.net/e/
The WMA provides ethical guidance to physicians through its Declarations, Resolutions, and Statements.
The WMA is in official relations with the World Health Organization (WHO). Other health professional associations, governmental and non-governmental agencies and regional medical associations are supporting the work of WMA.
↓ The following is quotations of the WMA webpage. ↓
1. The World Medical Association reaffirms its strong belief that euthanasia is in conflict with basic ethical principles of medical practice, and
2. The World Medical Association strongly encourages all National Medical Associations and physicians to refrain from participating in euthanasia, even if national law allows it or decriminalizes it under certain conditions.
〔My overall impression〕
I found that WMA is absolutely opposed to euthanasia whether it is patient’s will or not. Moreover, although some countries approve euthanasia in law, they are against euthanasia. The point of view of WMA is based on ethics, so I think they are sensitive to life problem. As I said before, I haven't decided yet which sides I stand. However, I come to think that positive euthanasia isn't illegal act. In my opinion, WMA thinks that the only thing physicians have to do is doing their best to save patients life. Of course, this is not wrong, but I think physicians have to respect patients' will even if they wish to stop medical treatment.
I confuse little by little, so I'll put my thoughts together next time.
Citation site:
"Policy." THE WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. 30 May 2007
http://www.wma.net/e/
2007年5月24日木曜日
Terri Schiavo
In our last class, someone referred to Terri Schiavo, so I checked her on the Internet.
Terri Schiavo, American, was a normal housewife. However, she collapsed in her home suddenly on February 25, 1990 because of brain damage. Her reapiration and heartbeat were stopped, and she became persistent vegetative state (PVS). In 1998, Michael Schiavo, her husband, petitioned the Pinellas County Circuit Court to remove her feeding tube, but Robert and Mary Schindler, her parents, objected to this. The Governor of Florida and President of the United States designed laws to prevent removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, but these laws were regarded as unconstitutional and overturned by the supreme courts of Florida and the United States.
References : Wikipedia
This is matter of Terri Schiavo.
I didn't know this matter until now, but I found that this is just related to our topic. In case of Japan, like this matter may be taken as bigger and more serious problem. Actually, one of the doctors in Wakayama who released the respiratory organs came to be seen as a problem a few days ago. I found that the problems related to life and death are existed closely to us than I had expested.
Terri Schiavo, American, was a normal housewife. However, she collapsed in her home suddenly on February 25, 1990 because of brain damage. Her reapiration and heartbeat were stopped, and she became persistent vegetative state (PVS). In 1998, Michael Schiavo, her husband, petitioned the Pinellas County Circuit Court to remove her feeding tube, but Robert and Mary Schindler, her parents, objected to this. The Governor of Florida and President of the United States designed laws to prevent removal of Schiavo's feeding tube, but these laws were regarded as unconstitutional and overturned by the supreme courts of Florida and the United States.
References : Wikipedia
This is matter of Terri Schiavo.
I didn't know this matter until now, but I found that this is just related to our topic. In case of Japan, like this matter may be taken as bigger and more serious problem. Actually, one of the doctors in Wakayama who released the respiratory organs came to be seen as a problem a few days ago. I found that the problems related to life and death are existed closely to us than I had expested.
登録:
投稿 (Atom)