Comments about ‘In our opinion: Lives worth living, euthanasia unsuitable for children’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 19 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Bountiful, UT

I don't disagree with this desnews editorial, but I wonder why the difference with animals? Why do we put animals who we love to death if we deem their life not worth living and believe what we have done is for the best?

South Jordan, UT

So the Dnews, who has supported the death penalty, advocates that the State can eliminate your right to life, but a terminally ill patient cannot? Where is the liberty in that? There is no liberty, and no compassion, in denying a terminally ill, suffering person a more peaceful way to die.

liberty or ...?
Ogden, UT

I'm having dejavu of a Child K circa germany 1939 who was deemed to have no quality of life as well.

Far East USA, SC

We have some tough issues to face.

Medicare is projected to be the main budget buster going forward. Our costs are increasing and the baby boomers are retiring.

1/4 of medicare outlays occur in the last year of someones life.

If you study this as a business person would, this number would scream loudly.

But it turns into a political flash point. Remember all the hoopla over death panels?
Heck, this was a made up issue, and yet it took the headlines.

But, realistically, this needs to be addressed. We cant continue to spend huge $$ on someone who is about to die.

That is a cold hard fact.

In reality, we DO need some form of end of life panel. Call it death panels if you want, but it needs to be discussed in a logical, factual way without over-the-top political rhetoric which shuts down the discussion.

Murray, UT

"One of the foremost principles of common law is that minors, or individuals under the age of 18, are unable to enter into legally binding contracts." - Is not an accurate statement. The State of Utah grants minors the right to enter marriage, a civil contract, at the age of 16 with parental consent and at the age of 15 with judicial and parental consent.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Is euthanasia "suitable" for ANY group? Or ANY age?

Once we accept euthanasia as "suitable"... we are no better than the Nazis and their gas chambers. just on a different scale.

Christopher B
Ogden, UT

JoeBlow, I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with you. People don't want to put a price on someone's life, but we do it everyday and must continue to do it. People just don't want to admit we do.

If we didn't put a price on someones life, insurance companies would be required to pay for each and every procedure and medicine that could extend the life of a person by even a minute.

We cannot do that. A business person understands that regardless of who much you can get an obamacare policy for, the true cost of insurance to taxpayers is at an unsustainable level and cannot continue to increase.

There needs to be a way for logical people to realize that "No" needs to be said by insurance companies sometimes if any of us are to survive the health care nightmare we are in.

But too often liberals try and guilt these insurance companies by saying there is no price too high to help someone. And that simply is not true.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I know that comparison was a little over-the-top. But when we accept euthanasia for certain groups (children in this case)... we are headed the wrong direction (IMO).

If you think it will just stop at those with mental or medical handicaps... read the views of the euthanasia society (goggle it). Or the views of the Fabian Socialists on euthanasia. Google George Bernard Shaw and read his views on Eugenics. Watch his video spouting the philosophy of the Fabian Socialists (that every person should be asked every year or so.. what are YOU contributing to society... and give the chance to justify their existence.... and prove they deserve the RIGHT to live).

Goggle "Fabian Society"
Goggle "The second spring"
Google "Eugenics"
Learn about the agenda and where it goes.

It's a slippery slope after you accept euthanasia . Especially State sponsored Eugenics.

Far East USA, SC

"JoeBlow, I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with you."

Crazy things happen sometimes. :)

"But too often liberals try and guilt these insurance companies by saying there is no price too high to help someone. And that simply is not true"

I don't disagree but I see both sides as the problem (a totally liberal idea).
The last big discussion about the issue was shut down by the conservatives.

"Obama wants to kill Granny!"

And this was all predicated by the concept that doctors should be paid for having a sit down discussion with the family about end of life options.

This is what inspired the whole "death panel" discussion.

Yes, liberals definitely contribute to the problem. But Conservatives hands are equally dirty.

Wilf 55

What this article doesn't mention is how strict the rules are before any minor is granted his request to die. The procedure is so time-consuming and requires so many check-points that in nearly all cases the incurable, intolerably suffering child will have died before any action can be taken. Moreover, the number of requests will be extremely low, if any. The Netherlands have have had this law (for 16-year olds) for more than 10 years and only 5 minors have made the request over that period. So, comparisons with Nazis and gas chambers are very inappropriate. This is a complex, deeply humane problem. Compassion with the one who suffers intolerably should be a guiding principle in judging.


I always believed that the countenancing and regular practice of legal abortions would be a stepping stone to legally killing the old and infirm. I cannot believe the evil of the world in which we live.

Centerville, UT

I see it now, euthanasia camps across America and Europe. Where Grandma goes to stay. Or the government reroutes you when you thought you were going for a cruise in the Bahamas. "Arbeit macht frei" "Jedem das Seine" Apparently the concept is not appalling to some posters. "we DO need some form of end of life panel. Call it death panels if you want, but it needs to be discussed in a logical, factual way without over-the-top political rhetoric (code for don't bring morals into the discussion) which shuts down the discussion." "comparisons with Nazis and gas chambers are very inappropriate" If the Nazis had only euthanized 600,000 it would be acceptable. Maybe if it was only five it would be acceptable. Eugenics is alive and thriving in the US. Already we turn our backs on 50 million children killed since Roe vs Wade. We live in a black and morally depraved society.

Centerville, UT

"Compassion with the one who suffers intolerably should be a guiding principle in judging." The Nazis determined 10 million, (6 million Jews) were suffering intolerably and thus were released from their suffering as a race, because they didn't equal the greatest race and were destined to forever suffer as inferior.

Lafayette, IN

We are 17 trillion dollars in debt. A baby born today is 50,000 dollars in debt (if one adds in unfunded liabilities, make that 150,000). Ruining the futures of children so old people can live 6 more months is immoral. As for euthanasia and children, children deserve the option. I would prefer no children suffer persistent horrible health, but I didn't create this universe.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Soilent Green is PEOPLE!! (Charlton Heston)

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Would any same adult allow a child to eat candy without constraint? There is a reason that children are under the protective care of adults. Adults realize that life, once extinguished, is gone forever. Children may not fully understand that consequence.

No child is capable of making the decision to commit suicide. No adult fully understands the full consequences of 'self-killing'.

Before we assume that we are gods, shouldn't we fully understand the purpose of mortality?

liberty or ...?
Ogden, UT

@ Joe Blow and Christopher B. I hope your personally volunteering to be first in line. If you truly have a problem with medicare going to elderly then I say scrap it for every one. The people who need medical coverage the most are the people in the beginning or last stages of life.It is the height of self serving narcissism to have posterity regard their aging parents who scrimped saved and sacrificed their whole lives for them to deny them the treatment they need to help them enjoy the fruit of a lifes labor worth of pain blood sweat and tears. If you guys are so concerned about the cost I suggest you all open your checkbooks and pay your parents back the 150K-200K they spent on average to raise you. thats the average we all cost our parents by the time we leave home. Or we could go back to how america used to take care of our elderly. When they got to old to be self sustaining it was your job to have them move in with you and support them. I personally prefer that idea.

Centerville, UT

"so old people can live 6 more months" and the spin goes on maybe we shouldn't allow a retirement because it puts a drain on the children. A movie from 1976, "Logan's Run" depicted a society that had determined the optimal period of life and exterminated people when they reached that age, thus no drain on society. There is no moral position that supports this kind of policy.

UT Brit
London, England

Does anyone in this comment section actually understand how euthanasia works in Belgium? You do all realise that it has to be requested dont you??? This isnt a case of doctors going around and killing the old and infirm. People have to apply, go through a series of checks and interviews and state that they wish to die.

Comparing this to the nazis and eugenics shows a clear misunderstanding of how this all works.

This is for people in crippling pain or those with a condition with no cure that will leave them with no dignity as they wait for a death.

Far East USA, SC

"If you truly have a problem with medicare going to elderly then I say scrap it for every one."

Nice strawman. There is quite a difference between treating an otherwise healthy 70 year old with prostate cancer and doing a hip replacement on an 85 year old with lung cancer.

I find it curious how the same people that justify spending endlessly to extend someones life a few months but want to deny healthcare to younger people with their whole life ahead of them.

Somehow one is humane and the other is not?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments