Death Panel Update: British Journal Article Recommends Dehydrating Dementia Patients to Death to Save Money

Coming soon to Obama’s America…

Britain’s Socialist Health Care System Euthanizes 130,000 Elderly Patients Every Year

A recent editorial in the British Medical Journal recommends dehydrating dementia patients to death to save money.
Lifesite News reported:

The courts should not interfere with doctors who want to dehydrate to death incapacitated patients who are a drain on scarce financial resources, according to an editorial in this week’s edition of the prestigious British Medical Journal.

Raanan Gillon, emeritus professor of medical ethics and former chairman of the Institute of Medical Ethics governing body, wrote that a ruling last year by the High Court against dehydrating an incapacitated patient to death was “profoundly disturbing” because it took the life and death decision-making power out of the hands of doctors and required that the principle of the “sanctity of life” take precedence over other considerations.

The judgment, he said, “threaten[s] to skew the delivery of severely resource-limited healthcare services towards providing non-beneficial or minimally beneficial life prolonging treatments including artificial nutrition and hydration to thousands of severely demented patients whose families and friends believe they would not have wanted such treatment”.

He complained that the ruling required that, under the “stringent” Mental Capacity Act, in order to remove “life prolonging treatment” like a feeding and hydration tube, the patient himself must have left a legally binding “advance decision” in writing, and that previous casual or unrecorded statements to relatives were not sufficient grounds.

The editorial, titled, “Sanctity of life law has gone too far,” said that unless it is overturned, the court ruling “will gradually and detrimentally distort healthcare provision, healthcare values, and common sense.”

Its logical implication, Gillon wrote, is that “doctors should no longer decide, in consultation with those who know their incapacitated patients, whether life prolonging treatment including artificial nutrition and hydration will be in their patients’ best interests.”

Isn’t socialized medicine grand?

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Derak

    Jeebus. Just put a f**g bullet in their head and call it good. It’d be far more humane than this hideous obfuscation. Gawd almighty, save us.

  • Pingback: Death Panel Update: British Journal Article Recommends Dehydrating Dementia Patients to Death to Save Money | Born Conservative()

  • I’m not a racist; I don’t like Biden or Pelosi either

    I think the headline on this may be misleading.

    I read it to mean that the courts are saying you have to try and save anyone who doesn’t have a legally written & witnessed document saying otherwise, and the doctors are saying that decision should be made by their doctor, in consultation with friends/family members who may have a better understanding of what the patient would want.

    The “dehydration” part is creepy in any case.

    Moral of the story: get yourself an ironclad Personal Directive and Living Will.

  • bg


    hey, stop whining, let me be very clear, it’s “cost effective”.. /s/


  • bobdog

    DAMN YOU!!!! Soylent Green is PEEEEPLE!!

    Remember when that was just a silly Sci-Fi movie?

  • I’m not a racist; I don’t like Biden or Pelosi either

    BG I love your posts and all the research you do, but that is not the point of THIS article at all. And believe me, I am not a fan of universal heath care.

    There are plenty of things to worry about in Obamacare, but this isn’t one of them. This just says there’s no reason to keep a “hopeless, end-stage” patient alive just because they didn’t sign a piece of paper saying they wouldn’t want to continue “living” in such a state.

    If it were me, I would want my family to step in and pull the plug.

  • bigkahuna

    If they are all liberals who tend to be wastes of sperm anyway…No great loss. Let them reap what they sowed. The rest of us people who are not brain dead can determine what our lives will be like

  • bg


    Terri Schiavo was a trial run..

    Attorney Who Aided Terri Schiavo’s
    Husband Now Advising Barack Obama

    and as i recall, there were more than ample people posting (not here at
    GP, not sure there was a GP back then) who were more than willing to
    let starve her to death back then.. 🙁


  • Pingback: Death Panel Update: British Journal Article Recommends Dehydrating Dementia Patients to Death to Save Money|PolitifreakPolitifreak()

  • RedStateGal

    Hi. Just wondering when ‘letting nature take its course’ became evil. My father, who is 77, says it was right about the time when the government, rather families, began paying the bill. Is anyone going to say my Dad is wrong? Didn’t think so.

  • bg


    #6 July 17, 2012 at 12:37 am I’m not a
    racist; I don’t like Biden or Pelosi either

    i know what you’re saying..

    however, listen to the “up the road” solution..

    the conclusion is it’s unavoidably clear which way the wind will blow,
    especially considering the undeniable fact that the ultimate goal is to
    depopulate planet Earth..


  • colint

    I am 79 . Canadian and get very good affordable “Socialist” health care. If or rather when I get to the point that I am confined to a bed and cannot use a toilet and no possibility of recovery I would want to die as soon as possible without pain.

    I think this story is phony. Euthanising is injecting a drug to cause death within a minute like is done to end the life of a suffering pet. What the doctors do is to stop treatment that prolongs the suffering of patients who are dying. The cost of expensive equipment to prolong the dying process and staff to clean their bodies could be better spent on younger people.

  • atticcellar

    The idea that human life should be extended for terminally ill patients at any cost is foolishness. If someone has the resourses to prolong their life and choose to do so, it is their buisness. In America, if someone is on deaths door (in some cases even dead) the doctors and hospitals will go to outrageous lenghts to prolong life by even an hour at a finanicial cost that boggles the mind.. Get right with God.. Then you won’t have to fear death to the point of causing a hardship on society.. Your life in this world is only temporary.. It doesn’t matter how much money you have, God is going to take you when he chooses.. If however, someone has a reasonable chance of recovery money should be of no concern.. The treatment should occur.. If the patient is unable to pay,the hypocratic oath should apply.. Let the treated pay what they can afford on installment (if possible)..

  • bg


    #6 July 17, 2012 at 12:37 am I’m not a
    racist; I don’t like Biden or Pelosi either

    btw, you obviously missed the /s/ = sarcasm = 😉

    but none the less, at some point in the future (par the right under
    our noes in plain sight course) it is going to be “cost effective” at
    some point, i mean, isn’t that why they set up determining who
    gets what when where how or why panels
    in the first place??


  • bg


    i am sorry, but dehydration is cruel and unusual
    punishment for being terminally ill or otherwise..

    they don’t treat dogs that way!!

    hence, i’m certain it will eventfully advance to giving
    them a shot, at least i would hope & pray so.. *sigh*


  • I’m not a racist; I don’t like Biden or Pelosi either

    As I said before, the best solution for your own benefit and to save your family the heartache of having to make the decision is to get a Personal Directive and leave copies with your family/friends. We’re all going to die, so there’s no excuse for putting it off and putting someone else in the position of making the decision. Even young people should have a PD.

  • jony101

    if they did it to save the patient suffering its one thing, if they do it to save money, then it is the dreaded death panels. But no doubt obama would pull the plug on the above patients but he would check its a republican, even camatose democrats can vote.

  • just-saying

    Sarah Palin was right about death panels: The government will decide on life or death.

  • Dehydration is probably THE most excruciating way to die that there is.
    “A ‘Painless’ Death?”

  • Jen

    They already put people to death in hospitals in this country. They are just very good at hiding what’s they’re doing. My father (at age 59) broke his hip and went to the Hospital. He had heart problems, Diabetes, one leg, and needed dialysis. They put him on Dialysis there at the hospital but it wasn’t the same there….from the moment they hooked him up he was incoherent and couldn’t speak the entire time until he had a “heart attack” that killed him there at the hospital. I guess he had so many problems he wasn’t considered worth the treatment he would need for the rest of his life. Then they had a woman there who’s only job was to reassure people that “letting him go” was the best thing to do. I have heard similar stories of inneffective treatment at hospitals causing death that people thought were unusual and convinced to accept. Then after we wonder if they really had to die at that time. My mother also died of Breast cancer after extensive treatment and tens of thousand’s of dollars worth of chemo that prooved worthless. I have a hard time trusting doctors and hospitals now.

  • A_Nonny_Mouse

    “… professor of medical ethics … wrote that a ruling was “profoundly disturbing” because it took the life and death decision-making power out of the hands of doctors and required that the principle of the “sanctity of life” take precedence over other considerations …”

    = = = = = = =

    Did this arrogant son-of-sam study ethics under Dr. Mengele, or what? “Profoundly disturbing” that somebody wants to take the power to kill-at-a-whim away from the various “Dr. Death”s of the NHS?

    Heck, if *I* had the power-to-kill-at-a-whim, he’d freaking be in a box, underground, decomposing already.

  • Tim in Cali

    Sooo..a convict on death row..we can deprive them of
    1. food
    2. water
    3. medical attention
    4. oxygen < my choice

    After all,they're going to die..and we need the cell space

  • Limousine Barry

    My program is called “Dehydration with Dignity.” My job is getting your and your family’s medical records and determining the problem before it gets too expensive!

    Just think of your old Granny as a Clunker. She is probably a little forgetful. Old people are. And, they only get worse as time goes on!

    We can conclude that she will gradually degrade in dementia. Why not save money and give her “Dehydration with Dignity.” The savings will be huge! That money can go to needy people on the dole… who will vote for me!

    Your child looks a little slow. She probably has a slight case of Down’s Syndrome. Why wait until for the inevitable medical bills? Give her “Dehydration with Dignity.” The savings for my socialized healthcare system will be enormous. The money could go to buy air conditioners for people on the dole… who vote for me!

    Say you son has been injured in Afghanistan. He is now in the VA hospital with a possible case of brain injury or a possible case of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Why wait for the unavoidable?

    We can give him “end-of-life counseling” and then give him “Dehydration with Dignity.” The savings will be tremendous! The money can go to Bill Ayers to help young University students to learn how to form anti-war groups and protest America’s elderly veterans!

    If you like the way I have abused your healthcare money then vote for me! This is important. Send me $30.00 before midnight!

    My big black bus is belching soot and David Axelrod has an new scam for unionized healthcare donors. It’s a simple bait and switch scam. But, my unionized employees always vote for me. I say screw them! My campaign may suck but once I destroy the healthcare system it will suck worse. Good day.

  • American Woman

    Let’s be honest, doctors and hospitals bury their mistakes. Therefore, patients and their families need to be proactive.

    A couple of days ago there was a story out of NY about a little boy that got a scratch at school, who by that evening became ill. The family took him to his pediatrician twice, she kept insisting he had the flu.

    When he became worse with severe vomiting and fever, the parents were alarmed and took him to emergency at a NY hospital. The child was wretching and had blotches on his skin. The doctors at the hospital said the young boy just had the flu and he would be ok.

    Cut to the chase, in the span of four days, the beautiful young boy (his parents pride and joy) died from septic poisoning.

    How many stories like that never make it to the papers?

    I had an older friend, who was seriously ill with cancer. She had signed a living will saying that she did not want to be kept alive in such a situation by being a research guinea pig or being tied to machines. Her niece had promised that she would abide by her wishes.

    One doctor opposed the niece, so she had the lawyer who created the will, extended family and friends come to the hospital for a meeting. The opposing doctor backed off when he saw us, and the patient was put into the hospice ward and treated with dignity and pain medication. Within three or four weeks, she passed peacefully.

    She was a beautiful, loving, kind human being. She deserved nothing less than kind and compassionate treatment.

  • To “I’m not a racist” and his comment about getting the plug pulled. Spoken like a person not dying. Let’s put you in that position where your life is directly related to money and see ho much you’ll pay for another year, another month, another day, another hour or even another minute.

    I advocate those who think dying is cool and should be tried by those wanting to save money that they experience the thrill themselves. People like Bill Maher. I’ll bet money he’ll gladly write a check for a million just for another sixty seconds of breath.

    As for heroic efforts to prolong life. From personal experience I witnessed this current healthcare system keep my father alive for another year and actually give him some quality of life back. Last year he flatlined. He was diabetic, suffered kidney problems, 79yrs old, crippled and had heart disease. They brought him back, put him in rehab and got him mobile enough to make it back to his favorite cabin in the woods with his beloved wife. He got almost 365 days more.

    Well worth it.

    But had he been in Britain or in “I’m not a racist” world of socialized medicine, they would have not brought him back. He would be dead, lost that year, his wife and family lost that year, the things he needed to say and do not done. So how much is a life worth? The real question we should ask is why should the government be in charge of that decision at all? Especially when we see it spend 26 dollars a gallon for Naval eco-friendly fuel instead of the three bucks regular fuel costs. Or five hundred million on solar panels and crony payoffs. You want THEM to chose your life’s ending? Biden? Pelosi? Obama?

    As for the hospital killing patients. I think it is more they quit trying after they realize it is useless.

    As Jen noted, there is a moment when heroic efforts become futile. Dialysis for a patient with heart trouble- probably due to fluid retention- is the last ditch effort. They tried it twice with my dad, with little success. After that, he was in so much discomfort and pain, they hit him with morphine type drug to ease the discomfort. He died shortly thereafter.

    BUT that decision was made by people who did everything in their power to win, regardless of the cost. He never gave up, so they never gave up. He was never willing to get his “plug pulled”.

    He just wore out.

    The doctors, nurses, interns and techs all came to the room and hugged his beloved wife who had never left his side during the whole time he was in. They cried with her and apologized for not being able to do more.

    This is not what happens in Britain or Canada or any place where your life is considered a line item in a budget.

    I’ve seen our system work first hand. I’ve seen the compassion and commitment to their work. For anyone to make a stupid statement about being eager to have their plug pulled, all I have to say is, that is your decision, not the government’s or even your family’s. It is your life, and your death, hopefully something you can have with some dignity.

  • Jeannie

    “Killing TErri Schiavo” Part I, 3/24/2005 (Part II 3/25/2005)


    Given what has happened to the world in seven years it is nothing less than eerie:

    “People who say that the government has no business interfering in a private decision like removing Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube somehow have no problem with a squad of policemen preventing her parents (or anyone else) from giving their daughter food or water.

    Do those who want to keep the government out of private decisions think that the police are not the government? Do they think that the judges who authorized this are not the government?”

    “We are being told that Terri Schiavo is being “allowed” to “die a natural death.” Such an argument might make some sense if this were a terminally ill person. But Terri Schiavo is not dying from anything other than a lack of food and water, from which any of the rest of us would die.

    She is not dying a natural death. She is being killed.”

    The nature of death by starvation and dehydration is also being depicted as “gentle” in the words of the New York Times — the same New York Times which in 2002 reported starving people in India dying “clutching pained stomachs.”

    This “gentle” death is the story line in the liberal media but a priest who has actually seen Terri Schiavo tells a wholly different story of her visibly deteriorating condition. If this is such an easy death, why not videotape it and show those of us who are less enlightened how mistaken we are? Instead, there is a ban on anyone’s photographing Terri as she dies.”

    There is much more, but just as Archbishop Fulton Sheen and Pope John Paul II nailed what would come following contraception (divorce, abuse, neglected children, death culture, abortion, euthanasia) so too did Tom Sowell nail many of the implications of Teri’s death.

    And do not forget that the hospital where Teri was murdered was owned by the judge whose re-election had been partially funded by Teri’s husband, who himself had moved in with another woman and stopped what had been successful therapy for a then not so deteriorated Teri, only months after he’d been given money to pay for nearly two years of treatment.

  • Jeannie

    archer 52, if we were still a country of faith you would know to look where we do to find endless stories of modern day miracles.

    ‘giving up when they know it is futile’ is the legacy of God out of the school and what 60 years ago would have been shouted down by people who themselves KNEW of the power of faith, is now touted by all the ‘experts’ and those from 60 years ago would now be shouted down as fools and idiots.

    As it happened every time in the cycle. If only those who are so sure of the fallibility of religion were being educated on the fallibility of paganism and man deifying religion…atheism. All that atheism is is humanity telling itself that its own thinking and emotional instinct is the highest form of rational thought and upon itself alone can it rely…over and over and over again. Every time a new and young generation comes in to see the massive chaos that springs from godlessness and they rediscover God and faith resurges and even the most hardened of hearts open up just that little tiny crack..and it is enough to let them see that anti-religion was just something they were taught by organized religion…secular, government sponsored atheism.

    YOu who think organized religious followers are brainwashed are brainwashed yourselves, completely indoctrinated, told to not even consider opening your minds to read a bit…and you follow and do not read.

    They are all lunatics you chant, just as you were told, yet they DO help so much in disasters and they DO listen to you well and so many do have all those community back up programs paid for by them and not government. And who do YOU know who is right wing judgmental? Who do YOU know that says you will go to hell? WHERE do YOU see tons of Judeo Christian propaganda hitting you at every level? What’s that? Environmentalism? Population Control? Animal rights (cannot kill those cute little critters, nobody has the right!)? Food police? PC?

    Yet you have all been taught by some to not believe…and you believe them ….why? Are they so successful? Do they have more knowledge than any person these last 2000 years? Will they let you even BEGIN to read what they dismiss as rubbish? Do they allow you to question them without getting defensive or condescending?

    Those whose words make you automatically label them as crazy, when their actions made you admire them, are those being slowly and surely told to crawl back into the catacombs and never let you hear their beliefs…while environmentalism, PC, sexual liberation, population control is IMPOSED on us all and any who disagree are publicly chastised AND punished.

  • Jeannie

    and archer52, thank you so much for that message, it did what all heartfelt stories do, hit its target, mind and the heart. I hope you and your mother and family have had gentle memories to help your grief.

  • YourMaster

    nancy pelosi will be like that one day… hahaha…

    they need to do a study on whether or not botox distorts brainwaves…
    or damages brain functions or causes some form of severe dementia..
    or complete insanity. …that may be why pelosi thinks the way she does…
    and I’m starting to think she’s one of the few that will be suffering from alztimer’s disease
    or be completely senile beyond any sense of reality …one of these days.

  • Jeannie

    Your Master, Pelosi has been putting botulism into her face every 8 weeks for 20 years. In the not so distant future I believe the people will go ‘Duh’ and realize that of course such a treatment, as arsenic put on the skin centuries ago to make skin glistening white, would result in severe disorders.

  • Pingback: Death Panel Update: British Journal Article Recommends Dehydrating Dementia Patients to Death to Save Money | Liberal Whoppers()

  • Jeannie

    I had to bring this entire article because it gives a better vision of the scope of this and how far we really have traveled and how Dr. Sowell was prescient in what happens when precedents are set:

    From 3/22/2005

    ‘Cruel and unusual’

    Thomas Sowell

    Mar 22, 2005

    If the tragic case of Terri Schiavo shows nothing else, it shows how easily “the right to die” can become the right to kill. It is hard to believe that anyone, regardless of their position on euthanasia, would have chosen the agony of starvation and dehydration as the way to end someone’s life.

    A New York Times headline on March 20th tried to assure us: “Experts Say Ending Feeding Can Lead to a Gentle Death” but you can find experts to say anything. In a December 2, 2002 story in the same New York Times, people starving in India were reported as dying, “often clutching pained stomachs.”

    No murderer would be allowed to be killed this way, which would almost certainly be declared “cruel and unusual punishment,” in violation of the Constitution, by virtually any court.

    Terri Schiavo’s only crime is that she has become an inconvenience — and is caught in the merciless machinery of the law. Those who think law is the answer to our problems need to face the reality that law is a crude and blunt instrument.

    Make no mistake about it, Terri Schiavo is being killed. She is not being “allowed to die.”

    She is not like someone whose breathing, blood circulation, kidney function, or other vital work of the body is being performed by machines. What she is getting by machine is what all of us get otherwise every day — food and water. Depriving any of us of food and water would kill us just as surely, and just as agonizingly, as it is killing Terri Schiavo.

    Would I want to be kept alive in Terri Schiavo’s condition? No. Would I want to be killed so slowly and painfully? No. Would anyone? I doubt it.

    Every member of Terri Schiavo’s family wants her kept alive — except the one person who has a vested interest in her death, her husband. Her death will allow him to marry the woman he has been living with, and having children by, for years.

    Legally, he is Terri’s guardian and that legal technicality is all that gives him the right to starve her to death. Courts cannot remove guardians without serious reasons. But neither should they refuse to remove guardians with a clear conflict of interest.

    There are no good solutions to this wrenching situation. It is the tragedy of the human condition in its most stark form.

    The extraordinary session of Congress, calling members back from around the country, with the President flying back from his home in Texas in order to be ready to sign legislation dealing with Terri Schiavo, are things that do us credit as a nation.

    Even if critics who claim that this is being done for political or ideological reasons are partially or even wholly correct, they still miss the point. It is the public’s sense of concern — in some cases, outrage — that is reflected by their elected representatives.

    What can Congress do — and what effect will it have? We do not know and Congress does not know. Those who are pushing for legislation to save Terri Schiavo are obviously trying to avoid setting a precedent or upsetting the Constitutional balance.

    It is an old truism that hard cases make bad law. No one wants all such cases to end up in either Congress or the federal courts. But neither do decent people want an innocent woman killed because she was inconvenient and a court refused to recognize the conflict of interests in her legal guardian.

    The fervor of those who want to save Terri Schiavo’s life is understandable and should be respected, even by those who disagree. What is harder to understand is the fervor and even venom of those liberals who have gone ballistic — ostensibly over state’s rights, over the Constitutional separation of powers, and even over the sanctity of family decisions.

    These are not things that liberals have any track record of caring about. Is what really bothers them the idea of the sanctity of life and what that implies for their abortion issue? Or do they hate any challenge to the supremacy of judges — on which the whole liberal agenda depends — a supremacy that the Constitution never gave the judiciary?

    If nothing else comes out of all this, there needs to be a national discussion of some humane way to end life in those cases when it has to be ended — and this may not be one of those cases.

  • Granny

    Oh, we did that here first – Terry Schiavo!

  • Pingback: This Will Be The Result of ObommieCommieCare | ZION'S TRUMPET()

  • Militant conservative


    Yup your an old socialist

    alright. The point is WHO

    chooses. You like government

    I have a living will. I choose.

    Socialist are such idiots.

  • Blue Hen

    “I would want my family to step in and pull the plug.”

    I don’t know what ails the people using this phrase, and using it very badly. They are talking about nutrition and hydration. Notice how they throw about the term “artificial”?

    Newsflash: Giving a baby a bottle is “artificial”. They didn’t get it themselves. An elderly person sitting in a chair handed a glass of water is “artificial”. They didn’t get it themselves. If we wouldn’t consider doing this to someone on death row (and we don’t), then why would this be considered for even a moment unless there were specific authorization from that person? The only reason is rationing of care. And because death row inmates can bring suit. People stricken in beds cannot.

  • LilyBart

    Dehydrating someone to death IS euthanasia. But its long and slow and painful. I don’t agree with euthanasia, but if you’re going to do it, do it quickly and humanely.

  • Sasja

    Come on people. Don’t you know that when you become a burden to your family or society, it is your duty to die? What do you think living wills are for? Having witnessed two occasions where it was thought only death was an answer because there was no hope but, oops. Not only did they recover, they are up and about and, oh my gosh, working. What went wrong?

    Far as I’m concerned, just as checking that organ donor box on your drivers license, a living will guarantees you will not receive the ultimate care you need to recover.

    Everyone in my immediate family know what each individual wishes are in these circumstances. They are written down and only for the family’s eyes and will be honored to the letter.

  • Sasja

    We have lost our humanity.

  • dba…vagabond trader

    My biggest problem is allowing a bean counting bureaucrat to pick and choose who gets to live. It will come to that and not only the elderly will be affected.

  • Finncrisp

    Our future – dictated by passage of the Affordable Eugenics Act of 2010. We will probably execute with Morphine – it is quicker & will allow more deaths to occur per facility. Had enough yet? When the state controls health provision, you only live as long as the state’s interest is met with you still alive. So, when the time comes you are just a cost to the state and pay little or no taxes, what do you think happens next?

    After 70 years of this in UK, it is just another day at the office.

  • colint

    Some comment mention the Schiavo case as though her death should have been further delayed . MRI tests had shown brain damage showing she had ZERO possibilty of recovery. This was confirmed in the later autopsy. Her brain was not capable of feeling pain. She was kept alive like a doll for the parents.

    Modern medical technology can keep a body alive. 100 years ago, when there were no artificial means of sustaining life, people were allowed to die. Giving the dying person a few spoonfuls of water was enough care. Some mention medical care that prolonged FUNCTIONAL life and that is good. When that is NOT possible let the person go’

  • dwd

    Coming to a hospital near you! Thanks Obama!

    If you like your plan, you can keep it — unless Obama and the Democrats decide you should just be dehydrated to death.

  • dwd

    “I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve just lived long enough.”
    -Barack Obama

  • thescribbler

    They let people die like this every day…here, everywhere. When they take a person off of life support, it includes any fluids and food being given. Hospice came to me when my mother was dying of cancer (age 58), they explained to me how everything would work. It wasn’t until afterward, that I had a nurse inform me that dying by dehydration is a horrible death. Your vital organs start to shrivel and dry out until they just can’t function any longer. Looking back and knowing what I know now, I would have greatly preferred them being able to give her something in her IV that would let her just fall to sleep and pass as pain free as possible.

  • bg


    just a sample;

    “If the upper class is able to give it’s children, grandchildren more
    and more genetic advantages, they will move away from the people
    who are naturally born..”
    ~ Lee Silver

    Our Totalitarian Eugenicist-in-Chief

    [To put the point even more directly, Obama does not want the
    Catholic poor to procreate. Like Planned Parenthood’s twisted foundress,
    Margaret Sanger (#34), Obama is a chilly eugenicist at heart who fears
    a backwards America “punished” by the babies of unenlightened breeders.
    China boasts a one-child policy; Obama’s is more like a zero-child one.
    Without a universally subsidized right to sterilization, contraception, and
    abortion via Obamacare, his Brave New World (#68) would falter and fail
    to materialize. . . .]

    much more here (#17/18), in connecting links & threads..


  • Joanne

    What is mind-blowing is this person actually believes that what they say is perfectly sensible. Why not quit providing monies to those illegal muslims and other foreigners entering the UK and living off the dole – them and all their wives and children…..that is where you should be saving monies, not saving monies on the backs of the people who actually paid into the system to be provided for in the future. I would like to have a word with the POS and explain life to him, because obviously he needs it.

    In Obamacare, democrats will receive care before all others – believe it – Obama did it to the car industry, and he will have no problem pulling the plug on people who don’t vote or financially support him.

  • Sasja

    When seconds count, ethic panels are just minutes, hours, days, or weeks away.

  • bg


    i’m surprised they aren’t using the lack of
    “ice floats” to pimp their death panels.. /s/

    like so many have mentioned, the bottom line point is:


    which, believe it or not, IS where we are headed.. 🙁

    and albeit won’t substantially affect this, or perhaps even the next
    generation.. “future generations” will most likely have been “second
    naturedly” conditioned to accepting “death panels” as being part of
    a “way of life”.. /truth sarc/


  • greenfairie

    Britain will not execute any criminal for any reason, but will sentence someone suffering from dementia–which isn’t fatal per se, just disturbing–to a horrible, lingering, cruel death for merely being a burden on the state.

    No thanks. If the state is going to kill me, I will give them a better reason than merely being old, ill, and useless.

  • Blue Hen

    colint commented:
    Some comment mention the Schiavo case as though her death should have been further delayed . MRI tests had shown brain damage showing she had ZERO possibilty of recovery. This was confirmed in the later autopsy. Her brain was not capable of feeling pain. She was kept alive like a doll for the parents.

    Not true. Sen Frist( who is a doctor) became involved after he saw test results showing more than zero. You also conveniently left out the fact that her loving husband shacked up with another woman, having kids with her and spent most of the $750,000 settlement that was supposed to go for her rehabilitation. he was allowed to claim that he was her loving husband AND live with someone else.

  • gobnait

    Life was so much simpler and humane when medical science did NOT have the means to artificially extend our lives and we were permitted to die naturally and peacefully. Well, there you go, progressives-you got what you wanted-progress. Look where it’s gotten us. Idiots.

  • bg


    Blue Hen #51 July 17, 2012 at 11:51 am


    nuff said, do some research..


  • bg


    Blue Hen #51 July 17, 2012 at 11:51 am

    re: colint

    sorry about that..


  • The Elector of Saxony

    “Sanctity of life law has gone too far,”

    And the Left claim that Nazism is phenomenon of the Right! It would be funny if it were not so sad. The Left in this country has screamed “slippery slope” so many times one would think they would be permanently hoarse from the exercise. So we accept pornography masquerading as free speech, we accept the presentation of the homosexual lifestyle as unassailably normal, prayer before a public school football match is a “slippery slope” to a theocratic government, same for Christmas cards and a manger on the lawn of a town square. “Slippery Slope! We can’t give an inch or it will certainly follow that we will lose our rights to speak at all, we’ll be banning and burning books, we’ll live in a Christian theocracy where women are reduced to barefoot, kitchen-pregnancy!” We must draw the line in the sand here!, they shout.

    And yet, for the Left, something called the Sanctity of Life Law and the principles it enshrines, are an acceptable target for attack? What of the “slippery slope” traveled by Hitler, Stalin and company? Is there no Leftist who thinks that if we start by dehydrating elderly dementia patients, it might take us down a road where we simply euthanize the handicapped at birth? After all, the State can hardly make use of a child with Down’s Syndrome, and that child will surely be a drain on precious public resources. But I think that in Leftist circles such arguments are made and roundly approved. They must be! Otherwise how could they refrain from denouncing Obama, who voted to deny care to babies who survived botched abortions? Instead they love him and approve of the unfettered, unrestricted murder of innocents in utero.

    I wonder why everything is a slippery slope, except for the de-sanctification of Human Life? They have such an urgency about it, it seems. I stand in wonder at their absolute disgust for Humanity and their hunger to see it smashed in the womb, gassed in the death chamber, worked to death in Siberian work camps, marched into the fields and tortured to death in the millions in the “killing fields”, and yet they feel no compunction over it, no guilt of any kind. These are the deeds of their ideological Socialist/Marxist brothers and yet, even upon reflection of the terror inflicted by Socialism upon Humankind in the 20th Century, they still cannot bring themselves to regard Life as anything more than disposable clumps of cells.

  • Blue Hen

    #53 July 17, 2012 at 1:30 pm
    bg commented:

    Blue Hen #51 July 17, 2012 at 11:51 am


    nuff said, do some research..

    If you don’t like it, disprove it.

  • bg


    Blue Hen #56 July 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm

    i was disagreeing with colint comment, not yours..

    also apologized here..

    besides i have nothing to prove
    i didn’t make any false claims..

    again. sorry about the mix up..


  • Pingback: » Death Panel Update: British Journal Article Recommends Dehydrating Dementia Patients to Death to Save Money()

  • Blue Hen

    #57 July 17, 2012 at 3:44 pm
    bg commented:


    Blue Hen #56 July 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm

    “i was disagreeing with colint comment, not yours..

    also apologized here..”

    Ah. I didn’t catch who the second comment was directed toward. I understand (now) and sorry about that.

  • KRM

    Let’s see, the UK will not sell certain drugs to the US because it would be cruel and unusual punishment to use them in the execution a convicted child murderer.

    But it is fine with you to kill 130,000 elderly patients each year by denying water, so you can balance your books?

    At least have the humanity to use the banned propofol on the dementia patients.

  • Pingback: Those Compassionate Socialists | PoliNation()

  • Stan

    My 86 year old mother has had to talk to her friend’s doctors to explain to them that the patient they sent home to die was actually still very active.
    Ask any elderly Canadian about socialized health care and see what they say about death panels.

  • Pingback: British Health System kills 130,000 elederly people a year « BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!()

  • bg


    Blue Hen #59 July 17, 2012 at 5:19 pm

    thank you,

    and no problem.. 😉


  • Pingback: ORBUSMAX ARCHIVES » Links From 7/17/12()