Sciences Medicine &
Warning: "a lie leads to another" (Terence)
Two manifestos written by physicians circulating on the Internet: one calls for the decriminalization of euthanasia, the other objects.
The French Society of support and palliative care (SFAP) launched on Wednesday evening on the Internet a manifesto to be signed by the health professionals who do not identify with the current movement, backed by Le Nouvel Observateur, claiming legalization of euthanasia. This manifesto wishes to reaffirm the complexity of the problems that "require a thorough and dispassionate reflection rather simple and simplistic solutions. "If the authors of this paper warns against" assisted suicide law "that would radically alter our social functioning, they believe, however, that this is by no means a field that relates directly to health professionals:" There is no acceptable argument for that if our society decides to recognize such legal assistance to suicide, this task should healthcare professionals. To kill requires no medical expertise. Health professionals will not assume this role. Finally, this manifesto is estimated that the 2005 law on end of life that rejects the aggressive treatment and affirms the fundamental right of every citizen to refuse treatment unnecessary or meaningless, provides solutions to these difficult questions. The authors regret that the application of this law is imperfect and require the launch of two campaigns, one explanation vis-à-vis the general public and other training and education of health professionals.
Act Review
This manifesto, in preparation for several weeks, was posted Wednesday night on emergency response to another article published by Le Nouvel Observateur yesterday, this one in favor of decriminalization of euthanasia. Circulating on the Internet since October, this text has been signed by 2,000 doctors, nurses, orderlies ... "We caregivers have helped patients to die, because for sure the disease outweighed our therapeutic, because despite adequate treatment, the physical and psychological suffering of the patient made life intolerable ... The authors of this manifesto, initiated by Dr. Denis Labayle Hospital of South Paris area, they believe that the law of April 2005 is insufficient. They claim, moreover, the immediate cessation of lawsuits against health care providers charged in connection with cases of euthanasia, a revision of the law as soon as possible and appropriate ways to support patients at the end life. A question
as powerful as the end of life deserves a debate denser than war through interposed clear. But some associations such as "for the right to die with dignity (ADMD) want to take this presidential election so that politicians take a stand on this issue.
trivialization of death
Furthermore, the publication of the manifesto in favor of the decriminalization of euthanasia is also intended to pressure in a trial should take place on 12 and 13 March in the Dordogne. A doctor and a nurse are accused of causing the death of a 65 year old woman with terminal through an injection of potassium chloride. In a particular context as the companion of the son of the patient was the sister of the doctor who prescribed the injection ...
"Faced with an incurable disease, whatever may be said, palliative care can not prevent all suffering," said Dr. Labayle, initiator of the manifesto in favor of decriminalization of euthanasia. We support for example the creation of an ethics committee at each hospital that would help doctors faced with an unmanageable problem. "A physician intensivist believes him, that legalizing euthanasia," we may leave patients more alone with their distress and suffering. By trivializing death, we advocate a societal disease that is chilling. "For Dr. Bernard Devalois, president of the SFAP:" We help people to die without suffering, we support their families, we have the means to do so, this does not mean it causes death. "
Finally, John Leonetti, MD, UMP, led to the 2005 law on end of life, regrets the confusion about the terminology in this debate and argues that" the law of April 2005 n is not known, is misunderstood and misapplied. The first thing to do would be to begin to remedy this. "Manifesto
health professionals and volunteers accompagnementconcernant debate on ending life
Faced with a topical it seems to us essential to hear a clear and strong voice for health professionals on issues unreasonable obstinacy and suicide legally assisté.Comme we were more to fear the debate has prompted the campaign, at the instigation of the lobby euthanasie.Un real plan of campaign was organized, culminating in the moment The inquiry
with candidates about White Paper of the Association for the Right to Die in Dignity / ADMD (20 MB PDF document: the load times can be quite long on some computers)
the issue of a "petition" a syndicate of general ultra-minority gathering of physicians claiming to have been euthanized patients (Nouvel Observateur, 7 March 2007)
The trial of the doctor sitting at Perigueux and St. Astier nurse who killed a patient with potassium chloride
Our responsibility of professionals and volunteers to support is to react without any extremism and dogmatism, building on our practice and our values éthiques.Ce obvious purpose to be signed by representatives of learned societies concerned with the accompanying the end of life, but also by any caregiver or volunteer who feels Agreement with this statement.
The text of the Manifesto of health professionals and volunteers to support regarding the debate on ending life
In the current challenge to the law of April 2005 on patients' rights and end of life , it seems necessary to clarify the views of health professionals or volunteers involved in supporting these everyday questions.Il is essential to reaffirm the complexity in advance of problems. They require careful thought and dispassionate and not simple or simplistic solutions. Very often the arguments are appeals to the emotions and suffering generated by tragedy or loss: the emotional approach does not appear sufficient for Answers wise and prudent (the Greek phronesis). That is a rational approach a-dogmatic and wide consultation to be proposed to illuminate the debate citoyen.Les supporters of legalization of euthanasia "systematically assimilate two questions yet fundamentally different: one question the right of everyone of us to refuse unreasonable obstinacy and secondly the issue of legally assisted suicide. This confusion is reflected so caricatured in a recent publication sent to presidential candidates: the White Paper of the ADMD ("End of life: a new law is essential" in February 2007). Regarding the claim of some to legally assisted suicide, it is is not a field that relates directly to health professionals we are. It is a question to all of our citizens and their representatives. He would organize these supporters by law a right to assisted suicide. It concerns so people no longer wishing to live and who request the company to "Help to die." Everyone is free to approve or not such a social project. Our role here is to draw attention to two points: The right to suicide
of each individual is not challenged by the current law. The creation of a legally assisted suicide envisioned by some radical change in our social functioning.
There is no valid argument that if our society decides to recognize such "legal assistance to suicide, this task is entrusted to health professionals. To kill requires no medical expertise. Health professionals assume therefore this role!
The question of the right to refusal of aggressive treatment (or unreasonable obstinacy) is cons in the heart of our daily concerns. We are directly confronted as health professionals or volunteers involved in supporting patients at end of life in particular. That's why we supported the development process of the law of April 2005.
This legislation is an important element in clarifying the issues. It provides practical solutions to these difficult questions. Buoyed by the home of the Enlightenment and Human Rights, it intended to be a model for Europe and the World. Following an extensive debate and a remarkable parliamentary work, passed unanimously by the National Assembly, it affirms the basic right for every citizen to refuse unnecessary treatments and / or meaningless. It clearly establishes that it is concerned about (the patient) to decide what is or is not an unreasonable obstinacy for him. Whether
end of life, or be kept alive artificially by a technical device, the patient is able to decide for itself, can stop all treatment, including those, if any, keep alive. Physicians have an obligation to comply this decision. When the patient is not able to decide for itself the physician should avoid anything that may appear as aggressive therapy (or unreasonable obstinacy). It must be founded on the instructions left by the patient himself (before his disability), particularly through advance directives and appointing a trusted person and on the advice of family and proches.Deux years after its enactment it is unfortunately true that the practical application of the law of April 2005 remains very imperfect. In violation of her hard situations unacceptable persist. We must apply the law and not change it! Our citizens are unfamiliar with this important law and the rights it confers on them .. The percentage of patients drafting of advance directives and appointing a trusted person is minimal. Some health professionals also uninformed, do not know how to apply the law. Patients who can not assert their rights and do not know where to turn for satisfaction.C is why a number of concrete steps are required:
Organization of a national information campaign about the opportunities law at the general public
Organization of a national awareness campaign and training of health professionals towards
Creating a monitoring practices of unreasonable obstinacy whose tasks will be to evaluate the practical application of the law of 2005 to organize information , awareness and training mentioned above. It will also provide expertise to the role of health professionals and mediation for patients and their families in complex cases of law enforcement. This will avoid a judicial remedy which remains today the only possibility in case of refusal to apply the manifest law. This observatory will bring together all the learned societies and coordinate the implementation of recommendations of good practice to specify the scope of the law to different clinical realities.
As health professionals and volunteers to support face the question of the end of life, we believe that the questioning of candidates are for president needs to refocus on the fundamental question: which way forward for either better enforced the law on patient rights and the end of life? This clarification of the debate seems to be a prerequisite to any decision position.Les signatories of the Manifesto
The French Society for Accompaniment and Palliative Care (SFAP)
Act Review
This manifesto, in preparation for several weeks, was posted Wednesday night on emergency response to another article published by Le Nouvel Observateur yesterday, this one in favor of decriminalization of euthanasia. Circulating on the Internet since October, this text has been signed by 2,000 doctors, nurses, orderlies ... "We caregivers have helped patients to die, because for sure the disease outweighed our therapeutic, because despite adequate treatment, the physical and psychological suffering of the patient made life intolerable ... The authors of this manifesto, initiated by Dr. Denis Labayle Hospital of South Paris area, they believe that the law of April 2005 is insufficient. They claim, moreover, the immediate cessation of lawsuits against health care providers charged in connection with cases of euthanasia, a revision of the law as soon as possible and appropriate ways to support patients at the end life. A question
as powerful as the end of life deserves a debate denser than war through interposed clear. But some associations such as "for the right to die with dignity (ADMD) want to take this presidential election so that politicians take a stand on this issue.
trivialization of death
Furthermore, the publication of the manifesto in favor of the decriminalization of euthanasia is also intended to pressure in a trial should take place on 12 and 13 March in the Dordogne. A doctor and a nurse are accused of causing the death of a 65 year old woman with terminal through an injection of potassium chloride. In a particular context as the companion of the son of the patient was the sister of the doctor who prescribed the injection ...
"Faced with an incurable disease, whatever may be said, palliative care can not prevent all suffering," said Dr. Labayle, initiator of the manifesto in favor of decriminalization of euthanasia. We support for example the creation of an ethics committee at each hospital that would help doctors faced with an unmanageable problem. "A physician intensivist believes him, that legalizing euthanasia," we may leave patients more alone with their distress and suffering. By trivializing death, we advocate a societal disease that is chilling. "For Dr. Bernard Devalois, president of the SFAP:" We help people to die without suffering, we support their families, we have the means to do so, this does not mean it causes death. "
Finally, John Leonetti, MD, UMP, led to the 2005 law on end of life, regrets the confusion about the terminology in this debate and argues that" the law of April 2005 n is not known, is misunderstood and misapplied. The first thing to do would be to begin to remedy this. "Manifesto
health professionals and volunteers accompagnementconcernant debate on ending life
Faced with a topical it seems to us essential to hear a clear and strong voice for health professionals on issues unreasonable obstinacy and suicide legally assisté.Comme we were more to fear the debate has prompted the campaign, at the instigation of the lobby euthanasie.Un real plan of campaign was organized, culminating in the moment The inquiry
with candidates about White Paper of the Association for the Right to Die in Dignity / ADMD (20 MB PDF document: the load times can be quite long on some computers)
the issue of a "petition" a syndicate of general ultra-minority gathering of physicians claiming to have been euthanized patients (Nouvel Observateur, 7 March 2007)
The trial of the doctor sitting at Perigueux and St. Astier nurse who killed a patient with potassium chloride
Our responsibility of professionals and volunteers to support is to react without any extremism and dogmatism, building on our practice and our values éthiques.Ce obvious purpose to be signed by representatives of learned societies concerned with the accompanying the end of life, but also by any caregiver or volunteer who feels Agreement with this statement.
The text of the Manifesto of health professionals and volunteers to support regarding the debate on ending life
In the current challenge to the law of April 2005 on patients' rights and end of life , it seems necessary to clarify the views of health professionals or volunteers involved in supporting these everyday questions.Il is essential to reaffirm the complexity in advance of problems. They require careful thought and dispassionate and not simple or simplistic solutions. Very often the arguments are appeals to the emotions and suffering generated by tragedy or loss: the emotional approach does not appear sufficient for Answers wise and prudent (the Greek phronesis). That is a rational approach a-dogmatic and wide consultation to be proposed to illuminate the debate citoyen.Les supporters of legalization of euthanasia "systematically assimilate two questions yet fundamentally different: one question the right of everyone of us to refuse unreasonable obstinacy and secondly the issue of legally assisted suicide. This confusion is reflected so caricatured in a recent publication sent to presidential candidates: the White Paper of the ADMD ("End of life: a new law is essential" in February 2007). Regarding the claim of some to legally assisted suicide, it is is not a field that relates directly to health professionals we are. It is a question to all of our citizens and their representatives. He would organize these supporters by law a right to assisted suicide. It concerns so people no longer wishing to live and who request the company to "Help to die." Everyone is free to approve or not such a social project. Our role here is to draw attention to two points: The right to suicide
of each individual is not challenged by the current law. The creation of a legally assisted suicide envisioned by some radical change in our social functioning.
There is no valid argument that if our society decides to recognize such "legal assistance to suicide, this task is entrusted to health professionals. To kill requires no medical expertise. Health professionals assume therefore this role!
The question of the right to refusal of aggressive treatment (or unreasonable obstinacy) is cons in the heart of our daily concerns. We are directly confronted as health professionals or volunteers involved in supporting patients at end of life in particular. That's why we supported the development process of the law of April 2005.
This legislation is an important element in clarifying the issues. It provides practical solutions to these difficult questions. Buoyed by the home of the Enlightenment and Human Rights, it intended to be a model for Europe and the World. Following an extensive debate and a remarkable parliamentary work, passed unanimously by the National Assembly, it affirms the basic right for every citizen to refuse unnecessary treatments and / or meaningless. It clearly establishes that it is concerned about (the patient) to decide what is or is not an unreasonable obstinacy for him. Whether
end of life, or be kept alive artificially by a technical device, the patient is able to decide for itself, can stop all treatment, including those, if any, keep alive. Physicians have an obligation to comply this decision. When the patient is not able to decide for itself the physician should avoid anything that may appear as aggressive therapy (or unreasonable obstinacy). It must be founded on the instructions left by the patient himself (before his disability), particularly through advance directives and appointing a trusted person and on the advice of family and proches.Deux years after its enactment it is unfortunately true that the practical application of the law of April 2005 remains very imperfect. In violation of her hard situations unacceptable persist. We must apply the law and not change it! Our citizens are unfamiliar with this important law and the rights it confers on them .. The percentage of patients drafting of advance directives and appointing a trusted person is minimal. Some health professionals also uninformed, do not know how to apply the law. Patients who can not assert their rights and do not know where to turn for satisfaction.C is why a number of concrete steps are required:
Organization of a national information campaign about the opportunities law at the general public
Organization of a national awareness campaign and training of health professionals towards
Creating a monitoring practices of unreasonable obstinacy whose tasks will be to evaluate the practical application of the law of 2005 to organize information , awareness and training mentioned above. It will also provide expertise to the role of health professionals and mediation for patients and their families in complex cases of law enforcement. This will avoid a judicial remedy which remains today the only possibility in case of refusal to apply the manifest law. This observatory will bring together all the learned societies and coordinate the implementation of recommendations of good practice to specify the scope of the law to different clinical realities.
As health professionals and volunteers to support face the question of the end of life, we believe that the questioning of candidates are for president needs to refocus on the fundamental question: which way forward for either better enforced the law on patient rights and the end of life? This clarification of the debate seems to be a prerequisite to any decision position.Les signatories of the Manifesto
The French Society for Accompaniment and Palliative Care (SFAP)
See Martin Perez. Posted March 9, 2007 in Le Figaro
Sign the manifesto and send it by postal mail: click here
Sign the Manifesto Online: click here
For more information:
End of life, desire death and euthanasia: the company tested (Article by R. Aubry & O. Maurel, 2004)
Euthanasia and death desired : Issues for the company and palliative care practice (Book coordinated by R. Aubry, January 2005)
The SFAP in the press
"The assassins are so nice"
Following the release of his novel on euthanasia "The assassins are so nice" (Salvator Edition), Elizabeth Bourgeois, RN, receives support from many individuals who, collectively, can have a real impact on this serious social issue.
That is why the Collective for a medicine of life "has been created to address the pervasive action of those who profit from many painful cases of euthanasia to require passing a law allowing the practice in France .
That is why the Collective for a medicine of life "has been created to address the pervasive action of those who profit from many painful cases of euthanasia to require passing a law allowing the practice in France .
The Collective, apolitical and confessional, said: helping someone to die in dignity, he's bringing all the medical and psychological care to avoid him suffering extreme physical and moral, end of life.
helping someone to die with dignity can in no way want to say cause its death.
that legalizing euthanasia, it would introduce the possibility for anyone to decide upon the death or suffering of beings regarded as unworthy to live.
that medicine is the art of treating any living being. To kill is not within its purview.
"The Collective for a medicine of life" demands that the Leonetti law of April 2005 on the end of life be applied with increased palliative care beds. He wants more training for medical students and allied health professionals on the treatment of pain and end of life.
March 11 at the Trocadero in Paris, they were nearly a thousand to say no to the legalization of euthanasia and before all the participants and many journalists, doctors present reiterated their Hippocratic oath. The Collective needs to be supported in its action by all those who think that France should maintain a high quality medicine, turned mainly to the Life and the dignity of all human being at the heart of his suffering.
Sign the petition on the internet
www.medecinedevie.com
or mail
BOURGOIS Elizabeth, 221 Avenue of Oaks, 62152 Neufchatel Hardelot - France
NAME ......... .................................................. .................................................. ............................................
NAME ............................................... .................................................. ................................................
PROFESSION ............................................... .................................................. ........................................
CITY ............................................... .................................................. .................................................. ....
SIGNATURE
0 comments:
Post a Comment