The disability group NotDeadYet is planning a vigil on March 1st to remember the disabled victims who were murdered by their caregivers, often family members who got off with no punishment or a light sentence.
In the past five years, over 650 people with disabilities have been murdered by their parents, relatives, or caregivers...
These are just the cases that we are aware of – since we began monitoring this issue, we learn about more murders every week. We read the victims’ names, see their photographs, and gather what information we can about their lives. The criminal justice system has continued to give lighter sentences to family and caregivers who murder disabled people, and the media continues to portray these murders in a sympathetic light.
more here.
and as a physician, I suspect the numbers are higher because their deaths were considered "natural" so the coroner or their doctors just signed the death certificates, often giving the family the benefit of the doubt.
and this doesn't include "unexpected" sudden death in hospitals, or deaths from withholding simple antibiotics from these people
this is a problem for the elderly of course. But one could argue they would die anyway (which is why their deaths are often overlooked) but to kill a deformed or crippled or mentally disabled child? That makes one shudder, yet only those who have had to care for such children in the home could imagine why this is sometimes seen as an act of despiration. Ironically, these children used to be placed in institutions because their care was too much for the family, but hey, now we have "deinstitutionalization", so their families do the work, and believe me, the severely handicapped are not the problem: The problem is those caring for children with autistism, ADHD and destructive behavior.
Withholding extraordinary care can be argued as ethical by the Catholic church, especially if the burden of treatment is high. So Lolo died in his bed after refusing chemotherapy, knowing he already had mild uremia and heart disease from his high blood pressure and he was 90 years old so the Chemo probably wouldn't prolong his life very much.
which is another long lecture where I could cite cases on the pros and cons of using dialysis that would be considered torture, or not giving chemotherapy to a man whose immune system is already weak, or putting them on a respirator: we had one man with a meningocoel whose family said no, but he was competent and said yes, so lived. But when faced with his next bout of pneumonia he said no.
the destruction of the family in the modern world means there is no one to care for them, because if both parents have to work to support the family...and this is worse with a single mom.
the irony about the 80 percent of late term abortions done "for social reasons" is that no one seems to be saying to the moms: we will arrange for you to live with a family and then help you place your baby with a family who loves them, or else help you to find a way to care for the baby yourself.
In intact families, usually this is done by the parents or aunts or cousins, and often churches have resources to point to where the moms can get help.
(been there, done that. And I know many families who have done the same for their druggie or teeenaged children who faced an unplanned pregnancy).
But of course, if you just let the mom abort the kid, the abortionist can make money.
sigh
No comments:
Post a Comment