When Nazi Germany embarked on its eugenic cleansing of the Jewish and other minority races, who would have dreamed that before the century was out the UK and other European Union countries would be considering a similar course of action?

In 1967 when the UK passed a law that would effectively condemn millions of unborn children to death by abortion, a door was opened which has led the UK steadily towards legalising euthanasia.

Euthanasia: n. bringing about a gentle and easy death, particularly in the case of painful and incurable disease
[Gk, eu = well; thanatos = death]

Sound so reasonable doesn't it, almost benevolent? Well, have no doubt about it, this is no benevolent ideology, but rather a malevolent and dark course which we are on.

In July 1999, the UK Government unveiled plans that Social Workers, appointed by the courts as 'managers' will be given the right to make decisions on behalf of those no longer to make decisions for themselves. Who are those who will be thrown into the 'merciful' hands of these new breed of 'managers'? The mentally incapacitated. In extreme cases these 'managers' will have the right to decide whether to stop a patient being given food and water. In other words, they will have the right to decide whether a fellow Human Being is denied the basic requirements to sustain life; the right to murder them legally.

The scheme, dreamed up by the Lord Chancellor's Department, will, of course, by couched in legal jargon; 'extended Power of Attorney', and 'Courts of Protection' etc., etc..

Family campaigner, Dr. John Campion, commented, "There is great danger here. There is so much pressure from within the medical profession and the courts. The courts have already described giving food and water as, 'treatment', when in fact it is basic care."

Does no-one else find the irony seriously disturbing that it is the medical profession which is pressurising for euthanasia? But should we be surprised? It was inevitable that since the UK National Health Service is now a business, with more interest in balancing the books than curing the diseased and healing the sick, anyone who is seen as a drain on these resources - the old, the long-term incapacitated, the inconvenient - is going to be looked upon as a financial liability to be off-loaded, rather than someone in need of care.

Sadly the euthanasia movement is even further down the road in at least one other European country. In July 99, a government Bill was delivered to the Dutch lower house of parliament which proposed that doctors should have immunity from prosecution when performing euthanasia. The Dutch have tolerated 'mercy killings' for a number of years, but this Bill would remove the legal grey areas.

So just what does our medical hierarchy really think in the UK? The British Medical Association's Ethics Committee has issued a report (July 1999) that states, 'artificial nutrition and hydration can be withdrawn from patients on the decision of doctors alone, and that doctors should not routinely be obliged to seek court approval before withdrawing such nutrition.

In December 1999 the government condemned any form of so-called voluntary euthanasia which deprives elderly patients of food and drink. Speaking at question time in the House of Lords, Junior Health Minister Lord Hunt of Kings Heath said any such action by NHS doctors would be "quite wrong".

In January 2000, a Private members Billl, launched by Tory MP Ann Winterton, called for a tightening of the law on euthanasia. Mrs Winterton's Medical Treatment (Prevention of Euthanasia) Bill was prompted by allegations that the NHS was denying treatment to the oldest and sickest patients in order to free beds. The objective was to make it clear to doctors that they cannot bring about the deaths of their patients either by a positive action, or by an omission, such as withholding or withdrawing life-prolonging treatment, or withdrawing food and drink for the terminally ill. The Bill received its second reading after MPs voted to close the debate by 113 votes to two, a majority of 111. In April 2000 the Bill was effectively killed off after being blocked by MP's.

The common law precedent was the Tony Bland case. Tony Bland, severely injured in the Hillsborough stadium disaster was left in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS). He was not dying but had no cognitive ability. After a long and protracted haul through the courts by the Bland family, the final ruling from the House of Lords was that this form of murder-by-starvation was to be permitted in PVS cases such as Tony Blands, but future cases had to be overseen by the courts.

Because of this case, the medical and legal taboo has been broken. It's now medically and legally OK for the old, the sick and the dying to be hastened on their way, whether they want it or not, by the deliberate3 with-holding of the basic need of nutrition and hydration - food and water to you and me.

The case of Diane Pretty, the motor neurone disease patient who went to court to seek the right to die elicited enormous public sympathy. She sadly died in May 2002 having lost her right-to-die court challenge in the European Court of Human Rights.

As in the case of abortion and all the rhetoric in 1967, which categorically said we would never have a situation of 'abortion-on-demand', we do have. It will be no different with euthanasia. In less than a generation it is quite feasible that we will be living in a society which routinely kills the old, sick and infirm on nothing more than a scrawled signature on a crumpled form.

On the 6th June 2003, the UK House of Lords gave a second reading to Lord Joffe’s "Patient Assisted Dying Bill", commomly known as, "The Voluntary Euthanasia Bill", which would have legalised Dutch-style euthanasia throughout Britain for "competent, terminally ill individuals.". Although this reading meant the Bill took one more step towards become law in the UK it eventually failed through lack of parliamentary time.

We continue to see attempts to open this door, which if successful, as in the case of the Abortion Bill, will see us yet again swept away by the flood.

To learn more about the value of life visit SPUC who have a lot of info about the euthanasia issue.