Friday, April 14, 2017

Brief History of Euthanasia in Germany.

When I read this I could see the similarities of the use of DNRs to hasten the death of those who have a poor quality of life.  Canadian Bill C-14 requires "foreseeable death" but a DNR does not. 

Spicer and his critics are historically off


My Passover holidays were interrupted by the news, shared by friends in the synagogue, that the press secretary to the president of the United States had just said that Syrian President Bashar Assad was worse than Adolf Hitler because Assad gassed his own people.
I was astounded and saddened by the comment referring to an event in the village of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4. Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s remark was not, as my distinguished colleague professor Deborah Lipstadt said in The New York Times, “anti-Semitism,” masked or real, but ignorance pure and simple, an ignorance that should disqualify one from so exalted a position.
My mood didn’t lighten as I read critique after critique discussing the murder of German Jews by gas in such “extermination camps,” to use the Nazi term for killing centers, such as Auschwitz and Treblinka.
Their critique overlooked the origin of Germans gassing their own population, which had nothing to do with Jews.
Forgive the history lesson, but permit me to explain.
Mass murder began with the death of a few individuals. In October 1939, Hitler signed an authorization permitting his personal physician and the chief of the Führer Chancellery to put to death those considered unsuited to live. He backdated it to Sept. 1, 1939, the day World War II began, to give it the appearance of a wartime measure. In the directive:
Reich leader Philip Bouhler and Dr. Brandt are charged with responsibility for expanding the authority of physicians, to be designated by name, to the end that patients considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy killing.
What followed was the so-called euthanasia program, in which men, women and children who were physically disabled, mentally deficient or emotionally disturbed were systematically killed. They were termed “useless eaters” and “life unworthy of living.”
Within a few months, the T-4 program (named for Berlin Chancellery Tiergarten 4, which directed it) involved virtually the entire German psychiatric community. A new bureaucracy, headed by physicians, was established with a mandate to “take executive measures against those defined as ‘life unworthy of living.’ ”
A statistical survey of all psychiatric institutions, hospitals and homes for chronically ill patients was ordered. At Tiergarten 4, three medical experts reviewed the forms returned by institutions throughout Germany but did not examine any patients or read their medical records. Nevertheless, they had the power to decide life or death.
Patients who doctors decided should be killed were transported to six main killing sites: Hartheim, Sonnenstein, Grafeneck, Bernburg, Hadama, and Brandenburg. SS members and other health care personnel in charge of the transports donned white coats to keep up the charade of a medical procedure.
The first killings were by starvation: starvation is passive, simple and natural. Then injections of lethal doses of sedatives were used. Children were easily “put to sleep.” But gassing soon became the preferred method of killing; 15 to 20 people were killed in a chamber disguised as a shower. The lethal gas was provided by chemists, and the process was supervised by physicians. Afterward, black smoke billowed from the chimneys as the bodies were burned in adjacent crematoria. Communities adjacent to these facilities could see that smoke even in the heat of summer and they could smell the burning flesh.
Families of those killed were informed of the transfer. They were assured that their loved ones were being moved in order to receive the best and most modern treatment available. Visits, however, were not permitted. The relatives then received condolence letters, falsified death certificates signed by physicians, and urns containing ashes. There were occasional lapses in bureaucratic efficiency, and some families received more than one urn. They soon realized something was amiss.
A few doctors protested. Karl Bonhoeffer, a leading psychiatrist, worked with his son Dietrich, a pastor who actively opposed the regime, to contact church groups, urging them not to turn patients in church-run institutions over to the SS. (Dietrich Bonhoeffer was executed by the SS just before the end of the war.) A few physicians refused to fill out the requisite forms. Only one psychiatrist, professor Gottfried Ewald of the University of Göttingen, openly opposed the killing.
Doctors didn’t become killers overnight. The transformation took time and required a veneer of scientific justification. As early as 1895, a widely used German medical textbook made a claim for “the right to death.” In 1920, a physician and a prominent jurist argued that destroying “life unworthy of life” is a therapeutic treatment and a compassionate act completely consistent with medical ethics.
Soon after the Nazis came to power, the Bavarian minister of health proposed that psychopaths, the mentally deficient and other “insane” people be isolated and killed. “This policy has already been initiated at our concentration camps,” he noted. A year later, mental institutions throughout the Reich were instructed to “neglect” their patients by withholding food and medical treatment.
Pseudoscientific rationalizations for the killing of the “unworthy” were bolstered by economic considerations. According to bureaucratic calculations, state funds that went to the care of criminals and physically and mentally disabled persons living in institutions could be put to better use, for example by loans to newly married couples. Incurably sick children were seen as a burden for the healthy body of the Volk, the German people. In a time of war, it was not difficult to lose sight of the absolute value of human life. Hitler understood this. Wartime, he said, “was the best time for the elimination of the incurably ill.”
Historian and Auschwitz survivor Henry Friedlander traces the origins of the Final Solution to the “euthanasia” program. The murder of handicapped people was a prefiguration of the Holocaust. The killing centers to which the disabled were transported were the antecedents of the death camps. The organized transportation of the disabled foreshadowed mass deportation. Some of the physicians and other health care workers and hospital personnel as well as ordinary guards and mechanics who became specialists in the technology of cold-blooded murder in the late 1930s later staffed the death camps. All their moral, professional and ethical inhibitions had long been lost.
Psychiatrists, voluntary participants in the German “euthanasia” program, were able to save patients, at least temporarily, but only if they cooperated by sending others to their death.
Gas chambers were first developed at the “euthanasia” killing centers. The perpetrators cremated the dead bodies. In the death camps, the technology was taken to a new level: thousands could be killed at one time and their bodies burned within hours.
The Roman Catholic Church, which had not taken a stand on the “Jewish question,” protested the “mercy killing.” Count von Galen, the Bishop of Münster, openly challenged the regime, arguing that it was the duty of Christians to oppose the taking of human life even if this were to cost them their own lives. It seemed to have an effect.
On Aug. 24, 1941, almost two years after the “euthanasia” program was initiated, it appeared to cease. In fact, it had gone underground. The total number of people killed in the Nazi “euthanasia” program is estimated to have been between 200,000 and 250,000. The majority were Germans, but Poles and Soviet citizens of various nationalities were also among the victims.
The killing did not end; mass murder was just beginning. Physicians trained in the medical killing centers went on to grander tasks. Irmfried Eberl, a doctor whose career began in the T-4 program, became the commandant of Treblinka, where killing of a magnitude as yet unimagined would take place.
Again, gassing did not begin with the Jews; it began with Germans who found the presence of fellow Germans of special needs an embarrassment to the myth of the “master race” and an economic hardship. Hitler initiative the process but the participation of German society and even its elite psychiatric community was as widespread as is was essential.

MICHAEL BERENBAUM is a professor of Jewish studies and director of the Sigi Ziering Institute at American Jewish University.

Monday, April 3, 2017

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Carol Anne - Response to Petition

The Petition that VCHA filed on March 3 2017 to set aside the Order of Febuary 24th 2017is saying that Carol Anne is incapable of conducting litigation.  Exactly what VCHA did to Randy.  Make Carol Anne a ward of the court and a non-person with no rights.  And all litigation would be suspended.

In the March 6 2017Affidavit of Ro Ang, the manager of GPC, she attached as an exhibit an incident report of 11 November 2010.  This incident was caused by a  nurse who told me that sleeping was not allowed on the premises.  Without my knowledge VGH had transferred Randy and it would not tell me where he was.  I was traumatized.  Apparently, VGH does not tell anyone where a patient is transferred to as that is confidential information.  By a process of elimination I discovered Randy was transferred to GPC and I went to see him.  This was at 8:00 pm well within the posted visiting hours.

I was under stress and exhausted and I laid my head resting on my arms at the side of Randy's bed.  A nurse told me sleeping was not allowed. The nurse deliberately picked on me and with the okay of the head nurse told the nurse to evict me from the premises for resting my head. So that is what he did.  Followed orders.  Apparently, I was non-verbal hostile towards staff. How can someone be non-verbal hostile towards staff. I ws tired.  There was no concern for me or for Randy. 

Apparently in my exhaustion rather than visit Randy I was taking pictures of staff and making disparaging remarks about GPC.  Not true. I was exhausted. All I wanted to do is rest. I did not even own a camera at that time.

The next day Tanu went on and on about her having the power to make sure that I never see Randy again even on his death bed.  I had a witness with me at that time.  So Tanu cannot deny this. Tanu said that she knew about Randy was going to be transferred to GPC three weeks earlier.  So how is it that VGH could not tell me this. My welcome to GPC...

As far as I can tell the 521 pages the binder which Guild Yule submitted to the court on March 14 2017 most of it cannot be used as it is hearsay and not admissible as evidence.  Guild Yule submitted such garbage knowing full well that a judge would not have time to visit each page of the 521 page binder however the judge did say to Skorah for him to summarize the pleadings. Skorah neglected to tell the judge most if not all of the evidence would not be admissible.

It is nauseating to think that a QC would stoop to submitting evidence that is not proper.

Lawyers especially those of Skorah's calibre should not deceive the courts.

.


Thursday, March 16, 2017

Kristin and Carol Anne email October 2016

I was reviewing the materials sent to me by the lawyers for VCHA before me applying for a visitation order to visit Carol Anne so we could visit each other.

What has us wanting to visit each other got to do with my husband who died April 13 2014 and the upset VCHA caused to us then.  VCHA believe their snowflake staff was more important than Randy. They 100% banned me so that I could not see Randy for the months prior to his death.

After it became clear to me that the hospital decided that Carol Ann would not be allowed to see me unless I applied for a court order, so I went out and got a court order on February 24, 2017.  As soon as management found out about it, they coerced Carol Anne to say she does not want to see me. What a brilliant move by VCHA. Now any further litigation would be neutralised.

These are words written by Risk Management VCH in an email October 20 2016 when I asked to visit Carol Anne.: 

I'm sorry I can't do that; I'm aware of the history of your restriction.  The restriction will remain in place as long as you continue to harass those on VCH sites about the death of Randy Walker.  VCH has responded to your allegations and will not engage in that discussion.

This is terrible using a few emails (which emails were not attached, so I do know what harassing she was talking about) to prevent Carol Anne and me from visiting each other.  VCHA is constructively imprisoning Carol Anne for something she had no part of.  I have heard that the medical system is broken, but what is happening is beyond broken.  It is contempt of our Constitution.  Carol Anne has the right to visit who she wants if she is in a hospital or not.  At the very least, it is elder abuse.  What VCHA is doing is unlaw and spiteful. VCHA cannot coerce Carol Anne to say that she did not want to see me.

Court Order in hand on February 26th and 28th, I visited Carol Anne both times she welcomed me and my witness.  So why is it as soon as staff showed up on the 28th, she frantically indicated that she did not want to see me.  Coercion. Duress.

Carol Anne is a full quad.  She cannot communicate, and she is not mobile.  On February 26, 2017, when I saw her, she indicated that her family did not visit her.   Her before boy friend would see her and would tell me how she was doing. We would meet at the mall.  Vince died of a heart attack over a year ago.  She now has no one except the good and carrying staff of George Pearson Centre.  Staff who are imprisoning her.






Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Setting Aside Oder to See Carol Anne

I cannot believe what is happening.  I made a simple application to the court to see Carol Anne who is a resident in George Pearson Centre.  She is a quad and for three years and I have been trying to get VCHA to allow us to visit.  Vancouver refuses as I was violent which is not true and I was being disrespectful/disruptive to staff and management of George Pearson Centre.

There was an incident in 2013 wherein I in self-defence had to push back staff who were unlawfully preventing us from living George Pearson Centre.  Because of the toxicity of George Pearson Centre, I attempted to remove my husband from the premises.  GPC had the mistaken belief that they could detain him unlawfully.  I thought the incident was forgotten until January 29 2014 wherein I was told that I was banned 100% from visiting my husband and that the banning would be for 90 days.  Verbally, I was told that the banning was going to last forever.

My husband was dying and they did this to us.  I protested but I could do nothing.  On March 2014 I filed a Petition to Visit my husband.  The next thing I knew the  Public Guardian and Trustee was involved and I did not understand why and she became Randy's committee. VCHA wanted this.  VCHA had him assessed by a doctor, the same doctor, I accused of attempted culpable homicide by him putting an unauthorized DNR on my husband and then refusing to take it off.  The PGT was designated to protect Randy from me.  The decided that my enduring Power of Attorney should be taken away from me and they were going for Committee of Person as well.  In other words they were making Randy a non-person wherein it was the PGT who would decide everything in his life including putting DNRs on Randy.  VCHA, Dr. Dunne and the PGT conspired to do this.

The physician lorded over me saying on November 18 2017 that he would consider taking off the DNR/DNT when I asked him to do on his return from Prince George.  I took the incident to the College of Physicians and Surgeons and they decided that Randy was incapable due to a high fever caused by an infection.  He was not capable of giving informed consent. In the non-medical world, the physician would have been criminally charged with criminal intent.  But nothing happened to him except he was told that he should have been more careful in deciding if Randy was not well enough to agree to a DNR and his handwriting was illegible

It was after January 29 2014 when I was then accused of being bad for Randy.

On January 29 2014 I was banned citing the November 18 2013 incident.   It is so obvious but at that time it was not obvious to me that the real reason was so that I would not be in a position to question whatever was happening to Randy.  I believed prior to that that GPC were bullies and they were acting as such.  GPC was saying that my behavior caused the staff to be afraid of me and interferred with its ability to do their work. VCHA had to create reasons beyond the truth.  They even got the Workers Compensation Board involved because they said I was bullying staff.   VCHA over the years bullied me making me a basket case and then they turned it around and accused  me of  bullying the snowflakes. Can you imagine wasting manpower of the WCB.   I wonder what the report said.

Anyways that goes too far back in history to be part of what was happening now, so I thought.  It has been over three years. However, VCHA is wanting to continue the ridiculous banning for the rest of my life. This banning has discredited me, demoralised me.  My reputation has been damaged.    And they are intent on continuing to do so.  But now they have gone too far.

They have imprisoned Carol Anne and they need to continue to discredit me.  Carol Anne is severely disabled.  Her family abandoned her decades ago.  She is bedridden and cannot talk except with her eyes and nodding her head. She is on a ventilator and trach.  She is in a private room with only a television to distract her. She is totally isolated.  She can't even watch people activity on her ward as she is in a private isolated room. Isolated from others who could ring for assistance in case Carol Anne was in distress.

They might not want me to talk to Carol Anne if there is a remote possibility that I want to become her advocate.  GPC does not want any patients to have advocates unless they are mute.  With Carol Anne she is a non-functioning quad and her quality of life is that she has none

It is beyond me what they are trying to do to me. I only want to visit Carol Anne.  It is so obvious to me those that the decision makers employed by VCHA are idiots.

The question still outstanding is what did I do.  I asked this of David Bell, lawyer for VCHA, and he said I knew what I did.  Well, tell me again. 












Saturday, March 11, 2017

Proposed Injunction dated April 2014.

I was reading from the pleadings in 2014 when VCHA wanted an Order FOR LIFE that I by herself and or by her agents be barred from visiting any VCHA properties.

However, I could see Randy on the sidewalk as that would not upset the staff.  That did not last long, I was able to see him two times on the sidewalk and then Ro said that it was too much work for her and she refused to allow me to see Randy ever again. Think about this, I could see Randy under security on the sidewalk but I could not see him on his death bed inside GPC. I wonder what law firm gave VCHA that piece of legal advice. 

Although I asked VCHA to do an investigation it refused to do so.  They controlled the complaint process Star Chamber Court with no due process just one-sided gossipy evidence.  There was no provision for an independent investigation.

Randy was dying in 2014 and I was banned.  I asked friends to check on him and GPC decided that they could not do this any more. In an email from Risk Management (VGH) I was told to stop such COVERT activities that I organized.

 Even though I was banned, GPC would tell me that Randy was fine those that went to visit him (three of which were retired health professionals) would say differently.

 And most hurtful was when I was told he was crying.

The Order also said that if Randy was terminal I would be able to access him at George Pearson Centre.  That reality would be that GPC had no intention of transferring him to Vancouver General Hospital in the event he needed acute care.  They planned on letting him die at George Pearson Centre and I would only be allowed to visit his dead body.

I remember Tanu telling me in 2010 that I was not allowed to talk to anyone unless they talked to me first.  The "majesty" requirement of George Pearson Centre.

I wish I was not having these flashbacks but I must so I can fight for Carolanne so I can visit her.  It would be so easy just to walk away.


Sunday, February 26, 2017

A snowflake defence.

I had a mistaken belief that I had a fiduciary duty to Randy.  I had history, I had a marriage certificate, I had a power of attorney, I had a representation agreement, I had love but the health authority saw it differently. I was accused of being disrespectful/disruptive to management.  It was a snowflake defence.




Blog Archive