Saturday, August 29, 2015

Trust the medical profession, I think not.

I was psychologically harassed (bullied) by George Pearson Center and Risk Management Vancouver General Hospital for years, It is not bullying to them, it is just the way it is and has always been.--and then I read the article below.  The harassment starts at the very top.

The following an article from the Vancouver Province. And the College Physicians and Surgeons

A former top official at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. is suing her former bosses for wrongful dismissal, alleging she was harassed and bullied on the job.

Elaine Peaston, the deputy registrar of the college’s legal department, names college registrar Dr. Heidi Oetter and Michael Epp, the chief operating officer, as defendants along with the college.

She says that in the spring of 2009, as a result of a significant increase in work hours and responsibilities, she began to experience depression and stress and felt generally overwhelmed.

In a notice of civil claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Peaston says her doctor wrote a note to the college stating that for medical reasons she needed to limit her work schedule.

Oetter and the college ignored the note and refused to accommodate her medical needs, says Peaston, who was hired by the college initially in 1994 and became a deputy registrar in 2004.

In January 2010, her condition had not improved, another medical letter was sent to the college and she provided “considerable detail” about her issues, thereby exposing her vulnerabilities in expectation Oetter wouldn’t harass or bully her, she says.

The college, the regulatory body for B.C.’s doctors, still refused to accommodate her medical problems and in the summer of 2011, the workload increased and she had to cancel her holidays.

She sought legal advice on how to deal with what she calls the “growing culture” within the college of hostility directed by other departments at her department.

Then a dispute arose over staffing levels and she asked whether Oetter was trying to get rid of her but was told everything was fine, she says.

Concerns came up about a performance evaluation that Peaston said was “devastating” and inconsistent with assessments and comments from other college officials.

A former president of the college described Oetter’s conduct as bullying, she says.

The writ describes what it calls ongoing harassment, bullying and intentional infliction of mental distress from January to June 2012.

Oetter and Epp directed resources away from the legal department, leading to two stress leaves, it says.

The stress was exacerbated by sexual and non-sexual harassment by a staff member of a female employee of the legal department.

While the harassed employee did not report the incidents due to the environment created by Oetter and Epp, others did report it but nothing was done, says the writ.

Peaston met with Epp to discuss the reductions and was advised that “When Heidi asks you to jump, the only question is how high,” the plaintiff says.

On June 8, 2012, she says she suffered a breakdown and took medical leave.

She was told that she could remain on the job part-time but to stay in her current job she’d have to work more hours, an assertion that caused her “great distress.”

At the direction of Oetter and Epp, the college blocked her access to her work computer network, including her emails and disconnected her voice-mail access to her cellphone, she says.

She filed a complaint that she’d been bullied and harassed and an investigation was conducted but the college did not disclose the results, she says.

“The court will be asked to draw the reasonable inference that the complaints as made by Ms. Peaston have been substantiated.”

In February this year, she was fired and the college said in a letter that her allegation that Oetter had acted in a manner unbecoming of the profession was “unfounded and irreparably” damaged her employment relationship.

But in a letter in March, the college admitted Peaston had not alleged the registrar had acted in an unprofessional manner, Peaston says.

The “illusory” basis for the termination was devised to disguise the fact that the college’s decision to terminate her was in retaliation for the complaints she filed, she adds.

“As a result of the defendant’s intentional or reckless infliction of mental distress, intimidation, bullying and retaliation, the plaintiff has and continues to suffer from psychological and psychiatric injuries including major depression.”

Peaston is seeking unspecified damages for the alleged bullying and harassment and punitive, aggravated and “moral” damages.

In an email, the college said it was aware of the lawsuit.

“The College completely and strongly denies the allegations of wrongdoing contained in the claim and is confident that it will be properly adjudicated by the court. As the matter is before the court, the College will not make any further comment about the claim at this time.”

Read more:
Read more at partners with Guns N'Roses Lead Guitarist DJ Ashba.

Friday, August 28, 2015

8th Planned Parenthood Video: consent mostly not asked for

Full, Unedited 8th Video Confirms Planned Parenthood Sells Fully Intact Aborted Babies

National   Steven Ertelt   Aug 28, 2015   |   8:31AM    Washington, DC
Today, the Center for Medical Progress released the full, uncut video of the conversation between undercover investigators form CMP and top officials with StemExpress, which buys aborted babies and their body parts from Planned Parenthood. The full footage is of a shorter video that summarized the meetings earlier this week.
The release of the full, unedited video also comes one day after Planned Parenthood released a new report claiming the eight videos released exposing it were “altered.” The abortion giant says the videos were manipulated and therefore not eligible for serious inquiry by Congress, which has launched two joint investigations of the abortion corporation. Still, Planned Parenthood’s own paid for experts admitted that there was no evidence of any manipulation of the audio in any of the eight shocking videos.
The full two-hour-long video appears below:

While the videos have focused on the Planned Parenthood abortion business, the biotech firm StemExpress, which buys and resells aborted baby body parts from the abortion giant, has filed a lawsuit seeking to block some information the Center for Medical Progress obtained in its three year undercover operation. Just a short time after a judge issued a ruling that the biotech firm StemExpress can’t block the Center for Medical Progress from releasing videos, it put together a preview of its latest installment.
StemExpress is a for-profit biotech supply company that has been partnered with Planned Parenthood clinics across the country to purchase human fetal parts since its founding in 2010. StemExpress’ Medical Director, Dr. Ronald Berman, is an abortion doctor for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte in California.
In the video, Cate Dyer, the CEO of StemExpress, is shown in a lunch meeting with undercover operatives posing as representatives of a biotech firm. Dyer is laughing about how StemExpress purchases fully intact aborted babies from Planned Parenthood. She laughs about how shippers of the aborted babies would give a warning to lab workers to expect such a baby.
“Oh yeah, if you have intact cases — which we’ve done a lot — we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,” she says.
“Tell the lab its coming,” she laughs about the intact unborn babies. “You know, open the box and go ‘Oh my God,’” Dyer adds.
The eighth video in the ongoing controversy over Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted fetal body parts shows the CEO of StemExpress, a major buyer of fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood, admitting the company gets “a lot” of intact fetuses, suggesting “another 50 livers a week” would not be enough, and agreeing abortion clinics should profit from the sale.
In the video, actors posing as another human biologics company meet with StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer, plus Vice President of Corporate Development and Legal Affairs Kevin Cooksy, and Procurement Manager Megan Barr. StemExpress and the actors are discussing a potential partnership to supply extra fetal body parts to each other.
“So many physicians are like, ‘Oh I can totally procure tissue,’ and they can’t,” expresses Dyer, seeming to indicate that abortion doctors must do the procedure in a special way to obtain useable fetal parts. Federal law requires that no alteration in the timing or method of abortion be done for the purposes of fetal tissue collection (42 U.S.C. 289g-1).
“What about intact specimens?” asks one of the actors. “Oh yeah, I mean if you have intact cases, which we’ve done a lot, we sometimes ship those back to our lab in its entirety,” replies Dyer. “Case” is the clinical term for an abortion procedure. An “intact case” refers to an intact abortion with a whole fetus. “The entire case?” asks an actor. “Yeah, yeah,” says Dyer. “The procurement for us, I mean it can go really sideways, depending on the facility, and then our samples are destroyed,” she explains past botched fetal dissections, “so we started bringing them back even to manage it from a procurement expert standpoint.”
Feticidal chemicals like digoxin cannot be used to kill the fetus in a tissue procurement case, so a fetus delivered intact for organ harvesting is likely to be a born-alive infant.
“What would make your lab happy?” asks one of the actors. “Another 50 livers a week,” says Dyer. “We’re working with almost like triple digit number clinics,” Dyer explains, “and we still need more.” She later notes, “Planned Parenthood has volume, because they are a volume institution.”
Dyer also agrees that payments to abortion clinics for fetal body parts should be financially beneficial to them.
“Do you feel like there are clinics out there that have been burned, that feel like they’re doing all this work for research and it hasn’t been profitable for them?” she asks. “I haven’t seen that.” StemExpress publishes a flyer for Planned Parenthood clinics that promises “Financial Profits” and “fiscal rewards” for clinics that supply aborted fetal tissue. It is endorsed by Planned Parenthood Mar Monte Chief Medical Officer Dr. Dorothy Furgerson.
The sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2). The Sacramento Business Journal reported in June that StemExpress has an annual revenue of $4.5 million.
David Daleiden, the head of CMP, commented on the newest video in a statement to LifeNews.
“StemExpress is the ‘weakest link’ that unravels Planned Parenthood’s baby parts chain–they readily admit the profit-motive that Planned Parenthood and their proxies have in supplying aborted baby parts,” he said. “Congress and law enforcement should immediately seize all fetal tissue files from StemExpress and all communications and contracts with Planned Parenthood. The evidence that Planned Parenthood profits from the sale of aborted baby parts is now overwhelming, and not one more dime of taxpayer money should go to their corrupt and fraudulent criminal enterprise.”
After the swarm of negative publicity surrounding Planned Parenthood selling aborted babies and their body parts, StemExpress was forced to cut ties with the abortion company.
Meanwhile, two committees in the House of Representatives have already launched investigations of Planned Parenthood. One committee is looking into whether or not the abortion business is breaking federal law by altering abortion procedures to better obtain aborted baby body parts for sale. Another committee, among other things, is investigating the Obama administration and whether there is any connection between it and the abortion giant.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform wants to know if the Obama administration, via the Department of Health and Human Services, provided any federal grants to Planned Parenthood that ultimately went to pay for the sales of aborted baby body parts and if they were used by Planned Parenthood to “support transactions involving fetal tissue.”
The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all eight:
  • In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
  • In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
  • In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
  • In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
  • In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.”
  • In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”
  • In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”

So far, 12 states have responded to the Planned Parenthood videos and launched investigations into their abortion and organ harvesting business including South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Massachusetts, KansasMissouri, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia, Texas and Louisiana. The district attorney in Houston Texas is also investigating after the Houston-based Planned Parenthood abortion facility was caught selling aborted babies.
catedyer7Congress has expanded its investigation into the Planned Parenthood abortion business and five states have revoked taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood’s abortion business, including Utah, Arkansas, Alabama, New Hampshire and Louisiana and Iowa’s governor has ordered a review of Planned Parenthood funding.
The full, unedited videos have confirmed that revelations that some aborted baby remains sold by Planned Parenthood go to biotech companies for the purpose of creating “humanized” mice. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood has been exposed as having sold body parts from aborted babies for as much as 15 years.
The federal law that technically prohibits the sale of aborted babies and their body parts was written by a pro-abortion Congressman decades ago and essentially spells out a process by which sellers of aborted baby body parts can meet certain criteria that allows the sales to be legal. That’s why a Colorado congressman has introduced legislation to totally ban the sales of aborted baby body parts.

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Planned Parenthood aborts baby while heart still beating

Did you watch where Planned Parenthood aborted a tiny baby boy, and while his heart was still beating, the technicians removed his brain through his face? They murdered this baby so they could sell his organs.

Friday, August 21, 2015

For the greater $good

For references to my negative experiences with GPC and VCH, please scroll through the blogs as they are intertwined with other information about DNRs and Euthanasia.  It is all the same: how do you trust doctors to deal with DNRs and Euthanasia.  If you want to die it is easy or if you are coerced to die because of some quality of life issue, it will easily happen.  However, if you do not want to die, you will surely be forced  to do so as doctors are under tremendous pressure to cut costs. And they see nothing wrong with forfeiting your life for this end. We are talking about seriously ill and chronic patients.  The sooner they are out of the $system the better. As they are the most expensive.

All I seem to remember from my experiences with Randy was that the $resources could be used elsewhere and they did ration his care so that his enjoyment of life was severely limited and his life was put in danger.   When I asked in 2013 that Randy be given a small oxygen tank when I took him off site, I was refused by Dr. Fleetham as Randy did not fit into a program that would pay for it.  I remember saying I would pay for the oxygen but Fleetham refused.  It goes on and on.

This is in addition or concurrently with the bullying I had to face it seemed everyday from staff.  You are tired, you are exhausted, you are uncertain, you look blank, and a nurse runs to security saying you look aggressive.In all those years there was not one nurse that came to my defense but since management was sanctioning their behaviors nothing I would do would change things.

Like Nurse Ratchet said, Nothing can happen to me as I am a civil servant when I accused her that she was the cause of all the bullying towards me on Ward 2. She believes her job is to protect everyone and if there is collateral damage to one that is just too bad.  Dr. Dunne also told me this.  So they are all the same. For the greater $good, administration has to make its budget targets for government funding.


Thursday, August 20, 2015

US Gov gives half Billion dollars to Planned Parenthold to do 1 million abortions.

see; this is not planned parenthood, it is planned abortion.  Follow the money.
The clinics of Planned Parenthood are predominantly in poor black urban areas. Planned Parenthood should be out in these neighbourhoods with a culture of conception telling mothers tha unless you cannot $afford a child use conception and not make abortion as a means of conception.  How can you measure results with counseling but abortions have a recorded number: what bean counters (those that make financial decisions for the government) love.  It is measurable.     

Sunday, August 16, 2015

Quebec police chief mobbed (bullied) by his own staff. (pyschological harrassment)

I have been bullied (mobbed) by George Pearson Centre since 2010 and it is still going on even after the death of  Randy.  VCH will do everything to discredit me and they have been very successful so far.  The only reason for this is that these officers were given misinformation, the police believe them because they are health professionals, and I am at a disadvantage.  Beware of Car 57 (Mental Health team). VCH uses third parties to do their dirty work.  I would really like to know who are behind the complaints. When I first was having trouble with Tanu at GPC I would write notes to the social worker and when I asked for them he said he threw them out.  No wonder he has been at GPC so long.  I remember him telling me that Randy and I were his clients. A social worker is an officer of the court.  What a joke.  I know of no incident where he tried to help us. 

This National Post article was published in the Vancouver Province recently.  If the police will do it to its own why is it that it is not conceivable that such behavior is not happening within Vancouver Coastal Health..  These past weeks I have had three visits from the VPD.  Concerns that could have been cleared up with a telephone conversation.  All it did was distance me from my neighbours in my complex.  The complaints to the police involved Vancouver Coastal Health who I suspect are doing this deliberately to unsettle me and cause embarrassment.  The Vancouver Police Department is being  used by Vancouver Coastal Health.

Court orders reinstatement of police chief harassed by his own officers

One day, Michel Ledoux found a fake bomb outside his office door. Another time, he arrived at work to find himself hanging in effigy.
Ledoux was chief of police in the Laurentians resort town of Mont-Tremblant, Que., but the intimidation tactics were not coming from local gangsters. His own officers were targeting him.
A Court of Quebec decision this week concludes that Ledoux was the victim of a "vicious and degrading" harassment campaign and that he was justified in resorting to secret video and audio surveillance to identify his tormentors.
Calling the facts of the case unprecedented, the three-judge panel has ordered that Ledoux be reinstated as police chief with back pay after the town fired him in 2011 for spying on his subordinates. A jury had earlier acquitted him of criminal charges related to the surveillance.
"A smear campaign like that constituted a 'particular circumstance' in labour relations at the police station justifying the surveillance measures used," the Court of Quebec wrote. "It is hard to imagine that they were members of 'law enforcement' who did that."
Ledoux, a 30-year veteran of the Montreal police, was an outsider when he took over as chief in Mont-Tremblant in 2007.
He made it his mission to ensure officers were better prepared in court and in general to tighten discipline among the roughly 30 officers. Some of the officers, led by the president of the police brotherhood, were not amused.
After Ledoux suspended two officers early in 2011 and amid contentious contract negotiations, Ledoux and his assistant responsible for investigations became the targets of personal attacks at the police station.
Crude photo montages appeared in the station depicting Ledoux with a penis in his face, as a baboon having anal sex and as a Klansman. Insult-laden tracts, associating the police chief with sexually transmitted diseases and mental illness, were also posted inside the station.
Fed up, Ledoux bought a camera hidden in an alarm clock and a microphone hidden in a key chain, purchases that were reimbursed by the town. It did not take long to establish that Sgt. Serge-Alexandre Bouchard, president of the police brotherhood, was behind the campaign, according to the judgment. Video captured him posting posters on Ledoux's office door.
Audio recordings revealed the underlings wanted to drive Ledoux out. "I hope he is smart enough to leave," one officer was heard saying. "A boss can't live with harassment like that," said another. "All organizations run by guys from Montreal are crap," said another.
In one recorded conversation, officers laugh over Bouchard's treatment of Ledoux before a charity hockey game at the local arena. Ledoux had come to give the officers a locker-room speech. "Serge-Alexandre told him to get the hell out of the room. ... He slammed the door on him."
The court concluded that Ledoux was the victim of a form of psychological harassment known as mobbing, to the point where he took his service revolver home and considered suicide.
But instead of dealing with the offending officers, the town administration fired Ledoux, saying he had broken the law with his surveillance. The town manager claimed she had been unaware of the extent of Ledoux's spying, but the court cast doubt on her testimony. A lawyer for the town concluded the harassment was part of normal union pressure tactics.
"These were not legitimate pressure tactics used in the context of the negotiation of a collective agreement," the court ruled. "They were sneaky personal attacks directed at chief Ledoux, aimed at harassing him to ultimately have his head."
Under the circumstances, the court concluded, the officers' right to privacy did not protect them from surveillance aimed at exposing their abusive behaviour.
A town spokeswoman said the municipality needs more time to study the decision, which cannot be appealed.
A message to the police brotherhood was not returned.

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Euthanasia failing in the US ...

Subversive Strategies to Sell Assisted Suicide.

Dr Jacqueline Harvey
By Dr Jacqueline Harvey

The numbers don’t lie. In spite of masterful public relations campaigns to suggest otherwise, the assisted suicide movement has an abysmal record trying to legalize assisted self-destruction over the last 21 years. The suicide lobby has few victories to claim. Rather, they consistently fail at each of the strategies they employ to push their agenda. Lawmakers fail to pass assisted suicide bills 99% of the time, after lawmakers are educated of the dangers at public hearings. Ballot initiatives fail in nearly three-quarters of cases to win enough votes, even after propaganda campaigns with no public hearings. Even attempts to subvert lawmakers and voters altogether by courting judges to legislate from the bench have yielded few returns. 

Bolstered by deep pockets and a sympathetic media, we are led to believe that the assisted suicide movement is winning, when the track record shows overwhelming political failure spanning three decades.

Nowhere is it more clear how lethal education and scientific evidence are to the suicide lobby than by examining how many assisted suicide bills withstand the scrutiny of witness testimony. Since 1994, 175 bills have been introduced in 35 states and the District of Columbia and thus far, only one has prevailed. Vermont is the anomaly, the lone bill, passed in 2013 after 19 years of failed attempts to convince legislators, a success rate of .057%. Assisted suicide is an established loser with lawmakers, failing more than 99% of the time in statehouses in over 20 years. Death making does not fare well when subjected to public debate. Thus far in 2015, 25 states and the District of Columbia have introduced legislation and most bills met their demise, by either lacking support to advance, devastated by testimony and withdrawn to address concerns or simply to spare a humiliating death. A few a late-filed bills still linger after failing to launch, but are unlikely to persevere through the process or manifest as an amendment to still-viable legislation. 

A team of assisted suicide lobbyists are attempting to resurrect California’s Senate Bill SB128 through a procedural ploy that subverts the committee that rejected it and placing it on the floor for a vote, in an affront to the legislative process but in keeping with the suicide lobby’s inability to legitimately pass bills and blatant overall lack of regard for law-making and public will. They routinely circumvent lawmakers to exploit voters, and even disregard both lawmakers and voters to forcibly impose their will through the courts due to an inability to pass assisted suicide through legitimate means. Only one bill has yet prevailed at all through the legislature. A record of 1 in 175 is evidence that assisted suicide is too illegitimate an act to obtain legitimate support.

Attempts to comfort lawmakers ill-at-ease after hearing testimony about the abuses and dangers of assisted suicide are not persuasive. Rather than address the evidence from testimony which gives lawmakers reservations, the suicide lobby have decided to create lawmakers out of the uniformed voter through ballot initiatives that do not require public hearings. Assisted suicide advocates have frequently appealed to the voters who are not informed by testimony and could be swayed by emotion and deceived by sanitized language designed to manipulate their vote. 

Word choice is critical. Polls can drop 20 points against assisted suicide by using the word suicide, so the assisted suicide movement crafted terms like “aid-in-dying” to present suicide as a helpful act, rather than what is: assisted self-destruction. Suicide lobbyists fared a bit better when trying to exploit the uninformed this way but still have an overall losing record. While the success rate is a bit higher than with the traditional route that forces legislators who vote to actually understand the issue, the lobby still has only two of seven wins to its credit since 1994. Two wins in Oregon and Washington out of seven attempts is only 28.57% success rate, 71.23% of these campaigns still failed. Even without the benefit of testimony decrying the dangers of assisted suicide, people simply do not like suicide. Regardless of how assisted suicide has been rebranded for the sole purpose of overcoming this aversion, nonetheless voters have seen right through it nearly three-quarters of the time.

When lawmakers can not be convinced nor the voting public, assisted suicide lobbyists turn to activist judges to overturn laws against their will. This is why the only other two states with assisted suicide bypassed both lawmakers and voters and imposed it by judicial decree in New Mexico and Montana. The Montana court didn't actually legalize assisted suicide, but gave doctors a "defense of consent." The New Mexico court decision is currently under appeal. Attempts to subvert all voters and legislatures through the United States Supreme Court failed twice in 1997 but still allowed for lower court activism to usurp the will of the people. This strategy has prevailed just twice. In fact, such an attempt just failed in California when the judge showed disdain for such an attempt to usurp the will of the people saying that assisted suicide is “best left to the legislature, not the courts” saying that this issue requires a “legislative fix, not a judicial nix.”  Clearly judicial activism like this failed attempt is yet another hit-or-miss strategy, as well as the fact that the assisted suicide movement still puts resources into introducing and lobbying for bills in spite of having failed 174 out of 175 times in 21 years. 

The longstanding failure of the assisted suicide lobby to sell their agenda to informed lawmakers, the inability to gain enough support with the average voter or find sympathetic judges or to supplant the law points simply to the inherent problems with assisted suicide. The persistence and market research to brand suicide as something different may have deceived some into believing they support assisted suicide, yet this has not translated into political success. Furthermore, attempts to quell public debate by bypassing the legislature has not stopped educational efforts, shown in Massachusetts in 2012 to change polling from 65% in favor and 19% opposed to the ballot measure being defeated on election night. 

With three distinct strategies and three decades and only five state laws affected (two of which were are affront to the will of the people) the assisted suicide lobby simply does not reflect the political climate of the United States, in spite of efforts to manipulate public opinion. They may be relentless in their attempts to impose suicide on society but equally relentless attempts to stop them tend to always succeed.

Jacqueline C. Harvey, a public-policy scholar with Euthanasia Prevention Coalition International, has a Ph.D. in public administration and policy and focuses on end-of-life legislation at the state level.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Please link to this article about  Dr. Cohen-Almagor.  It  argues what is wrong with euthanasia in Belgium.  Dr. Cohen-Almagor initially was for euthanasia but after researching it over decades he has come to the conclusion that euthanasia should not be legalized.

To my readers please send this link to your doctor.  It is the doctors in Canada who can refuse to be part of this assault on human life.

It was published August 1 2015.

Thursday, August 6, 2015

California has it Right : No doctor assisted suicide (euthanasia).

Saturday, August 1, 2015

California Prohibition Against Assisted Suicide is Constitutional.

Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA
A California trial court has upheld the constitutionality of that state's criminal statute prohibiting assisted suicide, which states:
Every person who deliberately aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of a felony.
Penal Code § 401

The court's reasoning is contained in a 19 page "Ruling on Demurrer," filed on July 24, 2015. The ruling uses the term, "Aid in Dying" to mean physician-assisted suicide.  The term also means euthanasia. The court states in part:
Since "Aid in Dying" is quicker and less expensive, there is a much greater potential for its abuse, e.g,, greedy heirs-in-waiting, cost containment strategies, ímpulse decision-making, etc. Moreover, since it can be employed earlier in the dying process, there is a substantial risk that in many cases, it may bring about a patently premature death. For example, consider that a terminally ill patient, not in pain but facing death within the next six months, may opt for “Aid in Dying”' instead of working through what might have been just a transitory period of depression. Further, "Aid in Dying" creates the possible scenario of someone taking his life based upon an erroneous diagnosis of a terminal illness illness, which was, in fact, a mis-diagnosis that could have been brought to light by the passage of time. After all, doctors are not infallible.
Furthermore, "Aid in Dying" increases the number and general acceptability of suicide, which could have the unintended consequence of causing people who are not terminally ill (and not, therefore, even eligible for "Aid in Dyíng") to view suicide as an option in their unhappy life. For example, imagine the scenario of a bullied transgender child, or a heartsick teenaged girl whose first boyfriend just broke up with her, questioning whether life is really worth living. These children may be more apt to commit suicide in a society where the terminally ill are routinely opting for it, The message society needs to send to children must be that suicide is not an option for them; widespread "Aid in Dying," i.e., assisted suicide, may blur that message to immature minds. ('When grandma was in pain and dying, she just committed suicide. Why shouldn't I? My life is s-o-o-o painful."). Even though suicide (as opposed to assisted suicide) ís legal in California, the State has an important interest to ensure that people are not influenced to kill themselves," (Donaldson, at p. 1623.)
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), for youth between the ages of 10 and 24, suicide is the third leading cause of death claiming almost 4,600 lives each year. A nationwide survey of youth in grades 9-12 in public and private schools in the United States found that 16% of the students had reported having seriously considered suicide. (CDC website, March 10, 2015)
Ruling on Demurrer, pp. 8-9..

audreyjlaferreire, 5976 Cambie Street, Vancouver, B.C. 604-321-2276
Ccommunicate with Prime Minister Harper and tell him to veto the Euthanasia court decision. Prime Minister Harper, House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario.  K3A 086 To email in search bar type in "contact Prime Minister Harper" to use his web page.  Thank you.

Wednesday, August 5, 2015



Watch the video.  Is this happening in Canada as well. What about body parts soon to be euthanized February 6 2016.

Tuesday, August 4, 2015


A new 5th shocking video of Planned Butcherhood Parenthood harvesting fetal parts has been released, a day after Democrats blocked a vote to defund this barbaric organization. They currently receive $500,000,000 dollars annually from the U.S. federal government. That's half a billion dollars each year that could be going to provide real prenatal health care as well as mother and newborn care and services by a legitimate life-affirming organization.

Below is the fifth video showing discussions with a very willing Planned Parenthood official about obtaining intact dead babies they call "specimens". horrendous! Absolutely horrendous! Remember the Democrat Members of Congress, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton staunchly support Planned Parenthood. Remember this during the upcoming Presidential election. Get rid of the Democrats. They are unfit to govern.

[WARNING: GRUESOME DISCUSSION AND VISUALS IN THE FOLLOWING VIDEO. For those readers who can stomach the shocking material, click on image below or . The glass tray of baby parts can be seen from 14:13-14:21. If you pause the video at 14:18, you can clearly see in the collection of fresh fetal parts, a baby's left arm in the upper right of the tray and a baby's right foot inn the lower left of the tray.

Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Are DNRs used inappropriately.

I still can't get over how words are used as in the Daily Advocate March 31 2015 by Hugh Scher: The new description of medical murder is "inappropriate conduct." He also states that there are abuses to DNRs and these abuses must be corrected. My Randy died on April 13 2014 and I miss him terribly. Why did they ban me from his bedside. How cruel and barbaric they are. Like all bureaucracies they do not care about patients, only process and how they can twist process to protect themselves.

The above from my Facebook page.

Sunday, August 2, 2015

Why euthanasia should be illegal.

Read this:  It is because doctors cannot be trusted.

Dr. Cohen-Almagor said that saving money was not the issue in Belgium to euthanize.  Research provided indicated that beneficence is often the guiding principle.  Physicians wish to ease patients' suffering and to ensure a relatively comfortable death.  Maybe this is true in Belgium as it is a liberal state but in a money oriented country such as ours it seems to be the opposite. Follow the money.

I keep remembering Dr. Ostrow's "mean management" protocol evidenced by signage on the hallways walls of VGH so even the public was able to read them.  He sure did not mean saving toilet paper.  The brightest of the bright knew exactly what he meant and the rest would accept the saving the toilet paper scenario.  Dr. Ostrow was the CEO of Vancouver Coastal Health.  He also moonlighted with organ transplants. I used to call Ostrow "Napoleon" and his girl, Josephine (the new CEO).
I am very frustrated this afternoon, I have been trying to give Randy's "Owen" the little doggie terri-poo, a bath and each time I say to him let's go for a bath.  He runs and hides under heavy furniture and I have to find where he is with a flashlight and he won't come out of his space.  I had to cancel an appointment as I won't take him there, although they are dog friendly, without him being washed with his doggie soap that smells so nice.

We have been doing this doggie game for two hours now.  I will not lie to him.  As soon as I say "bath" he runs under a table, then a chair, then into his house "a large long dark willow basket" on its side top covered with an Afghan and the inside upholstered with pillows and a small fan. I need a flash light to see if he is there. I am going to have to start  to video him.  He is so cute and he has  perfect pearl white teeth. He is so healthy.  Not too long ago a male acquaintance tried to be friendly with me and Owen got in between him and I and showed his teeth.  The human decided to leave never to be seen again. 

I made an appointment with Trish, his groomer, next week and he listens to her.

A tale of my life.  No one listens to me.


Mein Kampf Is One of the Bestselling Political Books of the Year

Mein Kampf Is One of the Bestselling Political Books of the Year
One benefit of eBooks is that you can purchase and read them anoynmously—there are no nosy clerks or shaming book covers to give away your terrible taste. This, as it turns out, is great news for Hitler's sales: the electronic version of Mein Kampf has become a surprise bestseller over the past year.
"These are things that people would be embarrassed to read otherwise," journalist Chris Faraone, who first noticed the trend, told ABC News. "Books that people would probably be a bit more embarrassed to read or display or buy in public, they are more than willing to buy on their Kindle, or iPads."
Faraone notes that eBooks led to a huge surge in sales for erotic novels like 50 Shades of Grey as well as more controversial books like Mein Kampf.
From Faraone's post on Vocativ:
For a year now, [Hitler's] magnum manifesto has loomed large over current best-sellers on iTunes, where at the time of this writing two different digital versions of Mein Kampf rank 12th and 15th on the Politics & Current Events chart alongside books by modern conservative powerhouses like Sarah Palin, Charles Krauthammer and Glenn Beck.
In fact, all seven of Beck's books trail Herr Hitler's nearly century-old tell-all, which consistently holds its own against new e-blockbusters like Game Change by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, This Town by Mark Leibovich, and Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise.
Versions of Hitler's prison screed also currently sit in third and fourth place on iTunes' Politics and Current Events bestseller list.
Of course, it's not clear if the book's popularity is because of a resurgence of academic curiosity or something more sinister.
"While the academic study of Mein Kampf is certainly legitimate, the spike in ebook sales likely comes from neo-Nazis and skinheads idolizing the greatest monster in history," World Jewish Congress CEO Robert Singer told ABC News.
But Michael Ford, the president of Elite Minds, an electronic publisher with a popular $0.99 version of Mein Kampf, disagrees.
"The popularity of the digital Ford translation of Mein Kampf has surged due to academic interest in the subject." Ford told ABC News in an email.
Who knows! The only thing for sure is that Mein Kampf is more popular now than most contemporary political books.

Blog Archive