SHOCKING: Dutch woman’s euthanasia horror story and what this means in our death culture







Listen to the 10 min audio

Read the transcript:


TOM LAMPRECHT:  Harry, Breakpoint recently ran an article that was highlighting a piece by Washington Post columnist Charles Lane. Lane has once again turned his attention onto the issue of euthanasia. The lead in his latest column is the story of a 74-year-old Dutch woman referred to in Dutch records as simply “2016-85.” The woman, who’d suffered from dementia, had an ambiguously worded advanced directive requesting euthanasia. By the time she was placed in a nursing home, she was no longer able to clarify her wishes so her husband requested it for her. That still left the problem of whether she really wanted it.

Well, that’s not a problem for the Dutch euthanasia machine. The doctor concluded her suffering was unbearable and incurable, though there was no terminal physical illness. He therefore prepared a lethal injection. What followed is rather horrifying: to ensure the patient’s compliance, the doctor gave her coffee spiked with a sedative. When that proved insufficient and the woman recoiled from the looming needle, he asked family members to hold her down. Finally, after 15 minutes were spent by the doctor trying to find a vein, the lethal infusion flowed.

DR. REEDER: Yeah, it’s almost a horror story — some kind of a movie out of Hollywood developed on this. It almost takes the place of Bates Motel in “Psycho.” Charles Lane — just a little bit of context — this has been an issue that’s been on his mind. In fact, he did some articles on this a couple of years ago and continues to raise the yellow flags where he said this movement, “passive or requested euthanasia,” he pointed out that it has an inevitable train wreck. And, in this particular article, he says, “I’m not waving a yellow flag — here’s the red flag for you.”

In Europe, where euthanasia has been functioning for some time now and is a place that you can see the inevitable downward spiral of this movement, how passive requested euthanasia becomes active and mandated and enforced euthanasia. Here’s a prime example: It was so obvious that it caused some concern among Dutch political and health officials.


The selling point on doctor-assisted suicide, you got to make the first leap over the Hippocratic oath which says “Do no harm,” so now doctors are called to do no harm, and yet they are actually becoming paid agents to take the life of someone.

Well, we were told, “These are people that are terminally ill and they want to die on their own terms. They want to request it. It’s passive — it’s not mandated, requested — not enforced, and it gives people a chance to die with dignity.”

Tell me, in this particular case, how this is, No. 1, dignified and, No. 2, requested and No. 3, non-mandated. It’s very clear that this woman, who in her statement made some vague statements about requesting end-of-life treatment, if, in certain cases, she has dementia — there’s nothing wrong with her ongoing biological, physical, essential health metrics — she has dementia, her life has become difficult, it has become costly and it has become a matter of inconvenience for people, including her husband.

Therefore, he then appeals to this and the doctors read this and then he then takes her place — not because he is instructed to do so in her “end-of-the-will” statements, but because he’s her husband — but, instead of what most husbands do where they have attempted to appeal for the life of their spouse, he becomes an advocate for the ending of her life and his advocacy is well-received by the medical profession.


You have a woman who is now strapped down, she is given a spiked coffee sedative — that doesn’t work. What does that tell you? What do you mean it doesn’t work? It means she’s telling them, “Don’t do this.” And so, what they then do is hold her down, and then they get members of the family to hold her down, and every time the needle comes, according to the story, she’s pulling back.

What is this “You’ve got my permission”? What is this request? This is clearly enforced, this is clearly being mandated against her, she’s clearly pushing away at it and then, finally, they search for her vein with such difficulty — and maybe ineptness — that it takes them 15 minutes of the needle moving around in her that she is recoiling from until they finally found it and then they can give the lethal injection that goes into her bloodstream and she dies.

This is where we’re headed and that is active, mandated euthanasia. Of course, we were told, years ago when this was introduced in Europe and now introduced in America, “Things like this will never happen. We’re only going to use this when requested by the patient and it will always be done so that people die with dignity.”


This is what happens in a culture of death and that’s why we’re taking the time on this program to talk about it, Tom. We’re in a broken world — there are terminal diseases, there is death — but, in a sane, civilized society, particularly when impacted by a Biblical world and life view, life is seen as sacred.

Unless there are mental and emotional issues, why do people fight for their life? Why do they fight for their breath? Biblical world and life view says we were made to live. Death is not seen as a friend — death is an enemy — and so we fight against death. A believer realizes there’s nothing natural about death. There’s no death in Genesis 1 and 2. Death is the result of sin in this world, therefore, it’s an intruder and it’s an enemy.


However, in a Biblical world and life view, not only is there the sanctity of life, not only is death seen as an enemy that we fight against, but we have a way to deal with death in the truth of the Gospel, which tells us that Jesus has overcome death.

I want to tell everyone here, “Please come to Christ. You not only have eternal life, you not only have a changed life, but death, itself, has changed.” That’s why the Bible says in Psalm 23 that, “The Lord is my shepherd and that he is with me, and that he goes with me, not only in the presence of all my enemies, including death, but he walks with me in the valley of the shadow of death.”

Tom, if you and I were sitting in a car and a truck pulled up beside us and the shadow fell over the car, it would be a matter of inconvenience and maybe noteworthy, but it would not be horrific and that’s the way it is for a believer. Now, if the truck hits you, that’s another story. Jesus got hit by the truck. Jesus overcame death, sin, hell, the grave and Satan. He defeated our enemies.


Finally, in a Biblical world and life view, we always treat people to live. That does not mean that a doctor has to prolong someone’s death, but it does mean that we do not promote death or inflict death, and that is exactly where the euthanasia movement always ends up — the infliction of death and the destruction of the moral fiber of the medical society so that now the euthanasia culture becomes an instrument in the hands of the state, the medical community and those who have been inconvenienced by someone’s end-of-life illnesses and difficulties so we can get rid of them. No dignity, no passivity — an active mandated euthanasia — that’s the unvarnished truth.

Let me give you another piece of unvarnished truth. Jesus has won the victory over death and we can live life with this confidence: as long as we breathe, God’s got a purpose for us and your life is dignified. You not just simply have a death with dignity as a believer, but you have a life with dignity. Death, for the believer, becomes the step of promotion as you go through the valley of the shadow of death. “When it’s for me to live as Christ, then death becomes gain,” not for those who are left behind, but for those who go to be with their Lord.

We love life. God’s image is upon it. It is sacred, so we live life and there is triumph at the grave.


TOM LAMPRECHT:  Harry, on Friday’s edition of Today in Perspective, I want to take you to an article out of Christianity Today by Kate Shellnut, in which she cites findings from Barna and from Gallup which tell us that Generation Z poses new challenges for the church when it comes to identifying as atheist or LGBT.

DR. REEDER: The LGBTQ culture has so penetrated that it’s actually become a part of the adolescent journey that, “I am almost supposed to have those issues.” Now what do you do in the church when children surface an active interest in the LGBTQ culture and the current militant atheistic culture as well? Let’s talk about that tomorrow.

Dr. Harry L. Reeder III is the Senior Pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham.

This podcast was transcribed by Jessica Havin, editorial assistant for Yellowhammer News. Jessica has transcribed some of the top podcasts in the country and her work has been featured in a New York Times Bestseller.


51 mins ago

More than 100 conservatives call for Jordan to run for Speaker

A coalition of more than 100 conservatives sent a letter to House Freedom Caucus (HFC) co-founder Jim Jordan Monday urging him to throw his name in to replace outgoing Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.

“There must be a real race for Speaker of the House. Now. No backroom deals. A real race, starting this spring, to make every incumbent and candidate commit on the record, as a campaign issue, whether they’ll vote to save the Swamp or drain it,” the letter reads. “America needs you to declare yourself as a candidate for Speaker at once. We write to you on behalf of millions of Americans who want Congress to Drain the Swamp.”

Ryan rattled Capitol Hill in April when he announced he will retire from the House after nearly 20 years in Congress, telling reporters he wanted to spend more time with his family and pursue other opportunities.


Two of the top House Republicans — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana — are angling for the position, but neither thought to have a guaranteed lock on the speakership.

McCarthy failed to garner the 218 required votes to become speaker in 2015, but his particularly close relationship with the president has some expecting that, along with Ryan’s full fledged endorsement, it will give him an upper hand over Scalise in the coming months.

Scalise wouldn’t rule out a potential bid for Ryan’s job but is also adamant he would not run against McCarthy, who he considers a “good friend,” he said in March.

Yet, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, who is best friends with Jordan, might have the closest relationship with the president over any other member of Congress. During a speech Thursday in which Jordan appeared to preview a bid for the speakership, Jordan joked that Meadows was in the back, taking a phone call from the president, which Meadows is known to do on a regular basis.

The letter Jordan received Monday from conservatives echoes a great deal of what the congressman has said himself since Ryan announced his retirement. Namely, Jordan is adamant that Republicans need to get back to accomplishing what they promised voters during the 2016 election cycle, like dealing with immigration, border security, repealing and replacing Obamacare and stopping out-of-control spending.

Jordan’s response to questions about the speaker’s race have been the same since the day TheDCNF first reported the growing wave of support for his candidacy: there is no speaker’s race, and we need to focus on the issues.

Conservatives are pushing back against Jordan’s assertion that there isn’t an ongoing race to replace Ryan.

“To those who say there is no Speaker’s race at the moment, we say that it’s already underway – in back rooms, behind closed doors, and aimed at preserving the Swamp and making it bigger. The Speaker’s race must be public.  There will be no Republican Speaker in 2019 unless the GOP can appeal to those Americans in its own ranks, among independents and even many Democrats who voted for Donald Trump to drain the Swamp and for the current Republican-led House to help him do that,” the letter reads.

“The present House Republican leadership has failed. It is part of the problem. You are the solution. This is your moment.  We pray you will seize it, knowing that if you do, we will do everything we can to help you succeed.”

The HFC is no stranger to putting leadership on notice.

Jordan, Meadows and HFC members shot down a farm bill in order to secure a vote on an immigration proposal they were promised months ago.

Ryan and McCarthy huddled with Meadows and Jordan in the back of the House chamber before the final gavel Friday, but their 11th-hour attempts were unable to sway the conservative members.

The bill failed with members voting 198-213, dealing a decisive blow to leadership.

Friday’s vote is evidence the HFC has the leverage to sway major policy issues, given the power of the caucus’ 36 members’ votes. If the caucus votes as a coalition, they can kill a bill or get concessions from leadership.

Many believe Jordan’s bid would be to get concessions from either McCarthy or Scalise, but Ryan still has the rest of the year as speaker. That is, if he isn’t pressured to step down earlier.

McCarthy’s folks are reportedly nervous about the potential heat he will take in a drawn out speaker’s race if Ryan decides to stay through the November midterm elections, which he has promised he intends to do.

(Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact

2 hours ago

Hightower runs for Alabama governor on flat tax, term limits

State Sen. Bill Hightower is stressing his background as a businessman as he runs for governor on a sweeping platform of government overhauls that includes term limits for legislators and replacing the state income tax code with a flat tax.

The Mobile Republican says he believes long-serving politicians have become the “enemy of improvement” in Montgomery.

Hightower’s platform includes limiting legislators to three consecutive terms, establishing a flat tax income tax and ending budgetary earmarks. Legislators would have to approve the measures.


Hightower is challenging Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey in the June 5 Republican primary along with evangelist Scott Dawson and Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle.

A relative newcomer in state politics, Hightower was first elected to the Alabama Senate in a 2013 special election.

(Associated Press, copyright 2018)

Sign-up now  for our daily newsletter and never miss another article from Yellowhammer News.

2 hours ago

Canary responds to YH News

In recent months, there have been ongoing and coordinated efforts to paint the Business Council of Alabama as an ineffective and financially troubled organization. These attacks are maliciously false.

Those attacking our organization for their own political purposes are resorting to extreme lengths to undermine our organization. They continue to sling one baseless attack after another and hope something sticks.

This tactic was seen in Thursday’s Yellowhammer News editorial that looked at the BCA’s 2016 IRS Form 990 and made the determination that the BCA’s financial health “could be in jeopardy.” Once again, this is a claim that is simply not true.


In describing themselves the Yellowhammer News asserts in its Declaration: Our Philosophy. Our Principles. Our Promises…states: “We will abide by the letter and spirit of the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, developing content with both integrity and perspective.” Somehow this article fell short of that pledge by distorting the facts and knowingly asserting a premise that is false.

Information on a Form 990 does not show an organization’s ongoing financial health. The BCA finished 2016 with a balanced operating budget and a surplus. The BCA has zero debt and more than one-year’s operating budget in reserves. Hardly the picture of a crumbling organization.

One must ask the question – is this election year politics at its worst? Over the last several years, the BCA has built one of the largest political war chests in the state. Legislative success happens when the right people are elected, and that’s what our political action is all about – electing pro-job candidates who understand the issues and are not afraid to step up and lead Alabama in the right direction.

As a business advocacy organization, we continue to look to the future to create a climate in Alabama for new and existing businesses to locate or expand. Past success is no guarantee, but it does demonstrate how a united business community can accomplish worthwhile goals.

As BCA Chairman Perry Hand has said, “We will not be intimidated into bad decision making.” We know all too well that when you are relevant, you put yourself in the crosshairs, and that’s exactly where we are today.

From a national platform, the BCA is Alabama’s exclusive representative to the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Here in Alabama, the BCA represents the interests and concerns of nearly 1 million working Alabamians through its member companies that include businesses of all sizes and virtually every segment of Alabama’s business community-from manufacturing to retail, agriculture to financial services and many, more. Our organization is a deliberative body guided by our by-laws and our legislative agenda that is developed by our active members of all sizes.

The BCA’s legislative agenda is adopted by our board of directors annually in advance of every legislative session and focuses on improving major areas that impact every single business in Alabama: Education/Workforce, Healthcare, Infrastructure and Regulations. Fortunately, we have a governor and legislative leaders who are focused on improving Alabama’s standing in all these areas. Just as in year’s past, we will not be deterred by election year smear tactics.

The BCA’s guiding force is as important today as when first envisioned in 1985 when the BCA was created: We work together to create a vibrant economic climate and an educated workforce. These are the keys to creating and sustaining jobs for employees and their families.

William J. Canary is the president and CEO of the Business Council of Alabama.

3 hours ago

Dawson: Statements about Gov Ivey ‘dangerous move’ that could ‘tank the election’

Scott Dawson, a Republican candidate for the governor of Alabama, criticized Gov. Kay Ivey and a state agency last week, for funding that went to an Alabama based LGBTQ non-profit organization. Since then, it seems as if the gubernatorial race in Alabama has been turned upside down.

In his statement Tuesday, Dawson said, “Let me be clear. The Ivey administration has betrayed Alabama values by giving nearly one million dollars of taxpayer dollars to Free2Be, an activist organization which promotes transgenderism and alternate lifestyles to Alabama’s children.”

ADECA, which administers the state’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program with funding provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, was responsible for the allocation of funds to Free2Be.


According to ADECA, Free2Be has received nearly $1.7 million in grants from ADECA since September 2014.

Ivey responded to Dawson’s statements while at a luncheon in Tuscaloosa saying, “That’s nonsense.”

“I certainly don’t agree with the agenda or the values of that organization. The funding is federal funding. It’s been going on since 2014. There are no Alabama tax dollars involved,” Ivey told reporters.

When a reporter questioned Ivey on whether or not she was upset, Ivey responded, “Do I look upset?”

“Lookie here, he’s all over the board,” Ivey said. “He’s not getting any traction. He’s low in the polls. He’s three weeks away from the election. He’s getting desperate.”

Ivey is correct. When personal attacks are being hurled toward a rival, it signals desperation. And desperation this is. I was honestly shocked that Dawson would come forward with such bold accusations towards Ivey.

When a candidate is this close to the election, statements like these, that aren’t backed with sufficient and thorough investigation, should not be made.

During an appearance on Yellowhammer Radio’s “The Wake Up Call with Baylor and Hannah”, Dawson was questioned on his statements regarding the funding that is awarded to Free2Be.

“When we found it, we were like this just doesn’t look right, doesn’t look like it needs to be there,” Dawson said. “That’s when we started investigating the organization.”

Dawson reminded the audience that his intent in bringing up the funds was to warrant transparency for the state of Alabama.

He said, “This is just a statement about transparency. We need to make sure we know where our money is going, that we know why we are taking money, and how in the world these folks get $800,000 from ADECA.”

While I echo the statements Dawson makes here about transparency and ensuring that Alabamians know where their tax dollars are being spent, I must say that only a miniscule amount of research would have shown that ADECA grants are federally funded and in no way utilize tax payer dollars.

In closing the interview, Dawson said, “Quite honestly, you know, it was a dangerous move because it could just tank the election. I am just being forthright with you, but Alabama needs to know what’s going on in Alabama government.”

I think his comments did cost him the election. While I have great respect for Scott Dawson, I believe his coming forward with these statements was foolish. A lack of knowledge and research can really hurt you on the campaign trail and we are witnessing this right now.

It’s difficult for a GOP gubernatorial candidate to unseat a GOP incumbent who has, for the most part, had a good track record.

I understand the motive behind Dawson’s statements. That organization does not represent what most Alabamians see fit for a way of life. I just wish Dawson had gone about things differently and spent more time looking into the matter.

Dawson, along with everyone else running for office in America, should learn that research and getting the facts straight goes a long way. While it may be too late for Dawson, others should learn of the danger of proposing baseless investigations.

Ivey, who has received endorsement from the NRA, has shied from the public eye over the past few months. When you have a good track record as the head of Alabama, you can do these types of things. Since taking office, Gov. Ivey has not had a largely negative conflict.

Ivey’s objective in this election is to ride out her past successes in hopes of another four years as Alabama’s CEO and it might just work, so long as the unsubstantiated claims continue to be tossed her way.

@RealKyleMorris is a Yellowhammer News contributor and host of The Weekend Briefing that airs noon-2 p.m. Saturdays on 101.1 WDYE

3 hours ago

Any politician not calling for a special session on school security is committing political malpractice

The most predictable thing in America is that we will have another school shooting soon. We don’t know where it will be, but it is coming.

Every delay in addressing these issues is another day closer to more dead kids, and an eventual mass casualty event in Alabama. We can talk about hardening targets via new construction, and limiting access to guns until we are blue in the face, but these things are either expensive or not happening.

Every politician in a heated race in Alabama should be calling for a special session on school safety. State Representative and candidate for Lieutenant Governor Will Ainsworth is right on track with a real solution:


“Every school shooting that takes place in another state around the country brings us one step closer to an active shooter attacking classrooms here, in Alabama, so the governor would be wise to call a special session this summer,” Ainsworth said.  “Signs reading ‘Gun Free Zone’ are a magnet for those who wish to do harm, so we must provide teachers with the training, knowledge, and ability to defend their students with something more lethal than a ruler and a No. 2 pencil.”

Of course there is an ad as well:

Why this matters: This is good politics and good policy. The people have decided on this. The media can pretend all they want that people are torn on this, but they are not. Americans, and Alabamians especially, understand that there is nothing stopping shooters from walking into their kids’ school today and shooting it up. The idea that allowing teachers to carry makes a child less safe is laughable, the teacher willing to do harm is not stopped by a gun-free zone. Good teachers with guns, however, are following the law and the law is protecting school shooters.

The details:

— 69 percent of Republicans are in favor of allowing teachers to carry.

— 78 percent of parents would feel more safe, or just as safe, with their child’s teacher being armed.

— The media is lying and saying there have been 22 school shootings in 2018. They include accidental discharge of a firearm in their count.

— As of May 8th, Gov. Kay Ivey had not ruled out a special session, but she has not responded to Ainsworth’s call.

@TheDaleJackson is a contributing writer to Yellowhammer News and hosts a conservative talk show from 7-11 am weekdays on WVNN