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.

12 hours ago

University of North Alabama adopting new tuition plan

The University of North Alabama is switching to a tuition plan that officials say will result in increased costs for some students but not others.

Officials at the school in Florence say they are reducing the total number of student fees from seven to one, and fees will be included in the overall tuition cost.


A statement says students taking 15 hours will see a maximum increase in expenses of 4.1%.

But some could pay less, and costs will not change for others.

School officials say a lag in state funding is a continuing problem.

North Alabama’s vice president for business, Evan Thornton, says the school has deferred maintenance and capital needs totaling more than $160 million.

The school has an undergraduate enrollment of about 6,200 students.
(Associated Press, copyright 2018)

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

12 hours ago

Nathan Lindsay joining governor’s office from BCA

Another high profile staffer from the Business Council of Alabama (BCA) is joining Governor Kay Ivey’s senior level team.

The governor on Monday announced that Nathan Lindsay will join her office as director of appointments effective July 1.

This position is charged with spearheading the meticulous work that goes into Ivey meeting her duty to appoint qualified, representative and appropriate people to positions on the state’s various boards and commissions.

A press release from the governor’s office outlined that Lindsay assumes the role with an extensive background in state government and the private sector, which uniquely qualifies him to advise the governor in this capacity.


Most recently, through his work in political and governmental affairs at the BCA, Lindsay interacted with members of the business community throughout the Yellowhammer State, which significantly adds to his ability to identify and select candidates for various appointed posts.

Additionally, Lindsay’s early career included time in then-Governor Bob Riley’s office where he served as aide to the governor from 2006 to 2011. Lindsay also worked in the governor’s communications office as deputy press secretary and advised Riley on education policy.

“Nathan brings to our team a wealth of knowledge that I know will serve the state well,” Ivey said in a statement. “In addition to his expertise and insight, Nathan is a man of character. The men and women of my staff must have a strong work ethic, a depth of knowledge and a heart for public service. Nathan certainly embodies all of these characteristics.”

Lindsay earned his bachelor’s degree from Faulkner University. During his time at Faulkner, he served as SGA president and later, in 2018, he was awarded the Distinguished Alumni Award for the College of Arts and Sciences.

“As governor, I have the important responsibility of appointing qualified individuals to serve on the more than 450 boards and commissions in our state. These men and women must not only be highly-qualified, but they should also be a true reflection of our great state,” Ivey added. “I am confident we will continue to find the best people to serve our state, just as I am certain Nathan will serve my Administration exceptionally well in this position. His experience speaks for itself, and he shares my goal of moving Alabama into a better future.”

This comes weeks after Leah Garner departed BCA to become Ivey’s communications director.

Mark Colson also left BCA to become head of the Alabama Trucking Association recently.

Update 5:55 p.m.:

BCA President and CEO Katie Boyd Britt released a statement commending Ivey on the hire of Lindsay.

“Nathan’s background and expertise in political affairs combined with his political acumen uniquely qualify him to serve the governor and the state in this capacity,” Britt said. “I have no doubt Nathan will do an outstanding job, and I commend Governor Kay Ivey on this excellent addition to her staff.”

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

13 hours ago

Alabama listed as one of the top 20 most patriotic states in America

A WalletHub report released Monday revealed Alabama to be on of the top 20 most patriotic states in America.

Ranked 19 overall on the list, with a score of 47.43, Alabama ranked first for the “Civics Education Requirement.”

The report “compared the 50 states across 13 key indicators of patriotism” and “ranges from share of enlisted military population to share of adults who voted in the 2016 presidential election to AmeriCorps volunteers per capita.”


With one as “Most Patriotic” and 25 as “Average,” Alabama received the following rankings:

  • 5th – Average Number of Military Enlistees per 1,000 Civilian Adults
  • 30th – Active-Duty Military Personnel per 100,000 Civilian Adults
  • 17th – Veterans per 1,000 Civilian Adults
  • 1st – Civics Education Requirement
  • 12th – Share of Civilian Adult Population in Military Reserves
  • 10th – Share of Adults Who Voted in 2016 Primary Elections

Alabama also ranked eight overall for ‘Military Engagement.’

The report, which compared red states to blue states in terms of patriotism, found that red states were more patriotic. Red states received an average rank of 23.67, while blue states received an average rank of 28.25.

Kyle Morris also contributes daily to Breitbart News. You can follow him on Twitter @RealKyleMorris.

13 hours ago

Brooks: ‘Really dumb’ for Democrats to elect candidates mainly on ‘skin pigmentation or their chromosomes’

In an interview on WVNN’s “The Dale Jackson Show”on Friday, Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05) lamented that many Democrats have become more interested in racial and gender identity politics than the welfare of America.

Coming off of her much maligned comments comparing American immigration facilities to “concentration camps,” host Dale Jackson asked the north Alabama congressman if he believes that Democrats in Congress will allow Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to continue to serve as their “de facto face and leader.”

“Yes,” Brooks answered succinctly, promoting a follow-up request for his reasoning.


“Well, she is where she is,” Brooks explained. “She’s got a lot of political power. She’s got a lot of support — surprisingly.”

“There are large, large numbers of American citizens who have bit off on this socialist stuff, who have bit off on this victimization stuff, who have bit off on thinking that the most important criteria in determining whether to elect someone is their skin pigmentation or their chromosomes — which is really dumb, OK,” he continued. “We oughta be electing people based on their character and based on their public policy positions.”

“But, notwithstanding that, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has become the face of the Democratic Party in many different respects, and she does have great influence as evidenced by the presidential candidates on the socialist Democrats’ side who are trying to cultivate her support,” Brooks added. “They want her endorsement.”

Listen, starting at the 8:25 mark:

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

14 hours ago

Democrats hope it’s 2017 all over again, Republicans just want the nightmare to end

In 2017, Roy Moore won a Republican primary run-off against an extremely flawed Luther Strange. Strange wasn’t just a regular candidate — he had the cloud of his appointment, and he was dogged by former Gov. Robert Bentley’s investigation, impeachment and resignation.

Alabama Republicans, outside of U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL), were reluctant to criticize Roy Moore because they knew doing so would hand the Senate seat to now-Senator Doug Jones (D-AL).

But this is different.


State Senate Pro Tem Del Marsh (R-Anniston) told the Montgomery Advertiser that he blamed the GOP establishment in 2017, but still thinks Moore can’t win in 2020.

He stated, “I do not believe, with the numbers I look at, that Roy Moore at the end of the day can get the nomination.”

State Senator Arthur Orr (R-Decatur) dismissed Moore when asked about the candidates, saying, “If you look at the candidates, you got Roy Moore. I don’t think we need to say more there.”

Later, he all but endorsed U.S. Representative Bradley Byrne (R-Fairhope) by saying Byrne “would do the best job.”

Secretary of State John Merrill, a potential future Moore opponent, believes Moore has an uphill battle against Jones.

“I think it would be extraordinarily difficult for Judge Moore to be successful in a general election campaign against Senator Jones,” Merrill outlined.

He added, “I also think it would be difficult for Judge Moore to secure the Republican nomination.”

Congressman Mo Brooks (R-Huntsville), who endorsed Moore in 2017, has already endorsed State Rep. Arnold Mooney (R-Indian Springs) and is on record saying former U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions would be a favorite.

“I do believe that Jeff Sessions would clearly be number one in the poll rankings, based on his having been such a great senator on three principle issues: free enterprise versus socialism; deficit and debt; and border security,” he explained.

Say what you will, but you do not usually see these kinds of pronouncements from Republicans in the middle of a primary.

Democrats hope 2017 is going to be repeated in 2020, but there are many different factors that will matter.

Roy Moore is already fatally flawed as 300,000+ Republicans voters abandoned him in 2017 and stayed home. Many of those voters will vote in the primary in 2020, but will not vote for him.

U.S. Representative Mike Rogers (R-Saks) expressed a similar sentiment on CSPAN last week.

“I personally don’t think Roy Moore is going to be our nominee, but whoever our nominee is will prevail in November because you’ll have the full complement of Republican voters turning out turning out to vote,” he said.

This is not 2017.

Dale Jackson is a contributing writer to Yellowhammer News and hosts a talk show from 7-11 am weekdays on WVNN.