Monday, 10 November 2014

Liverpool Care pathway - A Life Less Perfect, Or Just Different...?

Is a life less perfect one that is not the same? Does being different devalue life? Do we not diminish ourselves in making assumptions such as these...?

This is time for some Life Café.

This is the paper unafraid to state its case.

This is a report about what is paramount: to have a child 'less perfect' or to have no child at all. Or is this child just perfect anyway, because this is your child?

Is this child just different...?
During Miss von Roth’s first pregnancy, she and her managing director husband Paul Freshwater, 41, were told there was a one in 700 likelihood that Lukas had the condition. With Sophia, the chance was one in 24.

For healthy pregnant women in their 20s, the risk of Down’s is usually lower than one in 1,000. Miss von Roth claims each time doctors put her under pressure to have Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS), an invasive further test.

But due to the risk of miscarriage caused by CVS – during which fluid is taken from the umbilical cord for analysis – she refused. Miss von Roth, who lives in Ashtead, Surrey, said: ‘After being given such drastic news – which turned out to be wrong – I spent my whole pregnancies obsessed my children might not be healthy. I couldn’t just relax and enjoy the experience.’

Recalling her pregnancy with Lukas, she said: ‘I was devastated when I got a phone call saying the test showed a higher risk of having a baby with Down’s syndrome.‘Doctors wanted me to undergo a CVS test, but I refused because by then I’d discovered the risk of miscarriage – around one to two babies in 100 – was higher than my chance of having a baby with Down’s.’
Miss von Roth’s children were not born different; they were born the same. This prompted comments –
I'm sure there are many cases like this happening to women. How come her story makes it to the papers? Am I missing something here..?
Yes, there must be many but it is necessary to print only one to make the point in argument against eugenicists such as Dawkins whose views also ‘made it to the papers’.

What does the NHS (National-socialist Health Service) consider the greater priority: the provision of life-extending drugs...

or to provide tests to design out perceived imperfections in the species?

This is some serious Life Café.

It is quite plain to see that the NHS considers the risk of losing a perceived healthy child is outweighed by the risk of conceiving a perceived unhealthy child.

In this case - as in the many other cases like this happening to women - this woman decided otherwise.

The NHS, 70 years in the making...

In 1941, the eugenicist, social architect and, latterly, Liberal MP, William Beveridge, was appointed to chair the committee set up by Arthur Greenwood which would call for a "cradle to grave" National Health Service.

Beveridge was one of those 'advanced' thinkers prominent with the Fabians in the LSE and an advocate of eugenics. Beveridge eugenicists created the NHS.

Fabian socialists provided the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the Australian child removal policies.

Beveridge favoured central planning. Under Bevan's charge, the State stepped in and, in line with the command and control policies of the time, the social architects commandeered the ship with their ideologues as stars to steer her by.

This is State Medicine.

Not ‘defective’ but different.

Both Right Wing and Left Wing have embraced the eugenics philosophy. It is clear why the Bard embraced the terms Up Wing and Down Wing!

Socialists – as well as National Socialists - championed the cause of eugenics and racial purity.

The Fabians Sidney and Beatrice Webb regarded eugenics as “the most important question of all”. Science was the religion of the time and the social scientists became its priesthood.

The Labour MP, Archibald Church, viewed those he saw as ‘defectives’ and ‘degenerates’ as “a misery to themselves”

The economist, John Maynard Keynes, served on the governing board of the Eugenics Society.

Eugenics was central to social planning and State Medicine is a tool, valued and valuable, an integral cog in a scientifically-planned society.

Are social scientists the new priesthood?

The post-war years saw a surfeit of 'advanced' thinkers in every field, redefining social values and what they perceived to be antiquated, 'Victorian' thinking.

These attitudes reflect through in today's, in the comments made by Warnock, Amis and Attali for instance.

Today, we have birth by induction and, via the EoLC Strategy and EoLC Programmes, the death lists and death pathways, death by induction. How better to complete this than by institution of the Communitarian Complete Lives system and the ultimate death plan with a pre-arranged appointment with death executed via the euthanasia bill set to go through parliament?

In the UK and across Europe, the social scientists are moulding our lives "without us being aware they are doing so" [Economic and Social Research Council].

In the manner, for instance, that the euthanasia campaign and its offshoot ‘charity’ has insinuated itself into Age UK via the EoLC Strategy, the Eugenics Society, in its affiliations, was “part of a complex web that enmeshed both pressure groups and politicians” [Ann Farmer - By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control, and the Abortion Campaign, p.68].

Furthermore - as reported in these pages in regard to the multiple Kendall groups for instance - the society was also “closely involved in covert methods, making it appear that prominent individuals from different political perspectives were reacting independently to a pressing social problem” when, in fact, such independent citation was a fallacy.

Further reading -

Liverpool Care Pathway - The Insinuation Of The Unacceptable

Liverpool Care Pathway – An Innocuous Logic.
The ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council) back-end funds all manner of projects that affect us all. The ESRC has been funding research into 'terminal sedation until death' at Southampton University.

The ESRC funds research which "has an impact on business, the public sector and the third sector".

This is the Economic and Social Research Council -
Shaping Society
What we do

We are the UK's largest organisation for funding research on economic and social issues. We support independent, high quality research which has an impact on business, the public sector and the third sector. At any one time we support over 4,000 researchers and postgraduate students in academic institutions and independent research institutes.

What is social science?

Social science is, in its broadest sense, the study of society and the manner in which people behave and influence the world around us. 
Some social scientists argue that no single definition can cover such a broad range of academic disciplines. Instead they simply define the social sciences by listing the subjects they include. 
Social science disciplines

The main social science disciplines include:
  • anthropology
  • communication
  • criminology
  • cultural studies
  • economics
  • human geography
  • linguistics
  • law
  • political science
  • psychology
  • sociology
  • development studies
Each of these social science subjects uses a range of approaches to study society, including surveys, questionnaires, interviews and statistics. Like all sciences, social sciences evolve through the interplay of the ideas and theories of academics and the evidence that supports or refutes them.

How social science shapes our lives

Social scientists influence our lives usually without us being aware they are doing so. For example:
  • the role of governments in an increasingly market-based society has been determined by famous thinkers such as John Maynard Keynes and Karl Popper
  • it was an economist who came up with the idea of the National Health Service
  • the payment of billions of pounds of state benefits for the needy has been influenced by the work of social scientists.
Social science research findings continue to provide invaluable information whether you are a parent, a local councillor, a police officer, or a business executive.
This is a scientifically-planned society and the social scientists are beavering away, moulding our lives in plain sight, and yet do we walk unaware, the fool on the hill, teetering on the edge of oblivion?

This is -
Liverpool Care Pathway - A Perverse Symmetry
Is this fast resembling Huxley’s Brave New world?

Natasha Canfer, a Trustee of the National Gamete Donation Trust, writes in BioNews 

In July 2014, the Department of Health announced that it had awarded the National Gamete Donation Trust (NGDT) funding to set up an independent National Sperm Bank in partnership with Birmingham Women's Hospital (BWH). 
A world first, the National Sperm Bank is due to launch in October 2014. It will be based at BWH as the single NHS-funded hub, with spokes across England later on. Donor recruitment, information and availability for all of the other centres will be coordinated from one location. Birmingham Women's Hospital is ideally placed as a leader in its field and its location to offer an accessible and fully integrated donor recruitment, screening and banking centre with donors coming from its youthful and culturally diverse population.
What will they tell the children? Will they tell their children? The ‘lost children’ - those for whom no record was held - felt that they had lost their lineage.

Is this a Brave New World of designer children?

Scientific American asks -

"...will selection of traits perceived to be desirable end up diminishing variability within the gene pool, the raw material of natural selection?"
What gambit is this gamete priesthood playing...?

Are the Social Scientists gambling with our future?

Last thought -
Liverpool Care Pathway - The Side Effects

No comments:

Post a Comment