Question about limiting medical care..?
If we limit or cut off a particular group of people's medical care, and shorten their lives, because they seem to serve no purpose, or because it supposedly won't improve their lives except to continue it, if we do this what is the difference between this and genocide. It would target a particular group of our people and slowly wipe them out ..or not? Thoughts?
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Actually, there is a term for that. If you're seeking to eliminate an entire race, it is genocide. If you are targeting the weak or old or otherwise "unworthy" within your own population group, it's called "euthanasia." The Nazis practiced both.
It is illegal in most of the United States, and most countries in the world. There are states that allow it, under certain circumstances. (And it isn't a Republican vs. Democrat issue. Since most Americans are firmly against euthanasia, Republicans have been using the health care reform to claim the Democrats are trying to set up euthanasia programs. The claim is false, as most states outlaw the practice. Of the four states that allow it, two are blue states (Oregon and Washington), and two are red states (Texas and Montana).
Texas has a "futile care" law that allows hospitals and doctors to withhold care if they believe the patient is terminal anyways. Oregon and Washington state have legalized physician-assisted suicide. The Montana State District Court has ruled that physicians in Montana who issue drugs to patients to self-administer suicide cannot be prosecuted. The case is currently before the Montana Supreme Court.
With the exception of the Texas law, euthanasia still only occurs if the patient chooses to go down that path. What you're describing is involuntary Euthanasia along the Nazi model -- very few people would support that, and nobody is actually proposing it.