Wednesday, October 16, 2024

When politicians create a "social valuation of life"

 I highly recommend reading this article by Amanda Achtman at Public Discourse. She discusses the development of "euthanasia centers" in Nazi Germany where the "unfit" were killed and the methods for the genocide of Jewish people were "perfected." 

These,

"euthanasia memorials do not receive nearly the volume of visitors that flock to the more notorious death camps; most people are unaware of the links between them."

We must remember this history lest we repeat it as more and more nations accept the notion of "euthanasia." 

Here is an excerpt, 

The medical records of the euthanasia victims list such things as: “congenital feeble-mindedness,” “social nonconformity,” “anxious relational psychosis,” “unable to work,” “incurable,” “danger to the public,” “unstable and dishonest,” “sullen and unapproachable,” “senile dementia,” etc., as conditions that obviously warranted death.

Ambiguous as these criteria are, they were used to reduce people to conditions that disqualified them from belonging in the world. The person with a name became the mere instance of a type. Doctors would refer to patients by their illness, disability, or inner struggle as a kind of shorthand that eclipsed the person. This is a particularly insidious form of dehumanization, when a person’s entire identity is reduced to a diagnosis, prognosis, or accessibility aid.

In short, a consensus arose around a social valuation of life, which became difficult to dispute. The rationale for killing people became entrenched under the guise of general agreement. The precedent became part of the argument. If the general presumption becomes that the rationale is logical, if there is a sense that fungible criteria are legitimate, then people are susceptible to being classified within them, regardless of whether they would have put themselves in that category.

Today we might instinctively look at Nazi criteria for death as utterly baseless, but at the time seasoned medical professionals regarded them as reasonable. To have a sense of history is to grasp the arbitrariness of such criteria. When it comes to killing patients, there is no way to get the criteria just right because the stamp of medical approval sends a social message that there is a category of persons who should not exist.

2 comments:

  1. Katherine12:28 PM

    We tend to forget, or perhaps we never knew, about the progressive era's links to euthanasia and abortion in our own country. These links are still present and are growing in one of our two major political parties.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Advocates of abortion use an identical tactic as the Nazis... dehumanization. A baby is called a fetus, and it is psychologically easier to destroy a fetus than it is to kill a baby.

      Delete