Prensa | Jue, 11/07/2019 - 10:23
VINCENT LAMBERT CASE
-"All over the world, there are millions of people who cannot feed themselves, be it due to sickness or advanced age. Should we stop feeding them all?", the spokesman for the platform asked.
MADRID, JULY 11TH 2019.- The President of CitizenGO, Ignacio Arsuaga, has condemned today what he has called the "murder" of Vincent Lambert by the medical team of the hospital in Reims (France)
"Doctors that took care of Lambert have put his death in motion last July 2nd. Vincent Lambert breathed on his own, he did not require a machine. Doctors stopped feeding or hydrating him. They've not let him die, they've murdered him. They premeditately euthanized a vulnerable person, a disabled person", stated Arsuaga after the news of the decease were known.
"Now that Lambert is dead, it's time to gather in prayer, as his parents explained, via their lawyer. The day will come when they'll demand responsibilities", ensured the President of CitizenGO, who lamented that the case may set a precedent in France.
From CitizenGO different questions were raised about the case:
1.10 days of agony of Vincent Lambert until his death it's not Dignified Death, as some call it, it's the euthanizing of a vulnerable being, the murder of a disabled person. It's simply abominable.
2. It's a disingenuous argument to deduce, as no one would choose living like this if we had a choice. We have to kill those that are in that vulnerable situation.
3. Patients in that state that don't want to live anymore, generally abandon themselves psychologically and soon after, they die. It hasn't been the case of Lambert, who has fought to keep on living since his traffic accident in 2008. As a matter of fact, last May 20th they tried to murder him for the second time and this was his reaction when his parents came to say goodbye. The average length of palliative care in France is of 16 days and he's been for ten years in one. Was he really at the end of his days?
4. If the doctors sedated him so that he wouldn't suffer while he starved and dehydrated, they conceded he could suffer.
6. "Watch the elderly, all those people that are in a coma, tetraplegic people, or the disabled, those that have long-term diseases, like Cancer or AIDS... if euthanasia's approved, we can justify the death of all of them... and more", said Ignacio Arsuaga.
7. Which human being gets to decide that another's does not deserve not to be lived? Lambert did not leave in writing his desire for his death to be planned. That any person doesn't want to live in a state of disability doesn't mean they want to be euthanized. As a matter of fact, until 2013 his wife didn't say anything about that being her husband's will. If you don't know if Lambert's is a case of euthanasia, just think that it was a third party, Dr Sanchez, who made the decision of depriving deliberately Vincent Lambert of food and water to provoke his death, to kill him. This is against the Hippocratic Oath, to kill a person with a severe disability.
8. The dignity of Vincent Lambert and his right to life, just as anybody's are inalienable. The ethical level of a society is measured by the care for those most vulnerable. In CitizenGO we fight against injustice and we work for the protection of a given set of values, such as the defense of the life of all human beings, from their conception to their natural deaths.
9. France has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Countries signing it claim to acknowledge these people have the right to enjoy the best health conditions without discrimination based on their disability.
10. The Social Security system implies contributing according to a citizen's income and then receive medical attention in accordance with their needs. Public health exists to keep people like Vincent Lambert alive, regardless of how expensive it may be. But furthermore, his medical attention is charged mainly to the employer's insurance company, as he was on his way to work, so the argument of the economic cost for all French people doesn't stick. Also, it looks like some private centers specialized in disability offered to take care of him. The care he received at Reims Hospital was, according to the media, more expensive than a specialized center, to which his parents demanded him to be transferred. Why was this denied if this is about public money?