Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum stated recently that ten percent of those who die in the Netherlands are killed by euthanasia. He added that half of these cases were involuntary.
Since 136,000 people died in the Netherlands in 2010, Santorum was essentially claiming that Dutch doctors kill close to 7,000 mainly elderly people per year without their permission. Over the course of a few years, this would make the Dutch medical profession a far bigger murderer of civilians than Syrian President Bashar al Assad.
There were many loud protests from the Netherlands stating that Santorum’s claims were false, as euthanasia is applied on 2.5 percent of all dying people per year. There are also no exact data on how many people were killed without their permission. A contributor to Forbes, however, pointed out that when applying certain calculations, Santorum’s claims may not have been so far off.
Whatever the exact figure, there are hundreds of cases every year of euthanasia in the Netherlands in which the patient is not asked his or her permission.
Let us now employ a bit of fantasy and assume that Muslim states were intent on assailing the Netherlands. They would claim in the United Nations Human Rights Council that such killings are a severe breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These states could easily muster a majority to have the UNHRC appoint a commission of inquiry into this matter.
Who would be better qualified to head such a committee than the Grand Master of Flawed UNHRC Reporting, Judge Richard Goldstone? As his report on Israel was a classic exercise in distorted methodology, its model would be followed. His committee of inquiry would include one member who had already condemned the Netherlands on euthanasia and another who was generally hostile to the country.
Goldstone and his associates would set out with their proven procedural methods. The commission would reach its conclusion on the basis of what it “saw, heard and read.”
The commission had accepted hearsay in the Gaza war investigation; it would thus do the same in the Dutch situation.
As there are many medical doctors in the Netherlands who consider euthanasia immoral, a number of them would likely testify and present the “facts” about its abuse. (The refusal of these doctors to commit euthanasia has already led to another contested initiative – a system of mobile euthanasia units that will travel around the Netherlands to respond to the wishes of sick people who want to end their lives.)
Some individuals appearing before the Goldstone commission would tell of how family members had asked for involuntary euthanasia to be carried out on a patient in order to lay their hands on his inheritance.
As hearsay is accepted as evidence, I could also appear before the commission. I have a Dutch acquaintance who told me how hospital doctors exercised extreme pressure on her to authorize euthanasia on her mortally ill husband. She stated it was only because she has a son who is a doctor and another who is a lawyer that she had resisted their coercion.
As tens of babies born with an open back have been killed by Dutch doctors in recent years, there would likely be other doctors who would testify to the Goldstone commission that children born with that affliction have been unjustifiably characterized in Dutch society as “misfits.” Others who might appear before the commission would be from Helping Hands, a Christian organization that works for better protection for the handicapped.
Due to the commission inquiry, the international public argument on euthanasia would be widened. There would be articles stating that there have been quite a few doctors in history who were also mass murderers. They would then refer to Josef Mengele of Auschwitz infamy. This theme of doctors who murder could be extended to the late Haitian dictator Papa Doc François Duvalier and Bashar al Assad, as well as many other lesser known figures.
If Goldstone were consistent, the report would be damning. After some time had passed and major damage to The Netherlands was done, he would write an article recanting part of his report, just as he did concerning Israel.
All of this of course, is purely a thought experiment. Deeply flawed UNHRC reports only focus on the one country it condemns consistently – Israel. All other countries, including the Netherlands, needn’t worry.
Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld is chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.