how sickening that despite that Hitler’s 1941 invasion of the SovietUnion- and the subsequent mass murder of 30M plus Slavic people -was in part predicated on Hitler’s racial discourse that the Slavs were subhuman race today in Russia some are calling for institution or the same biomedical discourse and the practice of social/racial hygiene. This is sickening.

It's easy to walk the extreme routes here to get maximum impact and coverage. Much harder to deal with the real issues. The truth that there is no absolute thresholds, no easy way out with a checklist, and the fact that all we have is our own frail judgment, our very own human failings and strengths. Disabled is as accurately descriptive as light, light has a spectrum and so does disability. disability can range from a weak leg, to complete vegetative immotive state. There is no doubt that at some stage in the spectrum, which is a subjective judgment, a threshold is crossed where in terms the quality of life of the individual, their parents and society as a whole.... There is an argument that sustaining the life does not make sense. This is not some Hitler plot, it is innately the humanity we have inside us, not to see suffering. It is as caring as trying to put everything we have into saving someone who is in peril. The problem arises when we set these factors in total imbalance. Because it does become a Goolish plot if society becomes the main factor, or the parents do. But where the individual has prime weighting, with the parents given input, and society just limiting to the sensible resources to apply. Then you can have a human approach. At the moment, maybe we have a wrong view of what life is. Ever improving medicine can sustain your ABC, but this is a mere existence. A Disabled person is a disabled person, who is entitled to a life, not a mere existence. So we need face all this and realize there are no hard and fast rules, we live in the real world, where maybe a process and some common sense with checks and balances is all we have. Maybe we have got things wrong at the moment, but I am sure an extreme view will not solve anything. Only a humane view will solve a human problem, there is no one else to ask. Give up on others absolutes, for one day they will give up on you! Instead create the best absolutes you can and live with it.

This is barbaric! As a person who overcame a mental health and a intellectual disability, I consider this as genocide. What if the child with the disability was a relative of theirs? People with intellectual, developmental and mental health disabilities can contribute to society, sometimes with a little help. Last, who does this person think they are, God?

Russia may have nuclear weapons, but if its women don’t act responsibly it has no future. “Sexual Dimorphism and Division of Labour” is a law of Nature, countries that don’t abide by it will be out bred and in time outcompeted. White females have been handed everything on a “silver platter” as a result they often behave like emotional and spoilt kids rather than responsible women. Indeed the fall of the US/Britain and the rise of Asian countries can be attributed in part from the respective behaviour of their women.

Our people are indignant about this journalist. A lot of posts aganist him are in blogs. Also, we all can't understand how the newspaper have published his article, are they so irresponsible?! This is the way to have great attention for newspaper, but it is so dirty "way". (Sorry for my bad english, - russian girl)

As a disable person I have seen phocomelic children ( no arms and no legs etc. - no eyes - no noses etc. ) and such an interminable heart breaking disabilities that it would be too sad, too depressing and too long to describe. I also know, in the almost totality of cases ,that the mothers knew that his/her child would be deformed ! but. they say , " I will look after him/her "... untill , of course, the parents are alive and then the disabled dumped in an empy room of some charities or , worse , other goverment institutions, looking at the walls if they can ! If churches and do goodders wants them alive then they should take care of them and not asking society to bear the moral and material costs : it's very easy to play the moral part BUT " you keep them alive and care for them , we just talk about it ". To day we can detect during pregnancy deformeties and , at that point , the pregnancy shoud be terminated with the simple consent of two doctors. Full stop. I can tell you that this is what most desabled people dearly wish ! Would you live if you were so desabled ? With great sadness . Pinocchio

It is sad and disturbing that some would value another's life only according to functional abilities. Human life is not special because of our abilities. It is special because our human nature is different in kind from other animals. We are a spiritual creature with free will and intellect. Who are you, and who am I, to decide that somebody else's life is not worth living? That is not our decision. A disabled child's life is worthy of love and nuturing. Besides, so many people with disabilities have contributed so much to humanity, such as Stephen Hawking, all while suffering from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. The eugenics opinions advanced by the journalist here, and others, such as Peter Singer in America (a professor at Princeton), belong in the dustbin of history with the gruesome eugenics experiments of Josef Mengele. There is no superior master race and those who would build one by eliminating the weak should be ashamed of themselves. The masquerade under the guise of "compassion", "preventing suffering", and "not burdening society" but really they are cheapening everyone's respect for life. And when the lives of the most vulnerable are not protected, then nobody's life is safe from the policy decisions of the few powerful elite. Human rights begin with protecting the weak and infirm, not murdering them.

As a nurse, I can see both sides of the argument. I have seen children / adults - devastatingly disabled / extreme medical conditions - that I do wonder. I would not want to exist (and it is an existence, not a life). most people never see the kind of disability that the article is portraying. one patient I do remember was a woman in her late 20's who had devastating chromosomal abnormality / was about the size of a small child / lay in the bed / no movement / everything had to be done for this woman / screeched constantly in an odd high pitched scream whilst awake / fed through a tube through the stomach wall / there was no communication or understanding from the patient / just stared ahead / there was nothing - and the relatives insisted on full resusitation who would want to live like this ??? how much did it cost to keep someone like this alive for 20 + years there was no life / no dignity - there was nothing and as a mother, I could not cope with caring for someone like this either - it devastates and destroys families - and is not fair on them - their life has gone too I really wonder that at times of overwhelming problems, euthanasia would be a better option and let the family move on and have a life (like I said, most people will never see or understand the kind of problems we are talking about here) at my work we have 2 children who come in from time to time - who have massive chromosomal abnormalities and require 24 hour care - the mothers are in their 20's and look exhausted and worn down - this is not fair on them - the adults deserve a life too - not a life sentence looking after a child who will never have anything more than an existance I see both sides

For the love of all things unholy, there are doctors out there who are aware of ethics and accidents happen. It's not proper to dicuss some decisions, I'm sure. The problem is that mothers bond to their children and everybody is afraid that their disability will equal death as well. And even a damaged creature will seek to survive if it can, has success in any definition of the word. And what happens to one, won't necessarily happen to the next down the line of reproduction. I think it's how unique to an individual we make disability that is the problem. It's personal instead of being a deviant. What can "it" do compared to the others of its environment? There is a big difference between not having a leg appearing as a monster to not having a brain and drooling all over yourself constantly, it should be noted. People in certain environments will become damaged as well. What to do with them? It's like a face off between the abused people and the wealthy people who exploit their little failures for social gain then shun the abused disabled as being lazy, aggressive or abusive.

This article has been mirrored by USWGO re-mirroring services because it talks about another high up wanting Hitlers programs to return.

Journalist calls for euthanasia of disabled newborns: Oh, my good Lord. "IT"?? This is an atrocious legacy of hatred that continues to be perpetrated against people who are perceived as "different" from the "norm". No less wrong than the Nazi killing spree. Disgusting! No person has the right to make this choice.This article is reminicent of the ignorant, soul-less mindset of a solicitor in Canada who has been designated to represent facts at a Fatality Inquiry for a little girl named "S.M." A Government appointed litigator who speaks of persons with disability as those who "suffer" as if that is the natural consequence of developmental difference. An individual who refers to the child, born with a chromosome duplication syndrome, Tetrasomy 18p, as "IT". How is that for impartiality and transparent governing? Each soul is as perfect in God's eyes as any other! Who will be next to be selected as unworthy of life... Make noise, this is wrong!! "Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Author: Martin Luther King Jr.

What quantifies disability anyway? We are each more/less gifted in some areas than others. We each are genetically predispostioned for conditions, whether these are more outward in appearance of disability or not. Some persons wear glasses, some utilize a chair for increased mobility... There are conditions that are invisible to the naked eye and yet life-threatening. If a person has, for instance, Cancer, should they simply be eradicated? Persons with develpmental differences are not less valued by those who love them. Each individual has a gift to bring to others. My daughter, born with a rare chromosomal condition has taught ME tremendously about life. She loved and was immensely loved in return. That little girl has achieved more in her short life than others without disability may accomplish in a life-time, including legislative amendment. She mattered and always will...

A child with Down Syndrome is a mistake of nature. To take care of a person with such a disability is a drain on society and a waste of time. They cannot take care of themselves; they cannot do anything except live. It doesn't matter how much money we put into raising them, they will never be able to live normal, independent lives. I understand why a person would not be willing to euthanize their own child, but I think that a person should have the option. People are terrified of ideas like this, because they associate them with the Nazis. While Nazi Germany obviously should not be the model for our society, if we blindly shield ourselves from the fact that genetics are extremely important to the success of an individual, we can only place ourselves and our planet in the direction of chaos and failure. We want to believe that all men our created equal, because it appeals to our sensibilities, but deep down in our hearts we all know that this could not be farther from the truth.

Millions of near-term babies are murdered through abortion each year and there seems to be very little outcry. If during pre-natal period, the doctor determines that a baby will be born with Down Syndrome, then the unborn baby should be aborted, even if the mother insists on giving birth. The parents of the born baby should pay an extra tax to cover for the burden this baby is on the society - unless the family lives somewhere in the taiga. Nature has endowed all her creatures with the ability to reject and destroy the unhealthy offsprings. It does this so that the current generation is protected and only healthy genes are passed on to the next generation. Only the human creature is foolish enough to bring unhealthy babies and low intelligent babies into the world. If the human race is to be destroyed, as seems to be their fate, it will be destroyed through their own foolishness, rather than by a natural event. Once the human beings decide on breeding unintelligent and unhealthy babies, there demise is not far off.

The human race eventually has a simple choices to make: 1. Progress to the future to it fullest potential that God gave them; or, 2. Be overrun by unintelligent and deformed creatures. The choice nature gave the human race is simple: "pay me now, or pay me later". In other words, if the human race continues down the foolish path of assuming that we are "all equal", regardless of low intelligence and physical deformities, the price will eventually be paid.

My biggest fear is becoming disabled (blind, deaf, loss of use of limbs) and I would not want to live in those circumstances. Not to allow euthanasia for the disabled is barbaric and I think that it's more important than euthanasia for the terminally ill as they will be dead in a short space of time while disabled people may have many decades of suffering ahead of them before they die a natural death.

I believe there is some truth, whether we like it / agree with it, in what this man speaks of. I have worked with severely disabled children & while they are quite sweet & loving as children, they often suffered from terrible illnesses & also developed emotional problems in their teen years & if they were able to make it to adulthood, they often had horrible cardiac problems & other health anomolies which were very painful & also quite costly to treat. Who do you think pays for 99% of these children to get medical care & specialised education? Your taxes are what is providing for the majority of their needs, while many able bodied & minded people who are in need of assistance are turned down because there simply is not enough to go around after having to provide for the needs of these "special needs" people. My great aunt had 2 sons, both were severly affected with chromosomal or phenylketonuria (they were born in the 1930-40s so there was no way of knowing their true diagnoses) & while one died at a few months of age, the other lived close to the age of 20 & it was so very hard for the family to care for "Vili" & it truly damaged my aunt's psyche having to care & love a son who was unable to do anything, nor show signs of emotion- not so much as a smile to show he was happy- but had a high pitched wail or shriek when he was upset or needed attention. As he grew older, larger & heavier, it took a toll on everyone caring for him, & he was suffering from various illnesses which made him shriek constantly. While not all children born with chromosomal disorders are as bad off as he was, some who can even learn & care for themselves, even work when they are older, there are many who are born so damaged & in need of constant care that not only wears down the souls of those who love & care for them, but also uses large amounts of money for their care. There is an ugly truth to this man's views, even if we do not like it.

This journalist believes these children don't have a right to live due to their physical imperfections. Meanwhile, he has an internal human imperfection of hate, violence and ignorance. He thinks that he is a superior being, when all the while, he is of much lower value due to his narrow minded, self centered life. He honestly thinks he is better? He is full of himself and it is disgusting. His imperfection is much uglier and and more damaging to society than any of these precious children. So, who plays God here? Really. Let's see if we can answer this. Who decides which child is dispensable? How do we rate a level of value on each challenged child's life. Do we take each individual child and see how many questions they can answer? See how far they can walk? See how many pictures they can draw? See how much math they can solve? See how much they cry when they are scared? And then decide who to kill? How do we decide who is of value and who isn't? Meanwhile, people who live sickening lives, have draining habits, and act out in hateful actions can be "chosen" to live just because they can walk better or speak more clearly? Honestly, I am just appalled!

Does anybody know where i can find a copy of this article I need it for a religious assignment about human ethics and moral values Muchly Appreciated x