Els Van Hoof Analysis

Teri Schultz overviews opposing professional opinions regarding Belgium’s new proposed law, which potentially gives terminally ill children the option of Euthanasia. Schultz compares pediatrician Olivia Williams’ opinion and Els Van Hoof’s opinion. Williams spends her life saving desperately ill children’s lives, but says kids deserve this option. “If you go to a geriatric ward, patients with the same quality of life and the same life expectancy as a 6-year-old with bone cancer, you wouldn’t let them suffer, when they ask you to go, you’d let them go,” (Schultz, 2). Olivia Williams supposes if children suffer enough and consider death, they should be given that option. Her morals say making them suffer is not humane or right. She questions the difference between making children and

Van Hoof argues children cannot possibly comprehend the overwhelming consequences. She questions if children cannot legally drink, marry, vote, or smoke before ages 16-18, then she wonders why society would punish them and let them make this decision when they clearly do not have competence. (Schultz, 3). The children simply lack the maturity and knowledge required.
Van Hoof also fears tired parents will be the ones requesting their child’s death, or “manipulating vulnerable kids into asking for it,” (Schultz, 3). Many religious leaders also do not support this proposed legislation, and Belgium must consider all these viewpoints while making this decision.
Thomas Szasz was an American academic, psychiatrist, and psychoanalyst. In “Killing Kindness,” he advocates against physician-assisted suicide, saying Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s thoughts do not justify Euthanasia. Szasz does not believe society should force and encourage doctors to go against their beliefs and values. In Schultz’s article, Olivia Williams opposes Szasz’s opinions. Williams says people deserve the right to choose whether they