I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: Deuteronomy 30:19
It did come as a surprise to this blogger to come across this item from 1950 and see the large percentage of Americans who supported euthanasia. This was just five years after the end of a war that Americans and their allies fought against the Nazis, under whom euthanasia morphed into mass murder, followed by the Nuremberg trials of the perpetrators for crimes against humanity. I've been dismayed to see belief in the sanctity of human life declining over the last 50-60 years, but I didn't know it was already fairly low even 75 years ago (assuming the results of the survey are accurate, of course). As reported by the Canadian Institute of Public Opinion and published in the
Calgary Herald, February 27, 1950 (bold in original):
PRINCETON, N.J.--Public sentiment in a coast-to-coast survey by the American Institute is closely divided on the principle of euthanasia or mercy killing.
The weight of opinion is against the idea, but the margin is very close.
In testing the nation's views on this controversial and much discussed issue the Institute patterned its question after the model bill proposed by the Euthanasia Society of America. This proposal would call for the consent of the patient, and an examination by a board of doctors appointed by a court.
Here are the questions used in the survey and the vote:
A. "When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life by some painless means if the patient and his family request it?"
B. If no, or no opinion, ask: "Would you approve of ending a patient's life if a board of doctors appointed by the court agreed that the patient could not be cured?"
Thirty-six per cent indicated approval and another 7 per cent on the second part, making the total as follows:
Favor mercy killing------43%
Oppose mercy killing-----46%
No opinion---------------11%
Opinion on the issue is not greatly different now from what it was when the Institute first tested sentiment with a similar question 13 years ago. There has been a small increase in the vote in favor.
The Sander case in New Hampshire and the Carol Paight case in Connecticut stimulated nationwide discussion of the pros and cons of legalized euthanasia.
When I read this article I had never heard of the Sander and Paight cases, but a quick Google search produced some results. First, the case of Dr. Herman Sander--as reported by
Australian Associated Press and reported in the
Cairns Post,
January 5, 1950 (bold, capitals in original):
EUTHANASIA CASE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
DOCTOR INDICTED.
DEATH OF CANCER PATIENT.
NEW YORK, Jan. 3 (A.A.P.). A Manchester, New Hampshire, grand jury of 21 middle-aged men, was convened to-day to consider whether Dr. Hermann Sander should be indicted for murder. Sander, who is 40, has been accused of the mercy killing of an incurable woman cancer patient, by the injection of air into her veins, as she lay on her hospital deathbed.
The judge, instructing the jurors, asked if any had signed any of the widely circulated petitions supporting Dr. Sander. There was no response.
Sander, who is on bail, continued calling.on his patients to-day. He told reporters that he still felt his action was not legally or morally wrong, and added: "I believe my position ultimately will be vindicated.
Meanwhile euthanasists have made plans to use the Sander case as a wedge in seeking the adoption of "a mercy death law."
The vice-president of the Euthanasia Society of America (Mrs. Robertson Johns) said in NewYork: "This is absolutely the best case, yet for our cause. It is good, because of Dr. Sander's integrity, and because he did not hide what he did."
A member of the New Hampshire Legislature (Mr. Ray Sawyer) said be felt that something should be done about légalising mercy deaths. He suggested that physicians should draw up such a Bill. Later Dr. Sander was indicted by the grand jury on a charge of first degree murder.
According to Rick Holmes in the
Derry News,
June 30, 2011:
Probably you heard that earlier this month — June 3, 2011 — Dr. Jack Kevorkian died. He was of course the so called "Doctor Death." Last year, there was even a Hollywood movie about his career. His passing brought back to memory those events of a decade ago when we were all talking about the right — or wrong — of physician-assisted suicide.
While all the country's attention has been on Kevorkian, it is interesting to know that the very first trial for medical euthanasia involved a doctor who had once lived in Derry. In 1950 — exactly 50 years before the Kevorkian trial — there was the trial of Dr. Herman Sander.
Sander (1908-1996) was born in New York, the first child of George and Ada Sander. Ada had been born in New Jersey but George had emigrated from Dresden, Germany, in 1888. He was a 1901 graduate of Stevens Institute of Hoboken, N.J. with a degree in electrical engineering. Shortly after Herman's birth the family moved to Derry. Here, George Sander was employed as superintendent of the Derry Electric Company. They lived in an apartment at 71 East Broadway, directly across from today's McGregor Library Building. After a few years in Derry, the family moved to Manchester where he was employed with the Traction, Light and Power Company — the concern that ran the Manchester and Derry Trolley.
Herman grew up in Manchester and, while attending Central High School, he became the state's first Eagle Scout. He studied at the University of Munich and received his undergraduate degree at Dartmouth College (1930) and his medical degree from New York University. His entire career was spent practicing in the Manchester area.
In 1949, Mrs. Abbie Borroto lay dying of cancer in the Hillsborough County Hospital. The 60-year-old woman was suffering; she was racked with unbearable pain that no amount of medication could ease. During that year, she had wasted from 140 to 80 pounds. It seemed likely to most that she had only a few days to live. All day and night she was screaming for someone, anyone, to help her die.
Herman Sander was her doctor and knew he was powerless to reduce her suffering. He then gave four injections of air directly into her veins. She died painlessly in about 10 minutes. Dr. Sander entered into her medical records exactly what he had done. Sander's supervisor read the entry and reported the death to the police. An arrest warrant was quickly issued for Sander that charged him with wrongful death. A grand jury soon found that there was enough evidence to hold a murder trial.
In 1950, Herman Sander became the first doctor ever put on trial for "mercy killing." The trial was held at the Hillsborough County Courthouse and was attended by reporters from all over the state and nation including novelists Fanny Hurst and John O'Hara. The prosecution was led by future U.S. Sen. Louis Wyman. On the witness stand Dr. Sander told the jury he thought Mrs. Borroto was already dead. But if that were true, why did he gave a dead patient the injections? In answer to that question, all he could say was, "Why I did it I cannot tell. It didn't make any sense."
All across America there was an active debate on Dr. Sander and mercy killing. Evangelist Billy Graham said the court should find him guilty of murder and make "an example" of him. In his hometown of Candia, 605 of the town's 650 registered voters gave Sander a "written testimonial of his integrity and goodwill."
In Derry, the local Baptist and Catholic Church were strictly opposed to euthanasia. They based their arguments on the scriptural command that "Thou shall not kill." It may be supposed that most of the other Derry pastors were also in favor of Sander being found guilty.
The first clergyman in the greater Manchester area to come out in public support of Sander was Rev. Dr. Charles S. Milligan of East Derry's First Parish Church. To make sure everyone knew his views, he announced a week before, the topic of his next sermon. That Sunday, the sanctuary of the church was filled to overflowing.
Pastor Milligan began his sermon with the declaration that "I believe God does not enjoy human suffering. I question that those who don't want it (euthanasia) have the right to deny it to those who do." He went on to say that doctors have been performing mercy killing for millennia but it has always been hidden. If euthanasia was made legal then it can be regulated for only extreme cases of suffering. He concluded by saying that now "only the honest doctor gets punished."
On March 9, 1950, the jury took just 71 minutes to find Herman Sander not guilty on the all charges. Today this verdict is viewed by many as being an example of jury nullification — a guilty man had been set free because the 12 men and women in the jury room didn't believe in the law against mercy killing.
Despite being found not guilty, the state refused to give Sander back his medical license. He could no longer practice medicine in New Hampshire. To support his wife and three daughters, the doctor was forced to work as a farm hand. In time, the New Hampshire Medical Board did give him back his license. He retired in 1974 after 33 years as a physician. He spent his remaining years as a beekeeper in Candia. In 1979, Candia honored him as "the most influential individual in town." Sander died in 1996 at a Manchester nursing home at 87 years of age.
The case of Carol Ann Paight occurred around the same time. As reported by Australian Associated Press and published in the
Adelaide News,
February 2, 1950 (bold, capitals in original):
U.S. GIRL KILLER "WAS INSANE"
New York, Wednesday.
--A psychiatrist today testified that Carol Paight was insane when she fired the fatal "mercy" bullet at her father.
He said she had not recovered her sanity nearly three weeks later.
Carol, 21, killed her father in hospital after learning he had incurable cancer. She is charged with second-degree murder.
Dr. Clifford Moore, medical director of a mental institution, was called as a witness after the girl's mother had given evidence that there had been in sanity both in her family and her late husband's.
Dr. Moore said Carol was insane when he examined her 19 days after the shooting. He didn't know whether she had recovered yet.
As reported by Mara Bovsun in the New York
Daily News,
June 19, 2010 (updated April 9, 2018):
If one thing was clear in this sad case, it was that Carol Ann Paight loved her father. She loved him so much that she could not bear to see him suffer. So she killed him.
Her father, Police Sgt. Carl Paight, 52, was a good-natured family man, adored by his wife, Mary, 52 and children, Carol, 21, and Carl, Jr., 22, both college students. They lived in a modest home in Stamford, Conn.
By all accounts, Sgt. Paight was the kind of dad every child deserves – responsible, good to their mother, and fun. The family spent hours swimming and sailing, and even chores were enjoyable when he was around.
It all came to a crashing end in September 1949. Sgt. Paight had not been feeling well, so he checked into a Stamford hospital. The doctors recommended exploratory surgery, scheduled for the 23rd.
During the operation, Carol and her mother, both devote Roman Catholics, went to church to pray.
Their prayers went unanswered. Back at the hospital, Dr. William E. Smith gave them the worst possible news. Sgt. Paight’s body was “riddled” with cancer, and he had, at most, three months to live.
Carol knew what that meant. Two of her aunts, Agnes and Alice, had died of cancer, and she witnessed these vibrant women shrivel away in agony. The experience had instilled in her a deep terror of the disease.
“Don’t tell Daddy!” Carol screamed when Dr. Smith delivered the news. Then she grew glassy-eyed and pale, and started babbling. Carol didn’t appear to hear anything, and seemed to be in a world of her own.
The Paight women returned home, but Carol didn’t stay. She swiped her father’s service revolver, and headed back to the hospital, stopping briefly at a spot in the woods to take one practice shot.
With the gun wrapped in a jacket, she returned to her father. Moments later, nurses heard an odd noise, like a tray dropping, and saw the tall, blond girl in the doorway of Paight’s room. Inside, they found the gun on the bed, and a bullet wound in the patient’s head.
“I shot him,” Carol told them. Then she became hysterical.
Later, as members of her late father’s squad guarded her, she seemed calm and detached. At around 8:30 p.m., she told Capt. William J. Lynch that she didn’t care what people thought or what would happen to her. She couldn’t stand to see her dad suffer.
The girl remembered nothing the next morning. She recalled hearing the doctor’s dreaded words, but after that, everything was a blank.
From the start, sympathy was with the girl. Civic leaders and businesses took up a collection for her defense. “It is my honest belief and firm conviction that the case of Carol Paight deserves extreme sympathy and leniency,” Stamford Mayor George Barrett told reporters.
Nevertheless, the district attorney had no choice but to arrest Paight, charging her with second-degree murder. It carried a life sentence.
The girl’s plight ignited a long-smoldering debate over mercy killing. In the 1930s, two groups were building a movement around the right to die – England’s Euthanasia Legalization society, and the Euthanasia Society of America. Both groups took keen interest in the case.
By the time Paight’s trial opened on Jan. 23, 1950, two more mercy killings were grabbing headlines. A New Hampshire doctor, Hermann Sander, had been arrested for injecting air into the veins of a dying cancer patient. In Ontario, Can., engineer Ralph Kilbon’s mentally ill wife had tried to kill herself with a bullet to the abdomen. When Kilbon found her, she was dying and in pain, so he shot her to finish what she started.
In Paight’s trial, everything hinged on the girl’s state of mind at the time of the killing, a period that Carol could not remember.
Witnesses swore that she certainly looked insane, swinging from shrieks and sobs to periods of calm, glassy-eyed detachment. Psychiatric experts for the defense said the news about her father had caused temporary insanity, and pushed her into a “fugue state” in which her subconscious mind controlled her actions.
The outcome was not hard to predict when the prosecution’s expert witness was booed for voicing the opinion that the defendant had been sane, and knew exactly what she was doing when she pulled the trigger.
Also helpful was the composition of the jury. It was made up entirely of parents – mothers and fathers with children about the same age as the accused.
After about four hours’ deliberation, the jury found her not guilty. Carol went home, and got on with her life. By September, a year after her father’s death, she had some good news, a wedding. “Carol Paight, the schoolgirl who was acquitted of the mercy-slaying of her cop-pop … is blessed eventing,” wrote legendary gossip columnist Walter Winchell a few months later.
The president of the Euthanasia Society said Paight’s acquittal was a “vindication” of his group. Ministers came out in support of mercy killings, and physicians went on record saying that they had, on occasion, made lethal doses of morphine available to the incurably ill.
For a time, it seemed as if Paight’s story might open a floodgate of mercy killings, especially after the two other high-profile cases ended in acquittals.
But the tide turned. In November 1952, another woman, Lois Curtiss, 33, stood in the same courthouse as Paight. Curtiss was accused of murdering her cancer-ridden father by turning on the gas jets in their apartment, an act that left her partially paralyzed. She said she had been motivated by love, and her only goal was to end his suffering. But the judge saw this death as “one of those killings which dramatists and sob sisters call a mercy killing” and sent her to prison.
In both the cases mentioned above as well as the notorious Canadian case of
R v Latimer (
1997,
2001), I'm struck by the willingness of so many people to believe that the killing was motivated by love. Who says the killer was motivated by love? The killer.
Robert Latimer was a farmer in Saskatchewan whose 12-year-old daughter Tracy had severe cerebral palsy and was in constant pain, which may have been eased by surgery. Mr. Latimer murdered Tracy while the rest of the family was at church, but claimed that she had died in her sleep. Police became suspicious when an autopsy revealed high amounts of carbon monoxide in Tracy's blood, and only then did he admit that he had killed her by connecting a hose from the exhaust pipe to the cab. Mr. Latimer was charged with first-degree murder, was convicted of second-degree murder, and served almost 10 years in prison before being granted full parole in December 2010.
It disturbed me then, as it does now, that an
Ipsos-Reid poll conducted in 1999 found that 73% of those responding (it should be kept in mind that Ipsos-Reid admits, but doesn't publicize, that 70% of the people they contact refuse to talk to them) believed that Mr. Latimer acted out of compassion, and 41%--a plurality--believed "mercy killing" shouldn't even be against the law. It doesn't help that the media focus on the instances in which killing has taken place rather than those in which people in positions such as Mr. Latimer don't kill their loved ones. A former pastor of mine and his wife are parents of a son with multiple disabilities that require round-the-clock care. His parents aren't trained caregivers, aren't wealthy, have to work for a living, and have other children to take care of as part of living their lives. They found an institution in which their disabled son could receive the care he requires, and had him placed there. The institution is hundreds of miles and several provinces away from the parents, but they visit him several times a year, and the last I heard, reported that he was receiving excellent care. This is far from an ideal situation, but in a fallen world, this was the best choice they could make. Unfortunately, this example of true Christian compassion seldom gets any press.
Unfortunately, Canadian society has deteriorated so far and so fast since the Latimer case that he wouldn't even be charged today. Under the Orwellian-named MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying), introduced by the "Liberal" regime of Justin Trudeau in 2016, MAiD deaths have
increased from 5,665 in 2019 to 15,343 in 2023, making it the fastest-growing such program in the world. Very few of these people are dying; rather, they're people who have problems in living, and a disproportionately high percentage are poor. This is exactly the way it happened in Germany in the 1920s and '30s, culminating in mass murder and genocide during World War II. My father fought against the regime that did that; I'm glad he's not around to see what became of the country he fought for.
