Slippery Slope from Adult Euthanasia to Child Euthanasia Threatens American 'Death with Dignity' Laws
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "First Toddler Euthanized in the Netherlands | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." September 17, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that America's new assisted-suicide laws are dangerous because they rest on the same logic that led the Netherlands—over just 25 years—from allowing adults to choose euthanasia to allowing parents to have their toddlers euthanized. Once a society decides that ending suffering justifies ending life, the only thing stopping expansion to more vulnerable groups (like children) is an arbitrary consent requirement, which history shows can be moved.
Conclusion
American states legalizing assisted suicide/euthanasia (Death with Dignity laws) are starting down the same dangerous path that led the Netherlands to euthanize a toddler, and current consent-based safeguards (age, terminal prognosis, mental capacity) will not permanently prevent similar expansion in the U.S.
Premises
- The Netherlands legalized euthanasia for adults decades ago based on the principle that relief of suffering can morally justify ending a life.
- The Netherlands expanded its euthanasia laws in 2024 to permit euthanizing children aged 1-12 who are deemed to be suffering 'unbearably' with a 'hopeless' prognosis.
- In late 2025, a toddler was euthanized under this law after his parents requested it, marking the first use of the child euthanasia provision.
- Once a society accepts that relief of suffering justifies ending life, the only remaining distinction between permissible and impermissible euthanasia is the degree of consent required—a line that is arbitrary and can be moved.
- It took the Netherlands only about 25 years to expand from voluntary adult euthanasia to euthanizing toddlers, demonstrating that such 'lines in the sand' are not stable over time.
- American states like Illinois and New York have recently passed Death with Dignity/Medical Aid in Dying laws, currently restricted to consenting adults with terminal prognoses.
- Emotional pressure to end suffering (as in the toddler's case) creates strong pushes to loosen consent-based restrictions over time.
Assumptions
- The moral logic underlying adult euthanasia laws is fundamentally the same as that underlying child euthanasia laws, differing only in degree of consent.
- Legal and cultural developments in one country (Netherlands) predict similar trajectories in another (United States) despite different legal, cultural, and religious contexts.
- Current strict eligibility requirements (age 18+, terminal illness, mental capacity) in U.S. laws are inherently unstable and likely to be loosened, rather than being durable safeguards.
- There is no principled stopping point between voluntary adult euthanasia and involuntary or proxy-consented euthanasia for minors once the underlying moral principle is accepted.
- A society governed by 'consent-based morality' cannot coherently maintain firm limits on who is permitted to die or be killed.
- Religious/traditional moral frameworks (e.g., Christian views on the sanctity of life) are necessary to resist this slippery slope, implying secular consent-based frameworks are insufficient.