Talk:Child euthanasia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Garrettspindell. Peer reviewers: Kvraffy.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

MAY 1, 2018 Edits

Hello all, I made some large changes to the page this evening but I hope you like them or could see where I'm going with this. My next goal is to reorganize the "Ethical debate" section into a few sub-sections that focus on the ethical debate taking place. For example, the ethical debate on infant/neonate euthanasia will be a different argument than euthanasia of minors in Belgium. After the ethics portion is updated, then I will be adding Religious views from a handful of different religions.

I am a bit worried that some of you may get mad at all of the changes that I made, but please understand that I am easy to work with and we can always make adjustments to whatever we feel works the best. Over the next week or so, I will be engaging the Letting die article page and be linking the two where appropriate.

Garrettspindell (talk) 04:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Child euthanasia in United States, Ethical considerations, & overall organization

Hi, my name is Garrett and I am participating in a Wiki project for my religion course focused in death and dying. I found this page through my initial search in euthanasia and am interested in contributing to its development. My career aspirations include practicing as a community pediatrician. After reading the page, I really like how neutral the presentation of the information is, especially about such a topic that is quite polarizing. There are a few areas that I would like to develop, add to, and/or slightly modify. The areas that I wish to develop would be child euthanasia in the United States. I would also like to add to the Ethical considerations section, and I am thinking of ways to modify this section to better present the differing opinions on the topic while including who are these people having these said opinions. I believe a lot of improvements could be made in terms of how the section is laid out, and I hope that we can achieve these goals to make for a page that would be really interesting to the user. Again, I am new to Wikipedia and am hoping to work with you all in a cohesive manner, so feel free to give me feedback on any ideas that I have presented/will present in the future. Thanks, and have a great one! Garrettspindell (talk) 02:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Rename to Infant euthanasia

It looks like maybe this article should be renamed to Infant euthanasia. Most of the content and references so far deal with infants. Some brief searches (pubmed, etc.) turn up a lot more hits for Infant euthanasia than for child euthanasia. Zodon (talk) 09:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Child euthanasia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121020131349/http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pont-acd_life_doc_20040903_euthanasia-netherlands_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pont-acd_life_doc_20040903_euthanasia-netherlands_en.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2437921.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Future edits

Hi, I am working on improving this article as part of a class project at the University of Miami. You can check out our class page here. My plan is to provide some adjustments to the formatting/organization of the page as well as add some content under the realms of religious, philosophical and physician views on child euthanasia. Please feel free to check out my current progress with my ideas and sources to be used for my content sandbox. I appreciate any and all feedback, and I hope that we can make this page a go-to for people who wish to learn more about child euthanasia. Thank you Garrettspindell (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I wish I had seen this earlier. Now I have reverted all your edits. Main reasons are that you made the article non-neutral by adding values to it. For example your opening sentence Child euthanasia is a controversial form of non-voluntary euthanasia. We are working on a neutral encyclopedia. The second reason was that your turned the page into an USA-centred piece, instead of having a (reasonable) worldwide view. Third reason was the introduction of all kinds of info already described more neutral and in detail in other articles, like the Groningen Protocol and religious views (that seems to discuss euthanasia in general, not child euthanasia). The Banner talk 00:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@The Banner: I see. I wish that we had interactions on this page back in March when I had originally posted this as well. I agree that perhaps I should move some stuff around (i.e. Baby Bollinger and Baby Doe under the United States section of this page). However, I disagree with some of the other points that you bring up. I think including some history of Groningen Protocol and the amendment to Belgium's 2002 Euthanasia Act is important to note at the beginning of this page. Also, I think representing both sides of the thought process when it comes to evaluating the ethical debates on the different types of child euthanasia add value to this page. The religious views as well as physician sentiment contain information that is directly linked to child euthanasia and more changes to come in the future for its regulation. Ultimately, I provided links to the main pages in the event that other users wished to read in more detail on those matters. Please allow me to finalize these edits with appropriate rearrangement this evening, let it soak in and assess the page as a whole and then you and I can continue how efforts to modify the page as necessary moving forward. Does this sound good to you? Garrettspindell (talk) 01:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Why should you add information in this article when the information is already in another article? It is easy enough to give wikilinks to the specialized articles itself.

And no, as this article is about child euthanasia it is not fitting to give a background overview about other subject. Please stick to the subjects as close as possible. The Banner talk 01:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@The Banner: Good evening, I noticed that you removed some of the content that I had added to the page, citing it as non-neutral and overly-biased towards the United States. I would love to discuss this with you and figure out a happy medium, as I feel as though my additions were very neutral and added to the conversation of child euthanasia by covering both historical events and world views. Please let me know if you would like to discuss! Always open to suggestions of how things may be improved for the best Garrettspindell (talk) 00:50, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Garrettspindell: You have roughly restored all information that I have objected to. The next revert is imminent...
Please remove all information that is not suitable here, including overly detailed parts belonging to specialized articles. The Banner talk 15:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)