28.01.09 - Gerhard Lichtenauer -

[D+100] denied responsibility

For the existential consequences of disability, social responsibility is denied
The “wrongful birth” debate is getting more and more into a vortex of legal confusion

“Goddess of wisdom”, a model of the Austrian parliamentary democracy, blind as “Justitia”

Posting in Forum of BICEPS-INFO to the article: Help Austria life: disability is a social challenge
http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=8928#fid9359 28. January 2009 At 18:23

With the relativisation of the fundamental right to life in the indications-control of the period solution, the rule of law was abandoned. The ethical Meltdown now, 35 years later, more and more in a legal cul-de-SAC. The case law on (disabled or unwanted) “child as harm” is with your wits end now. The civil society is challenged to find a reasonable and responsible solution: The disability-related loads to be supported by a community of solidarity largely.

Posting in Forum of BICEPS-INFO to the article: Eugen Skills Austria
http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=9053#fid9358 28. January 2009 At 16:22

The killing of a child, which is the subject of without a doubt, also as a Baby is a protected right under the belly of the mother, the ceiling is – if it is a child with a suspected disability – up to the birth LEGALIZED (Late-term abortion for "Eugenic indication"). This is unconstitutional, because disabled people are discriminated against this in the starkest manner, but discrimination on the grounds of disability care in Austria, hardly anyone, unfortunately, not even the constitutional court!

If so, an impairment presumption (or some other "indication") is not available, any prenatal killing or attempt to Kill him (also damage to health!) of the child, according to the Austrian law, a crime with usually several culpable Parties. For the same crime, time but something brought forward, so if this is intentional child is committed to killing within the (arbitrarily defined) in the first 12 weeks of life, the exporting and involved offenders from different considerations Criminal free (Term solution).

The difference between the LEGALIZATION, and IMPUNITY is the "poodle's core". And exactly this difference is, the Dilemma of the Supreme court judges. The Supreme court is not a legislator, but to judge according to the law. I think in spite of the miserable optics ("damage", according to the law of damages), these Supreme court judgments for the basic problem. The indication scheme is the core of the problem, which is clear injustice to the “law” will be charged. The Supreme court judgments, there are only loose but consistent, fatal application of this inconsistency, which the rule of law principle ad absurdum.

The various judgments in the comparison appear to be like a vortex of legal confusion, the tearing down. The legislators (all of us) is (or are required) to find a solution that corresponds to our Reason and ability to carry Responsibility.

Posting in Forum of BICEPS-INFO to the article: Disabled child as a “case of damage” does not allow
http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=9419#fid9357 28. January 2009 At 16:22

On the basis of recent Supreme court jurisprudence, it is clear that the relativization of the fundamental right to life (in the Status of the pre – Birth) – in addition to the mass fatal effects of this unspeakable injustice, and a legal cul-de-SAC. The legislators (all of us) is (or are required) to find a solution that corresponds to our Reason and ability to carry Responsibility.

Of course, the disabled child is not a "damage", but for parents with responsibility, happiness and sunshine, like any non-disabled child. With all of the "child as harm"- discussions, we must not rationalize, but the actual damage easya family with a severely impaired child because of the social disabilities and handicaps. We take our responsibility as a caring society, as the “life task”, a disabled child (or dependent relatives) to have equal footing to participate in life, is very often a life-task.

Posting in Forum of BICEPS-INFO to the article: Königsberger-Ludwig: the poverty trap of disability support for people Affected by
http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=9414#fid9356 28. January 2009 At 16:22

There is a need, nationwide, in solidarity with all disability and in need of care - caused, individual needs is an absolute necessity! The provision of support resources to the extent desired and required, burden-sharing and compensation, in particular, the financial expense and losses to Affected and Affected a reasonably “normal” life. [See also:”The deck needs-and needs-oriented support, adequate relief as well as actual compensation“]

Because One thing is clear, the currently, on the part of the “community of solidarity” in a shabby way, refused to meet the demand of required supports, it is always compensated by someone or with life, “paid in full”, in the figurative and in the literal sense!

Posting in Forum of BICEPS-INFO to the article: A Baby complains, the Republic!
http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=9420#fid9355 28. January 2009 At 16:22

"Civil resistance" is the order of the hour, this can, and must, manifest itself in this matter in a brave and decisive Acquisition of socially responsibility with solidarity.