Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

FATHER’S RIGHT TO KILL.

DOCTOR AND DEFORMED CHILD.

The old question Avhether considerations of love and pity condone the taking of human life is to be threshed out in the State of Colorado, U.S.A., Avith the trial of Dr. Harold Blazer, a reputable physician, of Littleton, who confesses to chloroforming his daughter Hazel, Avho had been born without arms or legs and Avas deaf, dumb and a hopeless imbecile since birth. One remarkable argument to be advanced by the defence is that Hazel Blazer Avas not human in the meaning of the laAv, because of the impossibility of such a distorted creature having a soul. To take the life of such, it Avill be argued, was not murder. The prosecutor made it clear hg will not ask for the extreme penalty, because, admittedly, the doctor’s plight was pitiable and his provocation extreme. Briefly, Dr. Blazer’s story is that for thirty-two years he had cherished, attended and loved a little bundle of distorted humanity who had never uttered a Avord never listened to the voices of loved ones, never moved of her oavii volition. Through pneumonia, typhoid and other serious illnesses he had sat by by her bedside day and night, the the only person on earth ivho could interpret this being’s needs and desires. He Avas content to sacrafice his life to keep the little spark alight in the deformed body of his only 'child until the frailities of old age aroused in him the terrible fear that he would die and his helpless child be left to an unsympathetic world. The only way out, as Dr. Blazer saiv it, Avas to release himself from the long vigil by taking his own life and his daughtei s at the same time. He administered chloroform and the daughter died, but he recovered. The defence Avill ask: Was the aged physician sane when he chloroformed his daughter to death and was Hazel endowed with a soul and reason, and therefore a human being 1 ? The prosecution will merely ask T Did or did not Hazel have a right to life?

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19260204.2.29

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 2994, 4 February 1926, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
348

FATHER’S RIGHT TO KILL. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 2994, 4 February 1926, Page 3

FATHER’S RIGHT TO KILL. Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 2994, 4 February 1926, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert