How to manufacture consent for mass murder by the state

Removing consent and suffering from euthanasia step-by-step

In 2016, Hannie was euthanised on Dutch television. Hannie, was a woman with semantic dementia, a disease characterized by the loss of understanding of word meanings and object concepts. Hannie was one of three people who were followed by Dutch filmmakers in the documentary ‘End of Life Clinic’.

Hannie uses the meaningless word “huppakee”, which translates to something like “giddy-up”, in varying situations. Hannie said “huppakee” to express “get the door” after the doorbell rang, to reply to the question if she was having fun and when asked if she wanted coffee. “Huppakee” was also Hannie’s reply when she was asked for consent.

Hannie’s own physician did not believe Hannie was able to understand the concept of euthanasia and was unable to communicate a decision. A neurologist and psychiatrist agreed with him. The euthanasia was committed by an ‘End of Life Clinic’ physician, who said euthanasia is a day-filling task for him.

Removing ‘consent’ from euthanasia step-by-step

The documentary was a tipping point in the limits of euthanasia legislation because it ignored the medical and lawful definition of consent. Euthanasia without consent is murder. I remember reading an op-ed the next day by a journalist who described it as “murder with several million spectators”.

When Hannie’s diagnosis was confirmed in 2010, she made a living will including a euthanasia clause in which she stated:

“…..if my dementia gets so bad that I no longer know where I am, that I am confined to home, that I can no longer think, no longer talk, my girlfriends, my family no longer recognize, well just give me euthanasia then.”

Stretching the limits further by removing ‘suffering’

In the documentary Hannie is shown independently driving her car to a speed skating event, after which she meets with some friends at the bar and laughs and moves to the music made by a band. She recognizes her husband, family and friends. None of the prerequisites for the euthanasia clause she made in her living will years before, were present.

Shocking

WARNING: The final scene is shocking because it shows Hannie being euthanised on television. Skip it if you do not want to see it. In that case I will describe what happens. When Hannie is asked if she wants another cup of coffee, she replies “I don’t know”. When asked if she wants to go, Hannie replies “yes” and then points to the table and then asks to go there. When the physician and husband tell her to stay seated, Hannie says “that is pointless”.

After the physician has put in the syringe in her arm, Hannie is heard saying: “It’s terrible. It’s terrible.”.

The entire documentary can be viewed here. You can choose English subtitles in the settings.

It is not my intention to be disrespectful towards Hannie, her husband and her family, but when suffering, lawful and medical consent are removed from euthanasia, I believe it is crucial for people to face reality: This is not about ending suffering, dignity or choice. This is the state/media complex manufacturing consent for widespread euthanasia while the state/healthcare system employs executioners.

Why the Netherlands?

Several documentaries and tv-series have aired in the Netherlands where they (try to) celebrate euthanasia. It is shocking to witness. The Netherlands is a densely populated country and outside it’s borders hardly anyone speaks Dutch, which makes it a perfect place to experiment. It serves as an open lab where the social engineers study the public’s reactions and sticking points before controversial ideas and concepts are exported outside it’s borders. From euthanasia as a choice for the terminally ill, to euthanasia without suffering and without consent….how large can the steps be made in before a population reacts in outrage?

Euthanasia is a safe and effective method to reduce the population because ‘choice’. While they have us discussing the ‘ethics’ and ‘slippery slope’ of euthanasia, governments are putting the rails in to commit mass murder under the guise of ‘eliminating suffering’ which is ‘mercy death’ renamed. We are at the beginning.

The Netherlands first country to legalize euthanasia

The Netherlands ‘officially’ legalized euthanasia in 2002. They legalized infanticide in 2006.

Incurable, terminal illness and unbearable suffering are no longer required to intentionally end a life as the Netherlands moved on to include duo-euthanasia and euthanasia for mental illness.

In 2025, euthanasia accounted for 6% of all deaths in the Netherlands. The percentage does not level out but keeps increasing while the limits of euthanasia legislation keep expanding.

As a mother of children with autism I know this group is already targeted and often have similar sematic processing and communication issues as Hannie had. My daughter will repeat the last word if you ask her a question, so it’s easy to feign ‘consent’ by asking her if she wants to go.

The social engineers use every psychological tool in their tool box to sell us “mercy death”. In my next substack I will describe how they use AI audio to turn cries for help in consent for murder.