Is not the third question very silly? Surely if it depends on the circumstances then you are for euthanasia. Who was the genius that composed these questions?
Kayden Vries - 14 years ago
Who are we to say that we have the right to decide when somebody dies? If they are meant to die they will, but we should do everything within our power to help them live. If the only reason life support isn't given is because it costs too much then these doctors making the decision are commiting murder. A human life is priceless.
lillian vandenburgh - 14 years ago
Euthanasia kills more than disease. It kills hope too. Besides, miracles still happen everyday and doctors are wrong all the time!! Just think about all of the new and "best treatment" options that come along all the time to to fight fatal diseases. The "right" answer is out there somewhere, we just have to be persistent to find it. It we kill off all of our subjects and all of the patients we'll never find it! Just think of all of the "incorrect treatment plans that have been corrected thru time that allowed us to live! (for things like the Bubonic Plague and Polio. You can't ever give up! Just think of all the people who would have died instead of getting well if they had given up. You have to keep looking until you find thre right answer. I have stage 4 brain cancer, but am not accepting any of their conventional treatment options because they aren"t comprehensive enough. I'm going to keep looking/fighting/researching until we find a cure - not some 20% solution conventional solution. I bet I'll live longer than the doctors do!
Gerard Neame - 14 years ago
As a Christian I believe we are all God's children and He alone decides when our lives should start and finish. Therefore Euthanasia is wrong in exactly the same way as abortion is wrong. My Faith also teaches me that God loves us so much that He gave His son, Jesus to suffer and die for us and that He is merciful and forgiving in everything we genuinely repent of. I hope all who suffer or have suffered can always cling on to this when life is at its most difficult and whatever may have happened, right or wrong. God bless you all.
John - 14 years ago
I like how conservatives like to use the whole "preciousness of life" in the debates for the death penalty, or blowing up people half a world away, but when it comes to someone suffering from an incurable cancer, or if a person is a vegetable, all of a sudden their life is valuable?
Henry - 14 years ago
Where a person stands on this issue will ultimately be determined by their world view. Euthanasia is the logical conclusion of a society with a humanistic world view that says we are just glorified animals who came from monkeys, and if that's the case, then there is absolutely no problem with the euthanization of people for whatever reason. If on the other hand we were created for a purpose and we are accountable to our Creator, we will be inclined to respect all human life from conception to natural death. Having said all that, there are several other important factors to consider. Not only have doctors been sworn to protect and sustain life, they are also required to make life and death decisions including the authority to pronounce the death of a person, as in the case of a fatal shooting, extreme trauma as the result of an accident, or a massive heart attack and so on. That brings us to the matter of definition. How does a doctor determine when a person is dead, and how do we define "euthanasia"? Apparently the word euthanasia comes from two Greek words meaning "easy death". Webster’s dictionary defines euthanasia as "the painless putting to death of persons suffering from incurable diseases". That sounds a whole lot different than removing someone who is "clinically dead" from a machine that produces artificial respiration and circulation. We must never allow ourselves to get conned into opening the door to any form of "euthanasia" by people who bombard us with falsehood and emotional rhetoric. As someone has said, this is not a slippery slope; this is a vertical skating rink!
Sam N. Sansalone - 14 years ago
THE PROBLEM IS, "extreme quality of life circumstances" as a defined condition is constantly being misunderstood and misapplied. So to give citizens in our societies such a freedom to euthanize would be to guarantee misapplications and abuse of interpretation of what constitutes "extreme quality of life". For example, I was told by one of the most influential and celebrated neonatologist doctors / hospital in Canada that my baby would not have quality of life worth preserving. But preserving her life has proved otherwise: she is one of the happiest people you will ever meet on this planet, and she is also important in what she represents for human and civil rights. So I give a resounding NO to the idea of giving individuals and institutions a 'right' to end the life of another human on the basis of what really would tend to amount to a mere opinion -- often false -- on what constitutes true "quality of life" expectations for a given individual.
Charlene - 14 years ago
Ditto to Barbara....... then again for nearly 40 years we have blinded ourselves to what happen to pre-born humans. So why are we suprised when a creative way to legaly murder a living person is debated. It all comes keeping down to costs................and who is worth keeping in order to be productive to society.
Barbara - 14 years ago
I am a nurse who cares for ventilator patients. I understand Beentheredonethat's anger and despair. Just hearing about the kind of care his father recieved makes me furious too. However, examples of neglect and cruelty are not reasons to turn to euthanasia.
The patients I have cared for drove in wheelchair vans to marches to raise money for research for their conditions, drove to see the Christmas lights on Christmas Eve and the Macy's fireworks on July 4th, those who were capable enough went to school and college. Those with more limited cognitive ability were provided comfort measures and simple pleasures by caring families and nurses - perhaps soft music, a backrub, a simple toy or balloon. Some of my patients had head injuries, some were paralysed in car accidents, some had advanced MS or Lou Gehrigs disease. And yes sometimes they were discouraged and angry, but then again sometimes so am I.
It is easier to pity persons with severe disablilities than to get to know them and find out what wonderful and courageous people many of them are. It is easier to see the wheelchair and hospital bed than the person. Our job is not to discard their lives, but to speak up passionately for their rightful place in our society!!!!
Emmaliza Childs - 14 years ago
Back when abortion was first legalized, I wondered how long it would be before euthanasia would also be granted the 'ok'. If you can decide an artificial time when life begins (other than when it actually begins), then it's a small step morally to decide when it ends. Now, the US's chief science advisor is a proponent of eugenics, and we're seeing the beginning of a 'hate' movement against old people (the high cost of medicare and social security), thus setting the stage for 'Soylent Green', when the majority will approve killing the old. Our government enforced atheism in public life, thus removing moral foundations. Without a moral compass, anything is possible. Read the history of the Soviet Union or Communist China under Mao. God help us all.
jcrenshaw - 14 years ago
Here we go. It's the "death panels" Sarah Palin warned us of, ahead of schedule.
Once the State decides it has the right to decide "quality of life," it's a series of small steps to deciding the fate of the disabled, the old, or merely the ugly or dumb. Put them out of their misery, right?
Elise - 14 years ago
Ending someone's life is wrong. Artificially pro-longing someone's life is also playing god. If that's what they would have wanted, then great.
Ending life-support on someone who would not otherwise survive, and ending their life are two different things.
Smiley - 14 years ago
No one has the right to end some ones life. Firstly Baby Isaiah's circumstances are not as bad as being stated. He is progressing every day, there are tons of testimonies of similar cases where the babies after 90 or 120 days repaired themselves. They are totally normal now. Give the child a chance! Euthanasia is wrong no matter what, its killing!!!!! I would not be able to sleep at night. I do have experience with a handicap brother and He too defied all the doctors. He is an Olympian for Canada/Skiing. He has quality of life. But he would be dead if the doctors had the choice.
Concerned - 14 years ago
I agree with Common Tator, to a degree. If the child lives, without the ventilator, it was meant to be. I don't believe anyone is suggesting withholding food. My sister decided to take my mother off "life support" which was actually just an IV drip to re-hydrate her. My mother had suffered a rather severe case of the flu and become dehydrated. I don't know why the doctor agreed to do this, but I was too late to save her life. I was there for the last week and even though she was coherent, they had convinced her that she was dying. I did everything I could without success.
Sometimes, decisions are made without appropriate intervention. The parents of this child may not fully understand everything, they are following their hearts, now. But IF the child lives and remains forever in the state he's in now, who will care for him when they are no longer able to?
LB - 14 years ago
what drug would you use gmgirl I was just wondering if you felt compeled to do something like that? I would have no recourse but to look for something bought from a druggie. I guess i could hurt myself and get some oxycontin, but then the vegitative person would have to be able to swallow a pill. Me - I don't know if I could do something like that. I have a 23 yr old son who is in his prime, successful and married ready to start a family and if he were in that kind of state I just don't know. But if I were to take matters in to my own hand that is the only way I would know to go - I would have to look, but living in a large metro city as I do it probably wouldn't be hard. I certainly feel for these people - that is why she should not have had to go to those lenghts and should have been able to have the medical profession on her side.
gmrgirl - 14 years ago
I just hope I would never have to make this sort of decision. And yes I do feel for both parents. Being a mother myself, I couldn't do it.
" Inglis injected her son with an overdose of heroin" come on.. Are you kidding me. Why does she have that drug in the first place?
Deidra - 14 years ago
"Thou Shall Not Kill"
LB - 14 years ago
I feel for these people in the article - I don't think the mother should be in jail and I think the parents have a right to keep their baby alive. These are two different instances. That is what makes this a slippery concept. However, if
euthanasia is to be alowed it can be regulated to allow only those that have no possiblity of recovery, are in extreme pain without anything to manage it and are not responsive to have the right to let themselves with help leave this life as we know it. No one wants to see a loved one that has been living a full life endure impossible, and i mean documented impossible odds of life, in a vegitatve state, in pain, unable to communicate - because they are brain dead continue to live. It is only the humane thing to do - and I don't think you should take out a breathing tube or deny food - give them something to let them drift off. I am not a fan of Hospice as my father in law was in the care of Hospice at home and it was decided by some members of the family that it was okay to withhold food - well let us see someone starve to death even though he was terminal. I call that inhumane. Hospice is on the right track, just the wrong methods and I wonder how they get away with some of the things that they do. From friends I hear that Hospice will medicate the heck out of the patient within a hair of their life, but will not let them die - but withholding food is okay? I think there is going to be a time when in the most dire need it should be possible - but this article is not on the mark - of course you are not going to euthanise someone who is alert but is paralyized. So if people are going to comment lets be serious.
Rose - 14 years ago
Ask yourself...."Is it fair to watch someone you love suffer, not wake up and be able to live a normal life, and or never be able to understand the reality of things or the concepts because of severe brain damage"?
All I know is that I want to make sure that I put in writing that if for any reason I cannot wake, think, speak, nor live a normal life and need life support, I do not wish to have that. I prefer to REST in PEACE and unplug me.
And I most definitely do not want to be a burden to any family member because it is very true that it becomes a burden. Unless you have the money for a personal nurse to handle the situation it mentally and physically drains the family.
Life and Death - 14 years ago
CommonTater, are you kidding me? How can you possibly compare a human life to a potato? And who are you to make a decision about which baby in the neo-natal care gets the hospital bad and which one gets tossed out? How can you be so callus?
Always support, sustain, and value the miracle of life.
Life'saRight - 14 years ago
Are you saying that, for example, if you have a severe case in which you, say, need a heart transplant, then we should let 'nature take its course' and leave you to you die? Everyone deserves the right to live and just because the odds are stacked against someone doesn't mean you give up on them. Miracles do happen, and often. I have faith that God will help this baby pull through. It's so sad to see people thinking that they can decide whether someone lives or dies. No one should play God but God Himself. Also, euthanesia should never be an option. It's not 'merciful' to murder someone-they are put on this earth for a reason whether they want to be here or not. Every life has a purpose and it's no one's business to think they can snuff it out.
Modef - 14 years ago
My son died in a horrific accident in Apr/08, the night before his son turned a year old. I watched and tried to help my wife as she slowly faded. She passed away in her sleep, two and a half weeks before Christmas/09. Though I argued against an autopsy due to her deep biblical beliefs, here in "progressive" Massachusetts, I was overrided by the coroner. The inept idiot couldn't find anything. I told him she died of a broken heart. If I ever go to visit him in his office, I will end up in jail. When my son died, the coroner's boss, sweet lady, wrote on the death certificate, as the cause of death, Man vs. Tree.
As horrible as a vegetative state is, as even more horrible a "quasi"-vegetative state, i.e, walking, talking, ostensibly, cohertently handling life, and even though I voted that deciding to end a human life is FAR, FAR above the decision of a mere mortal, I can understand why family would not want their loved one to be a suffering from a capacity too diminshed be fully involved in life.
Anyone who is faced with this curse, has my tacit prayers and understanding.
Beentheredonethat - 14 years ago
PBEJCOS, my story exactly mirrors yours. My dad had an accident at the family home that left him in a vegetative state for almost 6 years. He was only 51 at the time of the accident, vibrant and full of life. We tried EVERYTHING...he was in numerous rehab centers, etc and finally lived at the local Veteran's home. In 1995, KY passed a law that a feeding tube could be removed if it was detrimental to the patient. Normally, they will live close to two weeks when that happens. Dad died within 48 hours.
If you have EVER sat in a room and watched your father be "suctioned" and see his eyes nearly pop out of his head every time, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you see your father in coma, having to allow everyone to do everything for him (there is NO dignity left at all), you MIGHT understand our decision. When all your dad can do is blink once for yes, twice for no, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you walk into his room and his face is blood red and he is sweating profusely and you remove the blanket to find a broken foot (evidently that had been caught under his wheelchair and no one had documented it), you MIGHT understand our decision. When you get a call from the nursing home and are told that your father was dropped onto his face from the bed left, but he just has some cuts and bruises, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you look into your dad's eyes and you can feeling him BEGGING to make this stop, you MIGHT understand our decision. When your dad can no longer hug you, say I love you, hold his grandbabies, cheer for his favorite college team (GO BOILERS!), go fishing or eat that favorite bowl of ice cream, you MIGHT understand our position.
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes...My life was changed forever in 1989. My dad did not have a directive, but had made his wishes known. Let's just say....My living will is so straight forward, you can't put a band-aid on me without following what I have laid out. It is about QUALITY of life. How selfish we can be? And please, don't bring God into this. I am a Christian...I have a very strong faith. I love my dad..I miss him everyday. I wouldn't change our decision for a moment. He is at peace and so am I.
Luiz Silverio Barcellos Borges - 14 years ago
Ladies and Gentlemen! This is not Kid stuff. One should bear in mind that this is sort of "Who was first borne : The Egg or the Chicken? So, we will eternally face this cultural aspect that should be observed and respected by everyone.The rest is "Baloney"
Jason - 14 years ago
The 'culture of death' is much too kind a description. The west has become the culture of the bloodthirsty.
Who decides the dignity and the value of human life, old, young, infirmed? WE DO. And if we decide you are 'life not worthy of life' as the Nazis put it, we eradicate you. After all, it's all about compassion, right?
So much for the inalienable right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Jan Bowman - 14 years ago
I would hope that if I ever reach the point that all I'm going to do is be in a persistant vegitative state that someone would go ahead and give me something to end my life. I do not want to live that way nor should I be forced to live like that. It is not a quality of life at all and puts the family into an unneeded expense.
PBEJCOS - 14 years ago
My father suffered a traumatic brain injury in the 1980's, and he lived for six years, breathing without the aid of a ventilator, but with a feeding tube. He merely existed as a vegetable - his hands and feet atrophied into little balls, he constantly coughed up phlem that had to be suctioned out, which was horrible to watch - his entire body would spasm and his eyes would seem to pop out of his head. He apparently was able to feel some pain. He suffered multiple seizures - day after day. 22 cases of pneumonia. He actually died in the ambulance the night of the accident, but the paramedics brought him back to life.. The doctors operated to remove the blood clot, and they put a valve in his skull to relieve the pressure that would quickly build. The docs said that if my Mom had not agreed to the operation, they would have gotten a court order to operate.
We felt that we were going to a funeral home every day/week for six years. He did not have an advanced directive, but I know that he would not have wanted to live like that.
My Mom had to put him in a veteran's hospital, and I can say that even though it was not a particularly beautiful place to go, he never had a bed sore. He was in a ward with five other men who also suffered traumatic brain injuries. One tried to commit suicide, blew his ear off, but lived. He, unfortunately, was able to know what was going on, but was unable to move, or communicate. They did not know the extent of what he knew. If you are going to try to commit suicide - do it right and don't end up like that man. Another young sailor drowned, but he also was brought back to life. I could go on, but my point is that from my father's horrific accident and life afterwards, I believe that if people knew how much these vegetative individuals suffer physically and without a shred of dignity, maybe more would make it a point to have a living will - to save your family from the agony that my father and my family endured.
CommonTater - 14 years ago
The Inglis case is euthanasia. The administration of a lethal substance. In the Mays' case, it's simply the refusal to provide extraordinary and likely futile measures. If they remove the ventilator from the baby, and it breathes on its own, then it's good. If the baby cannot breathe on its own, then it's nature taking its course. A potato has more life than that baby, and doesn't take up vital space and equipment in a neo-natal ICU that could be used to help babies with a better chance at life.
Is not the third question very silly? Surely if it depends on the circumstances then you are for euthanasia. Who was the genius that composed these questions?
Who are we to say that we have the right to decide when somebody dies? If they are meant to die they will, but we should do everything within our power to help them live. If the only reason life support isn't given is because it costs too much then these doctors making the decision are commiting murder. A human life is priceless.
Euthanasia kills more than disease. It kills hope too. Besides, miracles still happen everyday and doctors are wrong all the time!! Just think about all of the new and "best treatment" options that come along all the time to to fight fatal diseases. The "right" answer is out there somewhere, we just have to be persistent to find it. It we kill off all of our subjects and all of the patients we'll never find it! Just think of all of the "incorrect treatment plans that have been corrected thru time that allowed us to live! (for things like the Bubonic Plague and Polio. You can't ever give up! Just think of all the people who would have died instead of getting well if they had given up. You have to keep looking until you find thre right answer. I have stage 4 brain cancer, but am not accepting any of their conventional treatment options because they aren"t comprehensive enough. I'm going to keep looking/fighting/researching until we find a cure - not some 20% solution conventional solution. I bet I'll live longer than the doctors do!
As a Christian I believe we are all God's children and He alone decides when our lives should start and finish. Therefore Euthanasia is wrong in exactly the same way as abortion is wrong. My Faith also teaches me that God loves us so much that He gave His son, Jesus to suffer and die for us and that He is merciful and forgiving in everything we genuinely repent of. I hope all who suffer or have suffered can always cling on to this when life is at its most difficult and whatever may have happened, right or wrong. God bless you all.
I like how conservatives like to use the whole "preciousness of life" in the debates for the death penalty, or blowing up people half a world away, but when it comes to someone suffering from an incurable cancer, or if a person is a vegetable, all of a sudden their life is valuable?
Where a person stands on this issue will ultimately be determined by their world view. Euthanasia is the logical conclusion of a society with a humanistic world view that says we are just glorified animals who came from monkeys, and if that's the case, then there is absolutely no problem with the euthanization of people for whatever reason. If on the other hand we were created for a purpose and we are accountable to our Creator, we will be inclined to respect all human life from conception to natural death. Having said all that, there are several other important factors to consider. Not only have doctors been sworn to protect and sustain life, they are also required to make life and death decisions including the authority to pronounce the death of a person, as in the case of a fatal shooting, extreme trauma as the result of an accident, or a massive heart attack and so on. That brings us to the matter of definition. How does a doctor determine when a person is dead, and how do we define "euthanasia"? Apparently the word euthanasia comes from two Greek words meaning "easy death". Webster’s dictionary defines euthanasia as "the painless putting to death of persons suffering from incurable diseases". That sounds a whole lot different than removing someone who is "clinically dead" from a machine that produces artificial respiration and circulation. We must never allow ourselves to get conned into opening the door to any form of "euthanasia" by people who bombard us with falsehood and emotional rhetoric. As someone has said, this is not a slippery slope; this is a vertical skating rink!
THE PROBLEM IS, "extreme quality of life circumstances" as a defined condition is constantly being misunderstood and misapplied. So to give citizens in our societies such a freedom to euthanize would be to guarantee misapplications and abuse of interpretation of what constitutes "extreme quality of life". For example, I was told by one of the most influential and celebrated neonatologist doctors / hospital in Canada that my baby would not have quality of life worth preserving. But preserving her life has proved otherwise: she is one of the happiest people you will ever meet on this planet, and she is also important in what she represents for human and civil rights. So I give a resounding NO to the idea of giving individuals and institutions a 'right' to end the life of another human on the basis of what really would tend to amount to a mere opinion -- often false -- on what constitutes true "quality of life" expectations for a given individual.
Ditto to Barbara....... then again for nearly 40 years we have blinded ourselves to what happen to pre-born humans. So why are we suprised when a creative way to legaly murder a living person is debated. It all comes keeping down to costs................and who is worth keeping in order to be productive to society.
I am a nurse who cares for ventilator patients. I understand Beentheredonethat's anger and despair. Just hearing about the kind of care his father recieved makes me furious too. However, examples of neglect and cruelty are not reasons to turn to euthanasia.
The patients I have cared for drove in wheelchair vans to marches to raise money for research for their conditions, drove to see the Christmas lights on Christmas Eve and the Macy's fireworks on July 4th, those who were capable enough went to school and college. Those with more limited cognitive ability were provided comfort measures and simple pleasures by caring families and nurses - perhaps soft music, a backrub, a simple toy or balloon. Some of my patients had head injuries, some were paralysed in car accidents, some had advanced MS or Lou Gehrigs disease. And yes sometimes they were discouraged and angry, but then again sometimes so am I.
It is easier to pity persons with severe disablilities than to get to know them and find out what wonderful and courageous people many of them are. It is easier to see the wheelchair and hospital bed than the person. Our job is not to discard their lives, but to speak up passionately for their rightful place in our society!!!!
Back when abortion was first legalized, I wondered how long it would be before euthanasia would also be granted the 'ok'. If you can decide an artificial time when life begins (other than when it actually begins), then it's a small step morally to decide when it ends. Now, the US's chief science advisor is a proponent of eugenics, and we're seeing the beginning of a 'hate' movement against old people (the high cost of medicare and social security), thus setting the stage for 'Soylent Green', when the majority will approve killing the old. Our government enforced atheism in public life, thus removing moral foundations. Without a moral compass, anything is possible. Read the history of the Soviet Union or Communist China under Mao. God help us all.
Here we go. It's the "death panels" Sarah Palin warned us of, ahead of schedule.
Once the State decides it has the right to decide "quality of life," it's a series of small steps to deciding the fate of the disabled, the old, or merely the ugly or dumb. Put them out of their misery, right?
Ending someone's life is wrong. Artificially pro-longing someone's life is also playing god. If that's what they would have wanted, then great.
Ending life-support on someone who would not otherwise survive, and ending their life are two different things.
No one has the right to end some ones life. Firstly Baby Isaiah's circumstances are not as bad as being stated. He is progressing every day, there are tons of testimonies of similar cases where the babies after 90 or 120 days repaired themselves. They are totally normal now. Give the child a chance! Euthanasia is wrong no matter what, its killing!!!!! I would not be able to sleep at night. I do have experience with a handicap brother and He too defied all the doctors. He is an Olympian for Canada/Skiing. He has quality of life. But he would be dead if the doctors had the choice.
I agree with Common Tator, to a degree. If the child lives, without the ventilator, it was meant to be. I don't believe anyone is suggesting withholding food. My sister decided to take my mother off "life support" which was actually just an IV drip to re-hydrate her. My mother had suffered a rather severe case of the flu and become dehydrated. I don't know why the doctor agreed to do this, but I was too late to save her life. I was there for the last week and even though she was coherent, they had convinced her that she was dying. I did everything I could without success.
Sometimes, decisions are made without appropriate intervention. The parents of this child may not fully understand everything, they are following their hearts, now. But IF the child lives and remains forever in the state he's in now, who will care for him when they are no longer able to?
what drug would you use gmgirl I was just wondering if you felt compeled to do something like that? I would have no recourse but to look for something bought from a druggie. I guess i could hurt myself and get some oxycontin, but then the vegitative person would have to be able to swallow a pill. Me - I don't know if I could do something like that. I have a 23 yr old son who is in his prime, successful and married ready to start a family and if he were in that kind of state I just don't know. But if I were to take matters in to my own hand that is the only way I would know to go - I would have to look, but living in a large metro city as I do it probably wouldn't be hard. I certainly feel for these people - that is why she should not have had to go to those lenghts and should have been able to have the medical profession on her side.
I just hope I would never have to make this sort of decision. And yes I do feel for both parents. Being a mother myself, I couldn't do it.
" Inglis injected her son with an overdose of heroin" come on.. Are you kidding me. Why does she have that drug in the first place?
"Thou Shall Not Kill"
I feel for these people in the article - I don't think the mother should be in jail and I think the parents have a right to keep their baby alive. These are two different instances. That is what makes this a slippery concept. However, if
euthanasia is to be alowed it can be regulated to allow only those that have no possiblity of recovery, are in extreme pain without anything to manage it and are not responsive to have the right to let themselves with help leave this life as we know it. No one wants to see a loved one that has been living a full life endure impossible, and i mean documented impossible odds of life, in a vegitatve state, in pain, unable to communicate - because they are brain dead continue to live. It is only the humane thing to do - and I don't think you should take out a breathing tube or deny food - give them something to let them drift off. I am not a fan of Hospice as my father in law was in the care of Hospice at home and it was decided by some members of the family that it was okay to withhold food - well let us see someone starve to death even though he was terminal. I call that inhumane. Hospice is on the right track, just the wrong methods and I wonder how they get away with some of the things that they do. From friends I hear that Hospice will medicate the heck out of the patient within a hair of their life, but will not let them die - but withholding food is okay? I think there is going to be a time when in the most dire need it should be possible - but this article is not on the mark - of course you are not going to euthanise someone who is alert but is paralyized. So if people are going to comment lets be serious.
Ask yourself...."Is it fair to watch someone you love suffer, not wake up and be able to live a normal life, and or never be able to understand the reality of things or the concepts because of severe brain damage"?
All I know is that I want to make sure that I put in writing that if for any reason I cannot wake, think, speak, nor live a normal life and need life support, I do not wish to have that. I prefer to REST in PEACE and unplug me.
And I most definitely do not want to be a burden to any family member because it is very true that it becomes a burden. Unless you have the money for a personal nurse to handle the situation it mentally and physically drains the family.
CommonTater, are you kidding me? How can you possibly compare a human life to a potato? And who are you to make a decision about which baby in the neo-natal care gets the hospital bad and which one gets tossed out? How can you be so callus?
Always support, sustain, and value the miracle of life.
Are you saying that, for example, if you have a severe case in which you, say, need a heart transplant, then we should let 'nature take its course' and leave you to you die? Everyone deserves the right to live and just because the odds are stacked against someone doesn't mean you give up on them. Miracles do happen, and often. I have faith that God will help this baby pull through. It's so sad to see people thinking that they can decide whether someone lives or dies. No one should play God but God Himself. Also, euthanesia should never be an option. It's not 'merciful' to murder someone-they are put on this earth for a reason whether they want to be here or not. Every life has a purpose and it's no one's business to think they can snuff it out.
My son died in a horrific accident in Apr/08, the night before his son turned a year old. I watched and tried to help my wife as she slowly faded. She passed away in her sleep, two and a half weeks before Christmas/09. Though I argued against an autopsy due to her deep biblical beliefs, here in "progressive" Massachusetts, I was overrided by the coroner. The inept idiot couldn't find anything. I told him she died of a broken heart. If I ever go to visit him in his office, I will end up in jail. When my son died, the coroner's boss, sweet lady, wrote on the death certificate, as the cause of death, Man vs. Tree.
As horrible as a vegetative state is, as even more horrible a "quasi"-vegetative state, i.e, walking, talking, ostensibly, cohertently handling life, and even though I voted that deciding to end a human life is FAR, FAR above the decision of a mere mortal, I can understand why family would not want their loved one to be a suffering from a capacity too diminshed be fully involved in life.
Anyone who is faced with this curse, has my tacit prayers and understanding.
PBEJCOS, my story exactly mirrors yours. My dad had an accident at the family home that left him in a vegetative state for almost 6 years. He was only 51 at the time of the accident, vibrant and full of life. We tried EVERYTHING...he was in numerous rehab centers, etc and finally lived at the local Veteran's home. In 1995, KY passed a law that a feeding tube could be removed if it was detrimental to the patient. Normally, they will live close to two weeks when that happens. Dad died within 48 hours.
If you have EVER sat in a room and watched your father be "suctioned" and see his eyes nearly pop out of his head every time, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you see your father in coma, having to allow everyone to do everything for him (there is NO dignity left at all), you MIGHT understand our decision. When all your dad can do is blink once for yes, twice for no, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you walk into his room and his face is blood red and he is sweating profusely and you remove the blanket to find a broken foot (evidently that had been caught under his wheelchair and no one had documented it), you MIGHT understand our decision. When you get a call from the nursing home and are told that your father was dropped onto his face from the bed left, but he just has some cuts and bruises, you MIGHT understand our decision. When you look into your dad's eyes and you can feeling him BEGGING to make this stop, you MIGHT understand our decision. When your dad can no longer hug you, say I love you, hold his grandbabies, cheer for his favorite college team (GO BOILERS!), go fishing or eat that favorite bowl of ice cream, you MIGHT understand our position.
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes...My life was changed forever in 1989. My dad did not have a directive, but had made his wishes known. Let's just say....My living will is so straight forward, you can't put a band-aid on me without following what I have laid out. It is about QUALITY of life. How selfish we can be? And please, don't bring God into this. I am a Christian...I have a very strong faith. I love my dad..I miss him everyday. I wouldn't change our decision for a moment. He is at peace and so am I.
Ladies and Gentlemen! This is not Kid stuff. One should bear in mind that this is sort of "Who was first borne : The Egg or the Chicken? So, we will eternally face this cultural aspect that should be observed and respected by everyone.The rest is "Baloney"
The 'culture of death' is much too kind a description. The west has become the culture of the bloodthirsty.
Who decides the dignity and the value of human life, old, young, infirmed? WE DO. And if we decide you are 'life not worthy of life' as the Nazis put it, we eradicate you. After all, it's all about compassion, right?
So much for the inalienable right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I would hope that if I ever reach the point that all I'm going to do is be in a persistant vegitative state that someone would go ahead and give me something to end my life. I do not want to live that way nor should I be forced to live like that. It is not a quality of life at all and puts the family into an unneeded expense.
My father suffered a traumatic brain injury in the 1980's, and he lived for six years, breathing without the aid of a ventilator, but with a feeding tube. He merely existed as a vegetable - his hands and feet atrophied into little balls, he constantly coughed up phlem that had to be suctioned out, which was horrible to watch - his entire body would spasm and his eyes would seem to pop out of his head. He apparently was able to feel some pain. He suffered multiple seizures - day after day. 22 cases of pneumonia. He actually died in the ambulance the night of the accident, but the paramedics brought him back to life.. The doctors operated to remove the blood clot, and they put a valve in his skull to relieve the pressure that would quickly build. The docs said that if my Mom had not agreed to the operation, they would have gotten a court order to operate.
We felt that we were going to a funeral home every day/week for six years. He did not have an advanced directive, but I know that he would not have wanted to live like that.
My Mom had to put him in a veteran's hospital, and I can say that even though it was not a particularly beautiful place to go, he never had a bed sore. He was in a ward with five other men who also suffered traumatic brain injuries. One tried to commit suicide, blew his ear off, but lived. He, unfortunately, was able to know what was going on, but was unable to move, or communicate. They did not know the extent of what he knew. If you are going to try to commit suicide - do it right and don't end up like that man. Another young sailor drowned, but he also was brought back to life. I could go on, but my point is that from my father's horrific accident and life afterwards, I believe that if people knew how much these vegetative individuals suffer physically and without a shred of dignity, maybe more would make it a point to have a living will - to save your family from the agony that my father and my family endured.
The Inglis case is euthanasia. The administration of a lethal substance. In the Mays' case, it's simply the refusal to provide extraordinary and likely futile measures. If they remove the ventilator from the baby, and it breathes on its own, then it's good. If the baby cannot breathe on its own, then it's nature taking its course. A potato has more life than that baby, and doesn't take up vital space and equipment in a neo-natal ICU that could be used to help babies with a better chance at life.