Originally Posted By RoadTrip Once again this topic is in the news: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/03/21298097-man-who-killed-sick-wife-at-hospital-out-of-love-to-make-insanity-defense?lite">http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_new...nse?lite</a> What do you think? When Rosie was in the final stages of terminal colon cancer she expressed her desire to die several times. Once she asked if I would hold her hand while Kathy (her home health-care nurse) gave her something to "put her to sleep". " I said "Kathy couldn't do that... it would be illegal here". Would I have granted her wish if it were legal? I'm not sure, but I doubt it. Shortly before Rosie was discharged from the hospital for the final time to home hospice care, she said to me during a visit (one of her very few lucid moments)... "Jerry, I NEED you to understand this... I don't want to be long sick". Her word order was mixed up and awkward, but the message was very clear. When she came home I was given total control over her morphine, and probably had enough on hand to grant her wish. Even if I could have gotten away with it, would I have? No. I could never bring myself to do that. While I think there is a good case to be made for assisted suicide in the case of terminally ill patients, I think it should ALWAYS be a decision between the patient and her doctor. A third party should never be involved. What do you think?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder As I've mentioned here before, my father in law, Ray, has had Alzheimer's going on 15 years now. If it wasn't for his disease, he'd be a remarkably healthy 80 year old man. Next March he'll have been in a care facility for five years. He hasn't been "Ray" for quite some time. The man my mother in law married was gone over 10 years ago. She's 10 years younger than him, but the toll it's taken on her is tremendous. Ray's doctor says he might out-live her if she isn't careful. For years now, we all have said it would be a blessing if he just didn't wake up one day. He's retired LAPD, but he retired on a disability in the late 70's. He went to the scene of an auto accident, ripped out the windshield of a car with his bare hands to save the occupants, but tore up both shoulders in the process. He had to retire in his late 40's. LAPD's pension then wasn't what it is like now, and so in addition to draining all their savings they've had to do a reverse mortgage to help pay for his care. My mother in law was a mortician among many other things in her life, and Ray assisted with picking up bodies on first calls. He was familiar with death anyway from his PD days. Now and then, when he goes days just sleeping, waking only for food and to have his diaper changed, she sometimes thinks about ways to end his life without getting caught. Lately, he's taken to needing oxygen because his brain forgets how to breath (a function of Alzheimer's). The first few times this happened a couple of years ago the care facility panicked, and my mother in law and my wife became rather grief stricken but quickly realized that had he died, it would have been okay. When he does go, they'll be sadder than they've ever been, but they also know the real Ray died years ago. So yes, we're in favor of euthanizing under certain conditions. Ray even expressed a desire for it when he was still lucid enough to know what was going on. It's the age old argument- we do it for animals but not for humans. It most definitely should be an available option under certain, strict conditions. It wouldn't just help end the suffering of the terminally ill, but also for the loved ones as well.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost I think you are correct. Assisted death should be an option for someone with no hope to survive. Staying alive only prolongs their personal agony. To ask a third person, and I'm assuming here that you mean spouse or close friend or relative, puts a terrible burden on that person. On one hand you don't want to see them suffer, but, on the other hand, you love them and want them to still be with you. Way to much responsibility and conflict. I don't know how that all could legally be worked out, probably can't, but there should be an avenue where the consensus of diagnosis is unanimous and no options are left available. It is a dilemma between quantity of life and quality of life. I have informed my daughters that if the outlook for me, if that should come in a prolonged scenario, is fatal, that I wouldn't be upset if someone tripped over the life support power supply cord unplugging it. I think we should all be able to leave this earth with a certain amount of dignity and compassion.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<To ask a third person, and I'm assuming here that you mean spouse or close friend or relative, puts a terrible burden on that person. On one hand you don't want to see them suffer, but, on the other hand, you love them and want them to still be with you. Way to much responsibility and conflict.>> Yes, I was referring to a spouse or loved one. They should of course be CONSULTED, but have no direct responsibility for carrying it out. When Rosie was about to released from the hospital for the final time I had to make a decision... would she go to a nursing home or to home hospice care? All the social workers at the hospital advised home hospice... she said Rose would be much more comfortable at home an received better care than she would in the nursing home. That nursing homes had some very caring personnel, but were chronically under-staffed. One thing made the decision absolutely excruciating... Rose's colon had been totally blocked for the final two months... she could not take any nutrition via mouth. It all had to be provided by IV. When she was at home before her final hospital stay I spent hours each day preparing the TPN, cleaning her port with saline solution, injecting vitamins into the TPN bag, making sure absolutely all air was out of the tubing lines and connecting it to the pump and her port. Then unhitching it all the next morning. If she went to the nursing home her TPN would be continued. In home hospice care it would not... pain relief was the only intervention allowed. I asked how long it would take for her to essentially starve to death and was told a little over two weeks. It was the most horrendous decision I will ever have to make, but I took her home. Thank God she died after only 4 days at home, so lack of nutrition never entered into it. But the responsibility for the decision haunts me to this day... over 4 years later. Reading articles like the one I linked to bring all the memories back...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 This is a really REALLY hard one, and I don't know that one can really understand it if one hasn't faced it personally. I saw my parents face it with my grandparents, and I'm dreading it. To this day I'm not sure how I'll react when it's staring me in the face.
Originally Posted By Tikiduck Religion plays a significant role in our attitudes toward euthanasia, perhaps too significant. When something is done as an act of mercy, with consent, to spare someone terrible suffering, I can't comprehend the opposition, except for fear that it may be an affront to God. So we must let our loved ones suffer, worse than any domestic beast is allowed to suffer, in order to appease a God that by all logical accounts does not even exist. Madness.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I agree. But for me it wasn't really the deciding factor. Hell, I've offended God so may times in my life (if He is the God presented in the Bible) that one more affront wouldn't mean much. I just have this over-riding feeling that a human should NEVER knowingly contribute to the death of another human. Maybe it's religion. Maybe it's just overall societal beliefs. Maybe it's because our domestic beasts don't understand the prospect of dieing and we do. But it all must be re-thought. I talked with my brother a lot after he was diagnosed with terminal pancreatic cancer. Probably more than I ever had in my life. It was less then 2-1/2 months from the time of his diagnosis until the time of his death. He was only 52 years-old. First of all, I wanted to make sure we were "good" with each other. He said "Hell Jerry, we've ALWAYS been good with each other. We didn't always agree on stuff, but that is OK. We were always brothers and you always respected that." I asked him if he was scared. He said that yes, he was. But that however fearful he was of the unknown, it HAD to be better than what he was facing now.
Originally Posted By ecdc As for right now, I do think euthanasia should be a viable option. Obviously it's an extremely difficult issue, and each situation is different (which makes having a legal framework defining it also very difficult). My wife's grandfather is almost ninety. For the past four years we've gone to say goodbye to him at least half-a-dozen times because we've been told he's going to die. He sits in a chair all day long, never leaving his house. His wife has to take care of him, and she's old enough now that she can't really do it. He doesn't want to live. He's a religious man who long ago made peace with passing away. He leaves the house to go to the doctor, that's it. His medical care is extremely expensive (covered by Medicare). Even his children are exhausted going through this, wondering when the end will come. It's a terribly sad thing, but it's to the point for the past couple of years where everyone is waiting for this man to die. We do go and visit him, and sometimes he recognizes people and appreciates it, but other times he doesn't. Most of the time he's asleep. One-hundred years ago, this man would've died four or five years ago. I'm not sure where the line is that separates "Oh, I'm so grateful for technology that can keep him alive" and "Maybe it's time to let things go," but this family crossed the line long ago. He does have DNR orders, all that stuff. And here's the thing: In the future, these lines will only get more blurry. Right now there's a big difference between an elderly person confined to a bed and a Terri Schiavo-type person who's only kept alive by machines. But the technology will improve. It most likely won't be in my lifetime, but the day will come when humans will have to radically rethink of death as at least a partly-voluntary act. We will increasingly be able to keep people alive artificially, with much less effort. That's great if you're forty or fifty and would otherwise pass away. But what about when more and more people live to be a 120? 130? 150? It's not as unthinkable as it sounds (or that far away).
Originally Posted By Tikiduck It would be interesting to see how the attitudes would change if healthcare was compromised to any great degree. I still say it's a shame that such a large chunk of the healthcare pie is used on people who no longer have any quality of life. Much of that is because of our religious reluctance to accept euthanasia as a viable option. As a result, a lot of younger people are not getting the degree of care they need, and rather than being restored to health and productivity, they end up being sick and disabled for the rest of their lives.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Time it was and what a time it was, it was A time of innocence, a time of confidences Long ago, it must be, I have a photograph Preserve your memories, they're all that's left you>> "Old Friends", Simon and Garfunkel "Bookends" album... one of the best of all time. Don't really know why I'm remembering all this stuff today. I thought they were memories that had been dealt with and buried long ago...
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Having been up close to loved ones passing away a few times now, it's not any easier to let them go naturally than it would be to simply give them medication to "put them to sleep." For myself, if I am stricken with Alzheimer's or some other fatal disease, I would want the option to be done with it all. Lingering on for days or weeks may be the natural process, but I don't know that there's much to be gained by it for the person whose dying or their loved ones. Seeing someone die is a profound thing. In some cases, like my dad, he was surrounded at that moment by those closest to him, and it was a loving, relatively peaceful experience. Other relatives have not been a peaceful experience at all, nightmarish really, which is upsetting and hurtful to helplessly watch. Eventually the person's actual death fades a bit from your memory, and instead you think about the experiences you shared in happier times. But I certainly think doctor assisted suicide should be an option.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Lingering on for days or weeks may be the natural process, but I don't know that there's much to be gained by it for the person whose dying or their loved ones. >>> But what if there's a miracle?
Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>>Lately, he's taken to needing oxygen because his brain forgets how to breath (a function of Alzheimer's). The first few times this happened a couple of years ago the care facility panicked, and my mother in law and my wife became rather grief stricken but quickly realized that had he died, it would have been okay. When he does go, they'll be sadder than they've ever been, but they also know the real Ray died years ago. So yes, we're in favor of euthanizing under certain conditions. Ray even expressed a desire for it when he was still lucid enough to know what was going on. It's the age old argument- we do it for animals but not for humans. It most definitely should be an available option under certain, strict conditions. It wouldn't just help end the suffering of the terminally ill, but also for the loved ones as well.<<< Couldn't agree more, SPP. We have come to a time when we are so medically advanced that we can keep people alive well beyond what nature intends. After watching my grandmother live for years with dementia and psychosis, I certainly have no desire ever to live that way. I wouldn't want every bladder infection or pneumonia treated the way my grandmother's was. If my brain is gone, I would at the least want nature to take its course. What's the point of life if all you do is lay in bed under the total care of others?
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf I am in favor of euthanasia. Ideally, everyone would have a very detailed advanced directive that described every situation where you would want to let go of life so no one else would have to make that decision for you. Of course, it would have to be legal too....
