December 1, 2004
THIS IS HARDER FOR ME THAN IT IS FOR YOU... (via Matt Murphy):
A right to die? I’m more concerned that everyone has the right to live (Jane Campbell, 12/02/04, Times of London)
DEVASTATING is not too strong a word to describe the experience I had in January last year when I was admitted to hospital for emergency treatment. I was suffering from severe pneumonia, but I also have spinal muscular atrophy, a muscle-wasting condition which means I cannot lift my head from the pillow unaided and need to use a powered wheelchair.The consultant who was treating me commented that I was very ill and that if I went into respiratory failure he assumed that I would not want to be resuscitated on a ventilator. When I said that of course I would want to be ventilated, he looked puzzled but appeared to let the matter drop.
The next day a more senior consultant repeated the same message; that if I went into respiratory failure — and this was looking likely — then he assumed that I wouldn’t want to be put on a ventilator. Again I protested, and by then I was getting very scared. My husband rushed home, grabbed a photograph of me in my doctoral graduation robes, and returned to the hospital shouting to the doctors: “This is my wife, not the person you think she is. She has everything to live for. You do everything for her just as you would for anybody in this situation.”
It took this confrontation to bring about a change of attitude in the way I was treated. However, I kept myself awake for the next 48 hours, fearful that if I went to sleep I would never wake up. This incident, and similar ones that come to the attention of the Disability Rights Commission, reflect society’s view that people such as myself live flawed and unsustainable lives and that death is preferable to living with a severe impairment. [...]
The British Medical Association (BMA) has stated that the benefits of legalising assisted dying for an individual — such as respecting that person’s wishes — carry too high a potential cost for society at large. The BMA fears that assisted dying could undermine the trust that vulnerable, elderly, disabled or very ill patients have in the healthcare system.
Being coerced into assisted suicide could so easily happen. I heard of a 59-year-old woman who was very ill. Her family appeared concerned about her pain and constantly asked for her diamorphine to be increased. The medical team was unconvinced that the pain was so severe and the patient declined higher doses. Her 60th birthday passed with minimal celebration, after which the family rarely visited. Her fixed-term life insurance policy had expired.
She's lucky--plenty of husbands would pull the plug and comfort themselves that it was for her own good. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 1, 2004 8:18 PM
Wives too -- I had a co-worker whose brother-in-law almost had the plug pulled on him by his wife back in July following an four-wheeler accident because the doctors made it sound like it would be too much of an ordeal to let him live. His brother and sister had to help talk her out of it.
Posted by: John at December 1, 2004 8:59 PMMy mother, who did not want to be resuscitated or get a food tube, once joked that she would get a tattoo on her chest saying "DNR" for "do not resuscitate". But in that case, if they did accidentally go against her wishes, a doctor would say, "Oops, she's alive." That's a lot different than saying "Oops, she's dead."
Posted by: Just John at December 1, 2004 9:42 PMOJ:
Thanks for posting. Those first four paragraphs give me the absolute willies.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at December 1, 2004 9:42 PMUsed to be the goal was to keep you alive. Then it became to keep you alive unless you indicated otherwise (seems perfectly reasonable). Then it was to keep you alive unless family indicated otherwise, e.g. Terri Schialvo (your spouse must know your wishes and care only for your best interests, right?). And now it's keep you alive if the doctor thinks it worthwhile, e.g. this article, Luke Winston-Jones, the "Groningen protocols" (hey, they're doctors, they're professionals! Scientists, even!). Can someone tell me which of these steps is not "rational"? And if you can't, why I shouldn't far prefer to be "irrational"? Note that I say this as someone with a PhD in astrophysics...
Posted by: brian at December 1, 2004 11:00 PMBut Orrin, I thought that the people who take extraordinary measures to keep themselves alive are selfish, and are using resources best kept for the young and productive ?
What changed your mind ?
Besides, this cyborg obviously has no soul, and is unhuman.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at December 1, 2004 11:02 PMMichael:
We have more resources than we know what to do with.
Posted by: oj at December 1, 2004 11:10 PMWait until you have been married for 25 years.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 2, 2004 12:31 AMoj:
I see.
Then, you must now endorse the Boomers' quest to live to be 100, eh ?
As well as acknowledge that Fukuyama is wrong to oppose extended life.
Also, was that yes, this woman has a soul, or no, cyborgs cannot be human ?
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at December 2, 2004 3:07 AMSeeking to extend lifespan by artificial means is wrong. She has a soul.
Posted by: oj at December 2, 2004 7:32 AM>She's lucky--plenty of husbands would pull
>the plug and comfort themselves that it
>was for her own good.
In his book, "The Revenge of Conscience," in a chapter called "Why We Kill The Weak," J. Budziszewski (booj-uh-shev-ski) called this "spoiled pity."
Steve Bragg
DOUBLE TOOTHPICKS
Picked up and read one of Harry Turtledove's latest alternate-history novels last weekend, In the Presence of Mine Enemies. New twist on the much-used "Germany won WW2" theme -- being told from the POV of secret Jews living under false ethnic identities in the Reich capital itself about 70 years after the world was Nazified and ethnically cleansed.
How is this germane to the subject? Two scenes out of the novel:
1) The pediatrician recommending taking the incurable kid to the "Reich Mercy Center" before (as he puts it) "going home early and getting drunk".
1) The schoolgirl asking (upon the third Fuehrer's death) why, if the Fuehrer was so old and sick, they didn't take him to a Reich Mercy Center like they did her grandfather when he got old.
Posted by: Ken at December 2, 2004 4:03 PMI have a 'living will' giving my parents the right to pull the plug on me in the correct circumstances, and my parents have them to allow me the same decision-making power. It is infinitely wiser than allowing the state to make the decision either way. It should be one made by the patient's family and physician only.
Posted by: Bart at December 2, 2004 4:32 PMBart:
It's worthless. No one will either honor it or enforce it.
Posted by: oj at December 2, 2004 5:52 PM