Freethought & Rationalism Archive

winstonjen · 08-22-2003, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by openeyes
Of course, the cost of her care was largely picked up by the county, state or federal government. Was maintaining medical care the right thing to do?

Of course not. If they want them to be kept on life support, they should pay for it themselves. They have no right to force the state to pay for it.

Bad Kitty · 08-23-2003, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Hence my word to you, friendlily & w/o rancour, is BUGGER OFF! Well, a little less totalitarian than that: you have as we all (nominally) have here in the US of A, the right to preach your position & values; and to try to persuade others freely to convert to your way of thinking & acting.

I'm not "preaching" anything, I'm discussing the topic on a board meant for exactly that. If you don't like my opinions, feel free to completely skip my posts.

Quote:

You do NOT have the right to FORCE your position & your practises upon them/us.

The law already "forces" certain practices on us: for example bans on late-term abortions. So I think you should direct your ire at them, not me. Currently, your opinions and values are supported by the law. But that can change with the changing of laws -- and if that were to happen it wouldn't be just "my opinion" would it?

Michelle

Bad Kitty · 08-23-2003, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Michelle: Would do you consider a determination of personhood? For example, consider the other end of the spectrum of life: We had a case in my city years back where a man wouldn't allow medical personnel to take his 89 year old wife off life support. She was unconscious and not likely to become conscious. She had a host of medical problems. She lingered for months before her body finally gave up on its own, if I remember correctly (or maybe the hospital won the court case.) Of course, the cost of her care was largely picked up by the county, state or federal government. Was maintaining medical care the right thing to do?

I've read about the key cases covering this situation as it pertains to people in Persistent Vegetative States.

In a case similar to the one you describe, parents wanted to remove the feeding tube from their PVS daughter, but the hospital sued on behalf of the daughter to maintain it. A court agreed with the hospital and said it would need compelling proof that the patient had clearly expressed a desire not to be maintained in such a state in order to allow the family to remove the tube. The family then refiled and presented enough witnesses (mostly the girl's friends) who had had conversations with the daughter regarding her feelings about extreme life support. The court then agreed with the family and the tube was removed. I believe the girl died of starvation after something like 11 days.

My feelings on the matter: I think it is wise for all of us to have a clearly stated what we would want to have happen in that situation if we were the patient. I know that before the last surgery I had I detailed in writing (and had it witnessed) how I felt about long-term extreme life support (I don't want it) in order to ease the burden of my family. But if a patient has not expressed their feelings on the topic, does the state have a right override the wishes of the patient's spouse, who supposedly know them best? My answer there would have to be no.

I believe that we have a right to end our own lives if we so choose, and I wish the medical community would let us do it with dignity.

Michelle

winstonjen · 08-23-2003, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheBigZoo
I believe that we have a right to end our own lives if we so choose, and I wish the medical community would let us do it with dignity.

Michelle

That's one thing I dislike about the medical community - they view death - all death - as a failure. It is not - death is as natural as birth, and is more absolute - we can terminate a pregnancy, but not death. I wonder what terminally ill doctors do. My guess is that as they have access to legal drugs, most of them would commit suicide with those drugs if the pain gets to be too much.

Advance directives and living wills (not sure if they're the same thing) are highly recommended, but there's still a chance that they will be ignored.

openeyes · 08-24-2003, 07:18 PM

The point I wanted to make was that since we often use "brain death" as a point of discontinuing medical care, I think it's logical to use "brain life" as a point to begin to consider personhood. I'm not talking primitive brain function but the higher level development that makes us human. Before it is present, since the woman is providing the environment for development to continue, she should be able to have the pregnancy terminated if she's not ready to become a parent.

I don't think that people who think along these lines value children any less than "pro-lifers". I think it's a reasonable position and one that should be allowed by law.

abe smith · 08-25-2003, 05:41 AM

Responding to Wilson jen's just-previous-but-one comment about doctors's deciding for themselves (in contrast to deciding = not, for their patients), I recall having read (never can remember cite-
sites) within the last um, six mos., and earlier, that "doctors" = medical professionals (Like cops...) do have statistically-significant deaths-by-suicide. (Cops have access to guns; MDs have access to guns, and to meds.)

View Poll Results: What Motivates Them?
Fear of Death	6	8.70%
Genuine concern of the living	14	20.29%
Desire for Control	45	65.22%
Other (please elaborate)	4	5.80%
Voters: 69. You have already voted on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-24-2003, 07:18 PM	#145
openeyes Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Minnesota Posts: 4,215	The point I wanted to make was that since we often use "brain death" as a point of discontinuing medical care, I think it's logical to use "brain life" as a point to begin to consider personhood. I'm not talking primitive brain function but the higher level development that makes us human. Before it is present, since the woman is providing the environment for development to continue, she should be able to have the pregnancy terminated if she's not ready to become a parent. I don't think that people who think along these lines value children any less than "pro-lifers". I think it's a reasonable position and one that should be allowed by law.

08-25-2003, 05:41 AM	#146
abe smith Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: springfield, MA. USA Posts: 2,482	Responding to Wilson jen's just-previous-but-one comment about doctors's deciding for themselves (in contrast to deciding = not, for their patients), I recall having read (never can remember cite- sites) within the last um, six mos., and earlier, that "doctors" = medical professionals (Like cops...) do have statistically-significant deaths-by-suicide. (Cops have access to guns; MDs have access to guns, and to meds.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.