141–150 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop trying to interpret my opinions as facts. Are you seriously fooled into thinking what I'm saying here is even arguably fact? Of course it's my opinion...
If you call something someone else says a lie, that's not a statement of opinion. You're saying they said something false. That's a factual matter.
He had a terribly bad stroke that left him very much alive, but without the ability to speak, read, or write. He was a professional book reviewer and writer for much of his life, and continued to read, write, and think with voracity up until the minute before his stroke (he was setting up his Series 4 Apple Watch at his desk when the stroke hit ;) Not an ounce of cognitive decline into his 80s, which we were all thankful for.
He spent about 10 days in the hospital after the stroke. He was mostly lucid, glad to have the family around (thrilled to have his grandson there), but clearly frustrated that he literally could not say a word to us. At one point I handed him his iPad Pro so he could, perhaps, type a bit, but he looked at me and shrugged when the keyboard popped up. That part sucked.
He developed a heart arrhythmia and pretty severe pneumonia very quickly, and after a week or so of minimal cognitive improvement, the attending sat me, mom, and my sister in a room to discuss plans. He explained that, of course, they could and would do the "everything we can" bit if we wanted, but that dad's Living Will (*note: highly recommended for everyone to get one) was clear that if he couldn't live a comfortable life after this sort of debilitating event, he wanted only palliative care. The attending also explained that there was "a 0% chance he'll regain cognitive abilities at this age to live anything near a normal life."
It took us less than a minute to all vehemently agree that the right decision would be to move immediately to palliative care, to let things take their course, and let him spend his last hours/days in peace. The attending told us he was shocked at how easily we agreed -- that most families have a hard time letting go and that he often has a difficult job trying to balance the need to be pragmatic with the wishes of families who might not be in a rational state of mind. He actually thanked us for being so level-headed. Dad died about 2 days later in absolute peace, with family around, a warm and wonderful nursing staff taking care of him, and honestly, I wouldn't have had it any other way given the circumstances.
I share this not to gloat or preach that our family is somehow better than those who choose to request "full code", but as an anecdote to let people know that it's ok to let your loved ones go peacefully. Even in the months since this happened, none of us have even a single ounce of regret about the way things were handled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assisted suicide is a completely different thing than "laws preventing family members from prolonging the suffering of their loved ones." The first gives patients and families more options in how to deal with end of life care, the other takes options away.
> the other takes options away Yes, it takes it out of the hands of the family and actually respects the patients final wishes, that they made for themselves while still lucid.
Of course (unfortunately) most people still don't take these steps to make their wishes known. But the original comment was about "laws preventing family members from prolonging the suffering of their loved ones," specifically about an example of a young child, whose wishes were not known (and of course not really relevant for a toddler). The fact is in the absence of any advanced directive I would much rather have the family make decisions about the type of care desired by the patient than the state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> laws preventing family members from prolonging the suffering This would be inconsistent with the profit motive, which incentivizes patient treatments not cures.
You do know that most hospitals in the US today are run by Non-profits right? This tired old, inaccurate, and moronic belief that evil capitalism only wants to make people suffer, where good moral socialism would solve all of our medical problems fails even a elementary glace at history and reality
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know some parents who had a child with an extremely rare degenerative disorder that attacks the nervous system. They were wealthy enough to afford extremely good care and as such, kept their poor suffering child "alive" for 12 years longer than anyone else who had ever had the same disease. Life expectancy of newborns with this disorder is about 1-3 years. At every turn, the doctors and nurses charged with the chil…
>There should be laws Philosophical problems aren't solved by legislation, it is important that people stop looking towards lawmakers to push their morals. Telling good stories – tragedies – well enters them into the popular mythos effects better choices.
Murder, rape and theft are all philosophical questions, why are they easier to resolve through legislation?
If you have a loved one in this last stage care you can't have reasonable goals because nothing is reasonable anymore. Instead you measure success with time. The longer loved one 'lives' the better everyone did. It's irrational and harmful for everyone involved but that's how it is. That was actually what the person was asking when he ask if they did everything they could. Could she live longer?
My loved one today told me she would like to die on the operating table. She already had 4 head surgeries to remove her brain tumors. Last two last year left her physically disabled. She might need another one this year. The day after tomorrow we are doing her next MRI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s really strange to me. Christianity also teaches that death is temporary and you’ll be reunited with your loved ones (assuming everyone is righteous). Why such a fear of death?
I grew up in a conservative, Protestant family and I might be able to shed a little bit of light on this. A few points, simply based on the environment I grew up in, which means of course this is just one perspective on just one religious denomination - I won't provide more caveats than that: - Christians take the afterlife very seriously. One must be judged by God. Regardless of how confident you are in your final d…
That's very variable with denomination.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If God gave man brains and free will, then Christians should be ok with the tools and medicine man creates, because it’s still God’s creation at the root, if even indirectly. (I know this doesn’t square with Luddites/ Amish etc.)
God gives man the ability to make tools that can both prolong their life and end it prematurely. Is there anything special about the latter than makes it “forbidden”?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> seems to me like it's a cultural thing as well. This is true. I think that it's also a religious thing as well, and almost Christians. Other religions are more accepting of death, but Christianity has taught many to sincerely believe that Jesus himself would step into the room and heal their loved one, therefore every attempt must be made to save them. This is something I've seen first hand in my years as a Paramed…
That's a bizarre bigotry. Christianity teaches of heaven and the second coming, and also that Jesus heals regardless of doctors. There is a huge diversity in Christianity. How do you as a paramedic know what's happening to a patient's social security check?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Christians believe that whether or not someone ought to live or die is in God's hands. They take the view that whatever humans ought to do to extend life ought to be done, since death will come when God wills it. Choosing to stop life support is tantamount to choosing to end someone's life, a power they believe only God wields righteously. On the flip side, couldn’t life support be considered thwarting God’s will?
I think ultimately there’s no good answer to this line of questioning, because an omnipotent god can make whatever he wants happen regardless of what humans do. Claims that someone is thwarting or enabling God’s will are subjective and religious leaders can deploy them however they wish.