Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

doximity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 337 posts

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#191

Post by jawns »

jrnichols wrote: post #153
bartread wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Nope. Everybody dies, with rare exception: the Bible is pretty unequivocal on that. I hate to drift so close to…

This has been my own experience over the years, and if you'll please take the time to re-read what I said, you'll see I said "many" and not all. There are going to be differences, of course. Think back to the Terri Schiavo case. While she was apparently Catholic, the sentiment was the same. Her family believed that she was going to be healed by God (or Jesus, either one) and would make a full recovery. I also think t…

Her family did believe that she had more than a nonzero chance of some level of recovery, but that was not why they did not want her to be starved to death by having her feeding tube removed.

Though they held out hope, they acknowledged that she might never get better.

Their objection to withdrawing her feeding tube was not because they considered it wrong to do to a person who might recover but because they considered it wrong to do to a person.

That does not mean that they considered every life support measure to be necessary. It just means that they considered the denial of food and water to be different than something like turning off a ventilator.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#192

Post by IgorPartola »

djakjxnanjak wrote: post #136
saagarjha wrote: post #112

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.

He could even create a rock he himself could not lift. Oh wait...

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#193

Post by baby »

nlh wrote: post #142

I lost my dad recently (he was 84 and lived a wonderful and healthy life, which I consider a huge win for him). 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…

If this happens to me please reach out to my parents to ask them to put me in front of a computer with counter strike.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#194

Post by Thorrez »

jrnichols wrote: post #149
hopler wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

When a family member actually says "If she dies, we aren't getting paid anymore." I've also talked to nurses who have approached the topic of hospice with family members, and there is an undeniable financial incentive in many cases.

And that only happens among Christians? Atheists and Muslims aren't motivated by money?

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#195

Post by op00to »

bredren wrote: post #181

My grandfather had a do not resuscitate legal order. However, they did not have that at the hospital at the time he had his final trip to the ER. As a result the man went through a failed code attempt he did not want. So It is pretty rough to read this article, because It describes the sad experience for the patient in such real detail.

This happened to both my parents. In my dad's case, they failed and he died. In my mom's case, they succeeded in saving her a few times even after she was brain dead. She had a DNR, but it wasn't an actual medical order from a doctor, but a legal document, so they ignored it. No fucking clue why.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#196

Post by learc83 »

jrnichols wrote: post #153
bartread wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Nope. Everybody dies, with rare exception: the Bible is pretty unequivocal on that. I hate to drift so close to…

This has been my own experience over the years, and if you'll please take the time to re-read what I said, you'll see I said "many" and not all. There are going to be differences, of course. Think back to the Terri Schiavo case. While she was apparently Catholic, the sentiment was the same. Her family believed that she was going to be healed by God (or Jesus, either one) and would make a full recovery. I also think t…

>Think back to the Terri Schiavo case. While she was apparently Catholic, the sentiment was the same. Her family believed that she was going to be healed by God (or Jesus, either one) and would make a full recovery.

That's a mischaracterization of what happened. They had several arguments.

1. They believed that she wasn't actually in a persistent vegetative state, but that she was still conscious and could understand what was said to her and display emotions. They even found doctors (who were probably wrong, but they still had validation) to agree with their theory.

2. They believed that her husband wanted her to die so that he could get remarried while still inheriting her estate.

3. They didn't believe her husband when he said that she wouldn’t want to be kept alive via feeding tube. They believed that since she was a devout Roman Catholic she would have seen denying nutrition as euthanasia even though she might not want to be kept alive via a ventilator. This is the main religious argument made at the time, and it’s more of an argument about her wishes than a religious argument.

4. They found doctors who told them that there was a chance of improvement through experimental procedures.

They also seem to have made money since then by taking a salary to run a foundation in her name. It seems like either they were just parents who didn't accept that their daughter was in a persistent vegetative state, they believed the doctors who told them that their was small chance of improvement, they were trying to make money, they really hated their son-in-law, or some combination of all 4.

It didn’t seem to have anything to do with them thinking that God was going miraculously heal their daughter. It’s definitely not evidence of wide scale Christian refusal to accept death.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#197

Post by leetcrew »

hatefulmoron wrote: post #145
colechristensen wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

>Philosophical problems aren't solved by legislation, it is important that people stop looking towards lawmakers to push their morals. Murder, rape and theft are all philosophical questions, why are they easier to resolve through legislation?

I mean, we have laws about murder, rape, and theft, but are the questions actually resolved? did george zimmerman murder trayvon martin or did he justifiably kill him in self defense? if you pick a young woman and an old man at random, will they agree on the definition of "rape"? will either of their definitions be reflected by the law in their jurisdiction?

we do our best (most of us at least) to create laws that are just and fair, but ultimately law is a pragmatic measure taken to prevent societal collapse. murder is illegal because you can't have a viable society where anyone can kill anyone else at any time without penalty. whether or not you treat dying patients humanely doesn't really threaten the stability of a nation in the same way.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#198

Post by op00to »

diminoten wrote: post #57
macintux wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want to go out as a result of a series of violent mistakes trying to save my life. The problem is that excruciating pain is only obviously better than death if there’s something positive at the end of it. Otherwise it’s comparable to being tortured 24 hours a day for the rest of your life.

Sorry, but excruciating pain is always better than death, because death is eternal nothingness. At least excruciating pain is something.

Death is not eternal nothingness. Eternal implies that something "is". Death "IS NOT".

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#199

Post by matt-attack »

guhcampos wrote: post #190

This. This is messed up. Much of our medicine feels like it's not meant for the patient, but for the people around the patient. We struggle to let the person go, regardless of their own - often voiceless - suffering. We all feel pain. We all fear loss. Whose choice should it be to live or to die?

Could it be an extension of the perverse concept our society reinforces throughout life, that: suicide is illegal.

I feel that one rule ingrains in all citizens a notion that each of us does not have free agency over our own body. That someone else’s decision trumps our own regarding our own body.

I claim this is a perverse notion and the that feelings of the family in this article are a mere extension of this pervasive philosophy.

Re: I Lied When I Said We Did Everything We Could

#200

Post by mustacheemperor »

learc83 wrote: post #121
jrnichols wrote: post #21

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…

>This is true. I think that it's also a religious thing as well, and almost Christians. Other religions are more accepting of death. In my own experience growing up in church as a pastor's kid and attending a lot of funerals, people at Christian funerals tend to be a lot more accepting/less obviously distressed than people at non-religious memorial services. I think what you're describing has more to do with the Amer…

>American scientific optimism of the 50s and 60s

Sam Altman says he “fully expects” his brain to be uploaded to the cloud someday[0]. Is it any different this time, or do humans always delude ourselves about our mortality?

[0]https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610456/a-startup-is-pitch...

Post reply on HN