Live data from Hacker News

How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

archive.cancerworld.net

281–290 of 300 posts

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not? Because getting pregnant is not a crime so it shouldn't be punished. > Those are the stakes of sex and we all know it going in. You can say that about crimes as well. Knowing the stakes doesn't mean that something that follows is not a punishment. And we should be punishing only crimes. And we shouldn't be using corporal punishments at all. > I'm a man, but I know that if I accidentally get a woman pregnan…

to add points to this: > getting pregnant is not a crime neither is signing a contract, but you can be penalised for breaking one. Neither is joining the army, but you can be punished for deserting. You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me. > you don't have to take it with you from the hospital. If you did, you voluntar…

> You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me.

I'm suggesting the exactly opposite. That by having sex and getting pregnant you don't enter any contract and you don't automatically agree to take any responsibility. You can be punished for violating terms of something you voluntarily agreed to.

> why don't you assume the potential consequence of bringing a pregnancy to full term by voluntarily having sex, and not aborting in early terms?

If you made a voluntary decision to not abort in early terms then probably we can assume that.

>> if your child needs a kidney to survive you are not obliged to provide it > you aren't responsible for such a condition.

You might be. This might be a genetic birth defect (which is your responsibility for having sex by your count because it's one of the possible outcomes you are assumed to accept). Or you might have damaged you kid kidney with bad diet or herbal remedies or just beating the kid. And you still wouldn't be obliged to provide your kidney as a replacement. The point is, the law should never require of you the piece of your body.

> because you put them there? Can I lock you in a cage and claim no responsibility in getting you out?

Absolutely. However you'll be fully responsible for putting me there, if it was illegal.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#282
post #145

This subverts the message a bit, but my grandmother was sent to a hospice to die as comfortably as possible. I was out of state during her treatment up until this point, but when she was being moved to hospice care, I was told to expect her passing very soon. In this case, her doctors really seemed to have run out of good options; she just hadn't responded to treatment. But, after she was moved to hospice care, she b…

I think this is a pervasive problem in hospitals today. I was in the hospital 5 weeks at the end of 2020, and I was very aware of all the extra challenges that it brought to healing. Poor sleep due to lights/noise/interruptions, sleeping with a strange roommate who had their own sleep disruptions. Low quality food with few options, and very little fresh fruits and vegetables. On top of constant pain, boredom fear and…

I was in the hospital for pancreatitis a few years ago, here in Austin. One thing that struck me was that they came around for their regular visits at least once every couple of hours, even with me being hooked up to all the machines. I never got to sleep more than one or two hours at a time for that entire period. And they screwed up my blood pressure medication and drove my Systolic up over 250, which lead to me learning a new level 10 of pain, and extended my stay in the hospital for a week. At least I learned that Morphine doesn’t work on me, but Dilaudid does.

Whatever else a hospital is, it is typically not a place that is designed for rest and recuperation and overall patient wellness. They want to push their curatives on you as quickly as possible and without a lot of regard for your mental well being, so that they can get you out quickly and move on to the next patient. Think of it more like a MASH unit, where you’re only supposed to be there for a short period of time before they stabilize you and ship you out somewhere else.

I grew up spending a great deal of my life in hospitals, because of my dad and his medical problems. And then my mom and her medical problems. But until recently, I never really understood things from their perspective. I hope I don’t develop hospital psychosis like my dad did, but I am definitely very wary of checking into a hospital unless there is no choice.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not? Because getting pregnant is not a crime so it shouldn't be punished. > Those are the stakes of sex and we all know it going in. You can say that about crimes as well. Knowing the stakes doesn't mean that something that follows is not a punishment. And we should be punishing only crimes. And we shouldn't be using corporal punishments at all. > I'm a man, but I know that if I accidentally get a woman pregnan…

> Having sex is not acceptance of being forced to deliver a child. [...] You don't voluntarily agree to getting pregnant and giving birth unless you are planning it and wanting it. When people engage in sports they don't voluntarily agree to being injured or injuring others, they don't plan for or want it, yet these things are known risks of playing sports. I'm saying that having sex, something that no one needs to d…

> If people choose to engage in activity with a known risk of a certain outcome, is that outcome not their responsibility should it occur?

Is a person legally responsible for the injury if he engages in skydiving but then gets injured because the pilot of his plane made a mistake or manufacturer technician of his plane didn't prepare it correctly?

Is a person walking at night legally responsible for getting mugged, because there's a known risk of getting mugged?

Is the responsibility for any action with known risk solely on the person undertaking the action?

And if this person is legally defined to be responsible should this person and only this person be corporeally punished for engaging with this risky action when it results in undesirable outcome for herself?

Since father is also equally responsible why not take out one of his organs he can live without as a punishment for the undesirable outcome? Or why not give him 100 lashes or something?

Why corporal punishment for a women but just a fine for a man?

Refusing women abortion is similarly barbaric. We just don't notice it.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#284
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you said to your boss is actually a common expression in my country. To say "I hope so" about some event in the future, we say "If we live".

In America I sometimes hear a similar saying of "Lord willing" which is a shortening of a verse from James: "If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that."

My mom used to sometimes say “Lord willing, and the creek don’t rise”.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#285
post #10

My mom struggled with lung cancer for two terrible years with cutting edge treatment, and died badly. My dad cared for her through that, and when his turn came five years later, he had no doubts. He refused all but palliative care and died in two months. What he saw once, a physician will see over and over ad nauseam. Having seen one of each, I'm not conflicted over which path I'd take.

Was it small cell lung cancer? edit: for the remarkably special downvoters (stay classy HN) - that's the type of lung cancer my mother died from, in about 20 months time. You generally can't surgically remove small cell lung cancer. It was particularly brutal, with endless treatment attempts that were physically grueling and minimally effective. It's a highly aggressive cancer with a very low survival rate and few go…

Small cell lung cancer is what got my mom. She did chemo, radiation therapy, you name it.

In the end, she went into the bathroom, threw up a lot of blood, and never woke up. They didn’t do an autopsy, but the assumption was that the cancer had just gotten too widely distributed throughout her system.

But, since she had spent much of her adult life helping my dad with one or the other of his medical problems, and she had been an HR director at Norman Regional Hospital for many years, she did focus on trying to keep the best quality of life that she could, right up to the end.

The irony was that she had quit smoking thirty years earlier. It was her sister that did her in. Since the sister was in stage 4 of stomach cancer, they let her smoke in her hospital room. And my mom was the primary caregiver who slept in that room and was there pretty much 24x7. So, her second-hand smoke is what got my mom.

Definitely focus on quality of life. Whatever you’ve got left, you should try to make those your best days, weeks, months, or years yet.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#286
post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is ultimately what killed my mum. She stopped moving. Once that happens so many things in the body just don't work so well. Combined with her other ailments her body just didn't work properly any more. She initially went down-hill after she was weaned off the steroids she had been on during treatment for a benign brain tumour. Obviously the tumour and the radiotherapy didn't help things, but her health dropped o…

Sorry for your loss

Thanks. Luckily we managed to get her into a really good home for the last few months, which made the end easier on her, but that kind of age and innactivity related decline is a rubbish way to end your life. It's made me rather evangelical about keeping moving.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having sex is not acceptance of being forced to deliver a child. [...] You don't voluntarily agree to getting pregnant and giving birth unless you are planning it and wanting it. When people engage in sports they don't voluntarily agree to being injured or injuring others, they don't plan for or want it, yet these things are known risks of playing sports. I'm saying that having sex, something that no one needs to d…

> If people choose to engage in activity with a known risk of a certain outcome, is that outcome not their responsibility should it occur? Is a person legally responsible for the injury if he engages in skydiving but then gets injured because the pilot of his plane made a mistake or manufacturer technician of his plane didn't prepare it correctly? Is a person walking at night legally responsible for getting mugged, b…

> Is a person legally responsible for the injury if he engages in skydiving but then gets injured because the pilot of his plane made a mistake or manufacturer technician of his plane didn't prepare it correctly?

I don't see how that tracks. You appear to be saying "if birth control fails", but birth control is known to be less than 100% effective the same way protective sports equipment is. Arguably you have a point if the birth control in question is defective.

> Is a person walking at night legally responsible for getting mugged, because there's a known risk of getting mugged?

> Is the responsibility for any action with known risk solely on the person undertaking the action?

So the sperm and egg are committing a crime now? They are not conscious actors, they don't have responsibility.

> Since father is also equally responsible why not take out one of his organs he can live without as a punishment for the undesirable outcome?

> Why corporal punishment for a women but just a fine for a man?

We already have child support to extract responsibility, in some form, from the father. I think it would be fair to say that money is not nearly as big a deal as the pregnancy, so yeah maybe there should be a different form of responsibility enforced. Taking an organ doesn't really accomplish anything though, because the purpose isn't to punish but to support the child and taking an organ does nothing for that.

> Refusing women abortion is similarly barbaric. We just don't notice it.

I don't agree. While I'm certainly uncomfortable with the idea of forcing people to endure pregnancy and its consequences against their will, if one takes the position that fetuses are people and deserve the same human rights as everyone else, and quite a lot of people do (though for the record I lean toward not agreeing on this), then I don't think the issue is quite as straight-forward as saying that the mother (or father for that matter, but obviously his situation is different) bears no responsibility towards the fetus.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to add points to this: > getting pregnant is not a crime neither is signing a contract, but you can be penalised for breaking one. Neither is joining the army, but you can be punished for deserting. You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me. > you don't have to take it with you from the hospital. If you did, you voluntar…

> You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me. I'm suggesting the exactly opposite. That by having sex and getting pregnant you don't enter any contract and you don't automatically agree to take any responsibility. You can be punished for violating terms of something you voluntarily agreed to. > why don't you assume the po…

> I'm suggesting the exactly opposite. That by having sex and getting pregnant you don't enter any contract and you don't automatically agree to take any responsibility. You can be punished for violating terms of something you voluntarily agreed to.

I don't think this reasoning tracks. Let's say you're in a bar and get into a heated argument with another person and you decide to "take it outside", as it were. You don't have to fight this person, no one is making you, you both decided to engage in the activity. Now one of you ends up severely injured or maybe even dead, not because that was the intention but because of bad luck.

You agreed to the fight, with the known probability of significant bodily harm even though neither party desired that outcome. Do either of you have any responsibility for that outcome?

> The point is, the law should never require of you the piece of your body.

I think this is your strongest argument, because I honestly cannot think of a reason the state should be allowed to do that and the only counter argument I can muster is that there's currently no other way to bring a fetus to term, which I feel is a weak justification.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to add points to this: > getting pregnant is not a crime neither is signing a contract, but you can be penalised for breaking one. Neither is joining the army, but you can be punished for deserting. You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me. > you don't have to take it with you from the hospital. If you did, you voluntar…

> You are suggesting that if it's not a crime to take on a responsibility, you can't be punished for betraying it - that doesn't follow to me. I'm suggesting the exactly opposite. That by having sex and getting pregnant you don't enter any contract and you don't automatically agree to take any responsibility. You can be punished for violating terms of something you voluntarily agreed to. > why don't you assume the po…

The contract example was just to demonstrate the law absolutely allows punishment for betraying responsibility, not that you sign a literal contract. If you have sex, that should be considered voluntarily agreement to the consequences. AFAIK, you can sue people over matters where no contract exists - societal laws aren't all literal contracts.

> then probably we can assume that

then penalise non-medical late-term abortions?

> This might be a genetic birth defect (which is your responsibility for having sex by your count because it's one of the possible outcomes you are assumed to accept)

but acting in good faith, there's no formal responsibility to pass on good genes. An interesting concept, but moot in modern society. Also, it doesn't follow that "donating a kidney" fixes the issue in the same way "not aborting" would.

> or just beating the kid

In which case you would obviously be punished.

> you still wouldn't be obliged to provide your kidney as a replacement

My original comments agree this is true, but also state it doesn't mean you can't be punished/penalised.

> the law should never require of you the piece of your body

Then can I state your doctors can never retrieve/tamper with a piece of someone else's body, even if it exists inside your womb?

> However you'll be fully responsible for putting me there, if it was illegal

And I where a jailer who put you in there legally, but illegally left you there to rot? The legality of the first act would not change my initial responsibility to let you out.

Re: How Doctors die. It’s not like the rest of us (2016)

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that "suffering erases sin" is Jesus' final message? The Christian message is that there's nothing we can do in our own power to erase sin, including suffering, hence the need for Jesus in the first place. Death in Christianity is the final release from sin and its consequences, e.g. suffering, and into eternal joy...and being released of the weight of the consequences of sin eternally is supposed to b…

Explain Mother Theresa, as well as the flagellants and other penitents.

Well, I'm a protestant so there might be a different belief system in the Catholic church. "Grace by faith alone", which is the basis of what I commented above is a reformation doctrine and is mostly a protestant thing (some Catholics I have met believe it, but officially not the Roman Catholic Church), and penitence is entirely a Catholic thing, and was a primary cause of the reformation.

There are actually a LOT of different belief systems within Christianity and the related cults surrounding it, so you can't entirely sum them up by saying "Christianity". How I would respond to anyone stating that suffering is required to pay for sins is that it is un-Biblical and they've warped the message of Jesus, and are adding to/complicating the gospel.

This is possible in the Catholic church because edicts of the Pope and Councils have had equal (or at least near equal, I'm not a Catholic historian or theologian) weight with scripture, which of course have no weight at all to Protestantism as the Pope is just another person. Mother Theresa and penitents have such a drastically different belief system, that while I would not go so far as to call them non-Christian as I think only God alone determines that, I would say that their teachings are not the same religion as mine. Saints again are a purely Catholic thing, so to me and other protestants, Mother Theresa is just another person, and "Saint" is a worthless designation from the Catholic Church. In addition, individual adherents of what is classified as "Christian" can teach and believe (or fail in their belief) of the core doctrines and cease to become what I would consider Christian, despite doing things in the name of Christ. The church during the time of Paul's letters and Acts were dealing with the same thing, people using the name of Christ who were not what Luke or Paul considered Christians.

It sounds like a no-true-Scottsman argument, and perhaps it is, but the argument that I'm making is that you are lumping billions of people together, when #1 they don't lump themselves together (Catholics have considered protestants and the reformers heretics as well), and #2 they believe and practice drastically different things. You will likely hear Protestants hedge when asked if Roman Catholics are Christian, and the reason is because on an individual basis, there are Christians within the Roman Catholic church. But what they teach is not what we consider the Christian gospel.

Post reply on HN