Poor Terry Shiavou. Starved to death. May her soul rest in peace.
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
I'm disappointed. How can a hospital allow the death of a patient. (Though this brings in the Do Not Resuscitate order fiasco)
They have no right to withdraw her tubing - she can (could) breath on her own ofterall. Should all patients with dysphagia be killed. Docter: 'Well, you can't swallow so we're not going to feed you or try (where possible) to correct it. Say goodbye to everyone you know.'
Typically, people become heartbroken and torn two ways when the person can't breathe on their own - I suppose it's exchanging one brain part for the other. A hospital should have no part in it though.
I feel that people who wish to die and seek assistance put a burden of murder or assisted homicide on the helping party. Do it your damn self. Sign a release form - go home and take all your tablets or wither away. That sounds mean.
Plus I haven't heard anyone think of the other side. Sure she said it (apparently repeatedly) that she wanted to die if she were ever like that. But saying it when healthy and doing it when sick are two different hings. Suppose she, somewhere in there, realises that just seeing her family and friends is enough? IOW, she might have changed her mind.
On the other side: maybe it's selfish of the family to hold on to a shell because they don't want to let go. Should she stay and suffer in a state she never wanted to be just so that her family can continue to see her everday and touch her.
And yet, I'm disappointed in myself, because I support quality and quantity of life - two things that oft don't go hand in hand. Quantity - if you can live - let live as best as possible.
Quality - It doesn't make me happy to see someone who used to be vibrant, sitting in their own faeces, some in intractable pain (there are some pains no tablets will help), sleep becoming a memory, body turning to a shell with bed sores turning up (despite best intentions),unable to talk, communicate, smile, with ppl doing everything for them. Kept alive as if for a museum piece - an exhibition. Maybe they're in their own private hell - a black abyss of nothing. Just there. And so the queston sneaks in. Would it not be more humane if they died?
And just as easily I think: Did I give life, can I form it? So, can I take it or decide when it is to be released.
In the end I know only a few things: 1. As a doctor I would NOT let a patient die in a request from themselves or their family members - regardless of court orders. I would have to be reassigned.
2. As a family member I would NOT end a life of a relative or spouse because they no longer wanted to live.
3. As a human, I wold always wander in incertainty: was that amount of suffering God's plan? Was I suppose to help ease it in someway?
1 comment:
I'm disappointed. How can a hospital allow the death of a patient. (Though this brings in the Do Not Resuscitate order fiasco)
They have no right to withdraw her tubing - she can (could) breath on her own ofterall. Should all patients with dysphagia be killed. Docter: 'Well, you can't swallow so we're not going to feed you or try (where possible) to correct it. Say goodbye to everyone you know.'
Typically, people become heartbroken and torn two ways when the person can't breathe on their own - I suppose it's exchanging one brain part for the other.
A hospital should have no part in it though.
I feel that people who wish to die and seek assistance put a burden of murder or assisted homicide on the helping party. Do it your damn self. Sign a release form - go home and take all your tablets or wither away. That sounds mean.
Plus I haven't heard anyone think of the other side. Sure she said it (apparently repeatedly) that she wanted to die if she were ever like that. But saying it when healthy and doing it when sick are two different hings. Suppose she, somewhere in there, realises that just seeing her family and friends is enough? IOW, she might have changed her mind.
On the other side: maybe it's selfish of the family to hold on to a shell because they don't want to let go. Should she stay and suffer in a state she never wanted to be just so that her family can continue to see her everday and touch her.
And yet, I'm disappointed in myself, because I support quality and quantity of life - two things that oft don't go hand in hand.
Quantity - if you can live - let live as best as possible.
Quality - It doesn't make me happy to see someone who used to be vibrant, sitting in their own faeces, some in intractable pain (there are some pains no tablets will help), sleep becoming a memory, body turning to a shell with bed sores turning up (despite best intentions),unable to talk, communicate, smile, with ppl doing everything for them. Kept alive as if for a museum piece - an exhibition. Maybe they're in their own private hell - a black abyss of nothing. Just there. And so the queston sneaks in. Would it not be more humane if they died?
And just as easily I think: Did I give life, can I form it? So, can I take it or decide when it is to be released.
In the end I know only a few things:
1. As a doctor I would NOT let a patient die in a request from themselves or their family members - regardless of court orders. I would have to be reassigned.
2. As a family member I would NOT end a life of a relative or spouse because they no longer wanted to live.
3. As a human, I wold always wander in incertainty: was that amount of suffering God's plan? Was I suppose to help ease it in someway?
Post a Comment