Ethics: Discontinue life-support or no?

[Delta4Embassy]

Currently in the news is a girl who was killed when her routine tonsilectomy was botched and she bled out and died. But because she's on life-support, her body is still functioning even if her brain isn't and she was declared dead.

Her parents refuse to discontinue life-support, the hospital wants to 'pull the plug.' A legal injuction has so far managed to keep her on life-support.

Setting aside who's to blame, and costs of such services, should these kinds of incidents keep the body alive no matter what, or should we let those in veggetative states, or brain-dead, or irreversible comas die?


Since I don't believe in gods, I'm for the 'keep them alive no matter what.'

How medical science defines death has changed as technology has gotten better and more sensitive. Just because a modern machine can't detect a faint sign of life doesn't mean there isn't one a more advanced machine would be able to detect. Consequently, everything should be done to preserve life.

 

[Chuckt]

I believe in giving people any chance possible.
I believe in respecting life.
I've had three family members die in either a nursing home or hospital.
They have some very powerful medicine in the hospital.
From my observation, my stepsister only acknowledged everyone only one time before death as if that was all she was permitted by heaven to do.
I don't believe in playing God and keeping people from the inevitable.

I've had the doctor call me on my cell phone and say to me on vacation, "Do we give your mother morphine and let her die or do we try to save her life by giving her an operation?" I hope none of you have to make that decision.

Are we supposed to honor our parents? What if they say they want the doctor to do everything possible and if they won't make it, they don't want to be needlessly suffering?

 

[longknife]

I'm torn by this.

My own medical thingamajigee is that I do not want to have medical personnel take "extraordinary measures" in the event of a serious event.

At the same time, in a strange way, I believe we have been given the intelligence to develop extraordinary ways to save lives - just look what we've done for those injured in battle that would've otherwise died.

So, I guess it all comes down to what the professionals feel is best. The girl's parents are dealing with emotions and not realism.

 

[HenryBHough]

Once Obamacare is fully implemented this discussion becomes moot.

 

[Moonglow]

My mother had the heart wrenching decision to have my sister taken off life support. I hope to God I never have to go through that.
As far as my wishes, when I get to where I am useless and not enjoying life, or really living, to take me out back and shoot me.

 

[longknife]

Once Obamacare is fully implemented this discussion becomes moot.

Oh yeah, I forgot the Death Panels!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Currently in the news is a girl who was killed when her routine tonsilectomy was botched and she bled out and died. But because she's on life-support, her body is still functioning even if her brain isn't and she was declared dead.

Her parents refuse to discontinue life-support, the hospital wants to 'pull the plug.' A legal injuction has so far managed to keep her on life-support.

Setting aside who's to blame, and costs of such services, should these kinds of incidents keep the body alive no matter what, or should we let those in veggetative states, or brain-dead, or irreversible comas die?


Since I don't believe in gods, I'm for the 'keep them alive no matter what.'

How medical science defines death has changed as technology has gotten better and more sensitive. Just because a modern machine can't detect a faint sign of life doesn't mean there isn't one a more advanced machine would be able to detect. Consequently, everything should be done to preserve life.

That should be left up to the individual, or the family, and the doctors should only be able to challenge the decision if they believe the patient will eventually recover. Ethically, doctors should never go to court to end life support against the wishes of the people involved.

 

[HenryBHough]

Ethically, doctors should never go to court to end life support against the wishes of the people involved.

And no doctor ever will once those decisions are made by properly educated federal functionaries. Any doctor so challenged can just invoke The Nuremberg Defense and the "justice" department will retreat whilst chanting "Oooooommmmmmmmmmm".

 

[Gracie]

The parents are refusing to let their little girl go because they love her. The hospital knows the girl is brain dead and it is false living. I'm with the hospital. Let her go.

But that is me. It is up to the parents, in my opinion. Unless it was an adult, then I would say it is up to the person to decide what they want done PRIOR to it happening..which is recorded and notorized statements. I think it is called a living will. Everyone should have one.

 

[Gracie]

For the record..I have such a statement, in the safety deposit box. I do not want life support. I want to be kept comfortable until they unplug me. I do not want to be starved to death or denied water so I die in that manner. Stick a needle in my arm with an overdose, unplug me and let me go. Hubby wants teh same. If something happens to both of us at the same time, the inlaws will do as we request. If they don't, I have a backup friend that will see it is done. I covered our bases.

 

[Noomi]

If she is brain dead, she is dead. Take her off life support. If not, let the parents pay for each day she remains attached to a machine which is doing nothing more than preventing her body from going cold.

Sorry to be so harsh, but its true. Kid is dead. The brain doesn't recover from death, and no matter if her heart is beating, she isn't going to wake up.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

My daughter has pulled the plug on at least 30-40 people so far, and she is still a student, albeit she graduates in a few months.
There are many factors.
Family wishes.
Patient wishes.
Financial concerns.
Chances of survival...and of course brain activity.
My daughter has talked about this quite a bit the past year. Most of the time the decision is made by both the Doctor and the family. As it should be. In future, it may not be. I have no doubt the government will have a hand in it within my lifetime.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The parents are refusing to let their little girl go because they love her. The hospital knows the girl is brain dead and it is false living. I'm with the hospital. Let her go.

But that is me. It is up to the parents, in my opinion. Unless it was an adult, then I would say it is up to the person to decide what they want done PRIOR to it happening..which is recorded and notorized statements. I think it is called a living will. Everyone should have one.

The hospital knows no such thing.

 

[Noomi]

My daughter has pulled the plug on at least 30-40 people so far, and she is still a student, albeit she graduates in a few months.
There are many factors.
Family wishes.
Patient wishes.
Financial concerns.
Chances of survival...and of course brain activity.
My daughter has talked about this quite a bit the past year. Most of the time the decision is made by both the Doctor and the family. As it should be. In future, it may not be. I have no doubt the government will have a hand in it within my lifetime.

The government should have a hand in it because its government money that is being used to keep these people alive when its pointless - which is why parents need to be made to pay to keep their kids on life support - otherwise you will have people taking up resources when they are not needed.

 

[Pennywise]

My mother had the heart wrenching decision to have my sister taken off life support. I hope to God I never have to go through that.
As far as my wishes, when I get to where I am useless and not enjoying life, or really living, to take me out back and shoot me.

Dibs on first in line.

As to this story, I say the parents have the right to demand the hospital keep the girl alive as long as they wish due to negligence. The hospital is in no position to make any claims.

Fuck me, bleeding out for tonsils, that's unbelievable. Poor parents.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

!!!!!
Danger
Will
Robinson:
Death
Panels
Alert
!!!!!
​

my daughter has pulled the plug on at least 30-40 people so far, and she is still a student, albeit she graduates in a few months.
There are many factors.
Family wishes.
Patient wishes.
Financial concerns.
Chances of survival...and of course brain activity.
My daughter has talked about this quite a bit the past year. Most of the time the decision is made by both the doctor and the family. As it should be. In future, it may not be. I have no doubt the government will have a hand in it within my lifetime.

the government should have a hand in it because its government money that is being used to keep these people alive when its pointless - which is why parents need to be made to pay to keep their kids on life support - otherwise you will have people taking up resources when they are not needed.

 

[novasteve]

By that standard I can't be charged for killing a liberal since they are brain dead

 

[novasteve]

Doctors should be charged with murder for doing this if I can be charged with
Murder for shooting someone who jumped off a 100 story building and had fallen past my window on the third floor

 

[Noomi]

Doctors should be charged with murder for doing this if I can be charged with
Murder for shooting someone who jumped off a 100 story building and had fallen past my window on the third floor

I have no idea what point you are trying to make here.

 

[Vox]

Currently in the news is a girl who was killed when her routine tonsilectomy was botched and she bled out and died. But because she's on life-support, her body is still functioning even if her brain isn't and she was declared dead.

Her parents refuse to discontinue life-support, the hospital wants to 'pull the plug.' A legal injuction has so far managed to keep her on life-support.

Setting aside who's to blame, and costs of such services, should these kinds of incidents keep the body alive no matter what, or should we let those in veggetative states, or brain-dead, or irreversible comas die?


Since I don't believe in gods, I'm for the 'keep them alive no matter what.'

How medical science defines death has changed as technology has gotten better and more sensitive. Just because a modern machine can't detect a faint sign of life doesn't mean there isn't one a more advanced machine would be able to detect. Consequently, everything should be done to preserve life.

If she is brain dead, she IS dead, which means life support will continue for several days, maybe a week and she will still die - she does not have the highest regulatory function for the body to live much longer.
So, even if this is expensive, couple of days would not, most probably, make much difference, but will let the parents have the closure in terms - she passed away, not they killed her.