THE final decision to pull the plug on a patient lies with the physician, according to new guidelines released by Manitoba's College of Physicians and Surgeons Wednesday.
Manitoba's medical regulatory body is the first in Canada to introduce guidelines for physicians to follow when dealing with end-of-life issues and comes less than two months after a Winnipeg family challenged the decision of Grace Hospital doctors to discontinue an 84-year-old man's life support. __________________ I think this is a good decision. If someone wants to keep their family member alive, that's fine, but on my dime.
Why I dont get about that current case... They are saying its against their religion to let him die....
umm HAHEM... dont you think that if it comes to the point where you need machines to keep you alive you are perhaps...just a little.. subverting your GODS will?
My Mom was on life support for a week....the hardest thing we ever did was take her off. As far as I was concerned she was already dead....machines were breathing for her. By taking her off nature took over and she was gone within an hour.
That is very sad. It is a catch 22. Maybe you get a chance to say good-bye. My mother died in her sleep and we never had that chance. My father died after a lengthy illness and we had time to say good-bye.
I would think having someone go quickly and naturally would be easier in the long-run, as I've heard stories from people who have to go to the hospital every day...waiting for the person to die. (No, it isn't what they say, but in fact that is the reality)
It is sad and it's an issue that will become increasingly relevant as the baby boomers start to move on.
For me, I would want to be able to say goodbye and think there's more dignity in letting someone pass away than have a number of machines keep them alive for weeks, months, years on end - sort of like they're in storage. IMO I think there comes a point where it's being done more for the family rather than the patient. In that case you do need a third party to be able to say look, that's enough. In that situation, a doctor is better able to make that call.
Would a private for profit company that was involved in simply that... keeping people hooked up to machines and caring for them... be a violation of the health care act... re.. two teir health
All I know is that if a Dr says someone isn't coming back, and the family wants to keep them alive, that the taxpayers shouldn't be carrying that burden.
I wonder how much they would pay and how long a family would want to keep a loved one alive when "public" doctors said there is no hope?
At say $1000 per day for 24 hour monitoring.. would not take much to eat through most families budget. Would they sell all their possessions? take to working 16 hours per day? Or in the end would they simply make the finanical decision instead of Love decision to let them go?
I agree its always just such a horrible situation.
I used to work as a nurse and I had this one patient who had been in the nursing home I worked at for years. His arms and legs were bent horribly and he couldn't move. It was always so painful for us to take care of him. He would moan all the time everytime we had to bathe him, change his bedding, his diapers, change his iv, change his feeding tube.
I never want to live like that. The family never came to see him but they didn't want to let him go. It was juts so sad. So many times I wanted to call the family and make them see the pain he was in and make them allow us to stop his suffering but of course I couldn't.
I just don't understand how somebody could let their loved one stay like that.
I liken it to putting a dog down. (I have a very high regard for a dog's life btw) It isn't an easy choice to put it down, but it isn't fair for them to suffer either. But when a dog suffers, we would have to deal with it everyday...so maybe that's why we finally make the right choice. So maybe the family should have to deal with the family member day in and out if they want to keep them alive.
<blockquote><cite>Posted By: StBPegger</cite>Oh that's just not right newpegger.
I liken it to putting a dog down. (I have a very high regard for a dog's life btw) It isn't an easy choice to put it down, but it isn't fair for them to suffer either. </blockquote>
Agreed StB.
On that note, I'm curious to see where you (all of you) stand on the issue of euthanasia or the "right to die". My own personal feelings are that, if all hope is lost and there's no hope of recovery, shouldn't we extend the same mercy to a loved one that we we would for our beloved pets?
(Provided the loved one agrees, of course... not "let's off mom and get our inheritance early!" type of scenario)
Quality of life is important to me. I always use my litmus test of "what would happen if this occurred 500/1000 years ago". Technology is great, but it can create unnatural situations.
have made it abundantly clear to the fam: NO MACHINES, no heroic measures. They hate that conversation but ya gotta have it. Have you made a living will it makes it far more clear to all when there minds are messed up I have so has My wife.