![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 14 to 38 of 38. Go back in thread:
Posted by jujube on February 14, 2005, at 14:39:31
In reply to Re: Toph and jujube, posted by sunny10 on February 14, 2005, at 14:25:59
Sunny,
I agree with you. Euthanasia and the right to die is, to me, about dying with dignity at a time when physical illness, and resulting medical interventions, have stripped an individual of any quality of life and their ability to pursue their inalienable rights. And, I think "assisted suicide" in such instances is more than an unfortunate choice of words. It would be like calling someone a murderer because they take the decision to withdraw life-support from a loved one who is being kept alive by machines. I don't know if I am making any sense. I hope I haven't upset you by my expressing my views. It was not my intention. If I did, I'm sorry.
Tamara
I think "assisted suicide" is more than an unfortunate choice of words you
> I think what needs to occur is a legal distinction between assisted euthanasia and honoring a person's inalienable rights
> 1)life
> 2)liberty
> 3)pursuit of happiness
>
> if those conditions are no possible, they have the right to
> 1) die with dignity
>
> There is a huge difference between allowing someone to die of old age and assisting in a suicide!
>
> I have attempted suicide three times. Each time was met with medical intervention; then pyschological therapies and medication.
>
> And the doctor's were correct in doing so- I suffer from recurrent major depression and when those attempts occur, I am not making a rational decision based on reality.
>
> My father is. Yes, he has symptoms of depression now; but he was less depressed when he was being left alone!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
Posted by sunny10 on February 14, 2005, at 15:01:30
In reply to Re: Toph and jujube - trigger » sunny10, posted by jujube on February 14, 2005, at 14:39:31
You didn't upset me !! I was already upset when I jumped on this thread- you have actually made me feel understood and have validated my feelings, for which I thank you IMMENSELY !!!!
Posted by Susan47 on February 14, 2005, at 15:17:50
In reply to Re: Goodness NO jujube!, posted by sunny10 on February 14, 2005, at 15:01:30
I agree with both of you, Jujube you said it so well. Sunny, I'm sorry I just caught up with your thread. I'm so sorry for what you and your father are going through. You're so generous emotionally. That makes you so very beautiful, and fragile too, because everything that's truly beautiful is also delicate and easily broken. Remember yourself in all of this. My first instinct when reading was, can you take him out of hospital and take care of him, blah blah what a wonderful opportunity ... but it really doesn't seem reasonable. Maybe the thing you can do right now is just see him as much as you feel you want to, and let him know you support his desire to let go of life now. You know your family is in denial, they've proven it beyond a doubt. Their grief moves very quickly, perhaps? Perhaps in a year all this will be forgotten by them, as well. But not by you. You are actually taking the time to care very deeply. (((Sunny10)))
Posted by jujube on February 14, 2005, at 18:01:53
In reply to Re: Goodness NO jujube!, posted by sunny10 on February 14, 2005, at 15:01:30
Posted by Toph on February 14, 2005, at 19:39:18
In reply to Re: Toph and jujube, posted by sunny10 on February 14, 2005, at 14:25:59
Sorry to get all legalistic and all. I'm glad you weren't angry at us for discussing the various perspectives, sunny.
The bottom line is that I love my wife very much. I really don't know what I'd do if faced with being a participant in losing her forever. I also don't know how I will feel about dying when it becomes an inevitability for me. There is just a touch of irony in the thought that for my whole life I have struggled to appreciate being alive, and then when it's my time to go, someone else will force me to linger.
Toph
Posted by Tabitha on February 15, 2005, at 0:38:21
In reply to Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by Toph on February 13, 2005, at 15:37:44
Disability rights groups have protested that movie for a lot of reasons. They site several innacuracies in the film, including the fact that since 1990 a patient has the right to refuse care. Since the Hilary Swank character was conscious, all she had to do was ask the health workers to turn off the ventilator machine and they'd be obligated to comply.
Of course it was much more dramatic with her having to persuade Clint Eastwood to do it, and trying to do it herself through the tongue biting and all.
Posted by Toph on February 15, 2005, at 10:38:12
In reply to Re: Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by Tabitha on February 15, 2005, at 0:38:21
> ...all she had to do was ask the health workers to turn off the ventilator machine and they'd be obligated to comply.
>As I understand it, that's correct Tabitha. Unfortuately, nurses can only remove life supports upon the order of the treating physician. Some doctors will not terminate life sustaning treatment because of their personal belifs or because of a perverse interpretation of the do no harm provision of the Hippocratic oath. Then there's the belief that an individual who is suicidal is prima facial evidence of mental illness. Boy, I'd be depressed too if I had a brain injury or spinal cord injury that rendered me totally dependent on others for my basic needs. Nothing like laying in your feces for hours, the smell of necrotic flesh from decubitus ulcers or a male nurse changing your Foley catheter routinely. Of course, there's always the utter torture of an untreatable brain tumor to cause someone to beg for merciful relief.
I understand the point of view of the disabilities advocates who are concerned about euthanasia as an act of expediancy. I believe that for some it is an act of love.
Ironically this was in today's Tribune. Sometimes we treat animals more humanely than humans.
*One of city's most special gorillas dies*
By William Mullen
Tribune staff reporter
Published February 15, 2005
Kumba, who made history in 1970 as the city's first captive-born gorilla, was euthanized Saturday by keepers at Lincoln Park Zoo after years of slow deterioration caused by kidney failure..."...Losing an animal is the most difficult part of working at the zoo, and it was really tough to say goodbye to Kumba," said Robyn Barbiers, the zoo's general curator.
"For the past few years, we have been closely watching Kumba because of her reduced renal [kidney] function, and we have administered a variety of treatments, but her condition continued to deteriorate," she said. "It became evident that she was dying."
Kumba would have turned 35 in July. Since November, Barbiers said, her health had been in a tailspin as she lost weight and became lethargic. Her system had stopped metabolizing foods, and she had lost interest in eating.
On Saturday zoo veterinarians and ape-house keepers anesthetized her for another round of tests with a prior agreement that, if her condition showed no hope of improvement, they would euthanize Kumba to stop her suffering...
Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune
Posted by sunny10 on February 15, 2005, at 11:48:52
In reply to Re: Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by Toph on February 15, 2005, at 10:38:12
I have been doing some reading regarding the legalities, et cetera.
It is all what Toph said and more. Interestingly, if you are lucky enough to be in a hospice care facility, your wishes to refuse food and water are granted. But in a hospital (and, apparently, in my father's own home) your right is rescinded for the reasons Toph mentioned. Prima facia "incompetence due to depression" or that Hippocratic oath. You are, however, solely within your rights to sign yourself out of a hospital against medical advice if you sign their little piece of paper. Only problem comes when your family refuses to give you a ride home and you are too feeble to get there under your own steam...
It all stinks...yes, we are kinder to our animals than we are to our relatives.
Posted by Tabitha on February 15, 2005, at 14:16:34
In reply to Re: Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by sunny10 on February 15, 2005, at 11:48:52
Interesting. Most of what I read was on the NotDeadYet site or linked there. That person has a pretty different take on the issues about life with spinal cord injury, level of depression, incidence of bedsores, etc, and he sites a few research studies. It sounds like the satisfaction with life increases the longer the person has lived with the injury. Humans can be amazingly adapatable. I had quite a bit of sympathy for his points after reading the arguments. I mean, we all live with disabilities too, right? But I think I'm straying off topic a bit.
Posted by Toph on February 15, 2005, at 16:24:56
In reply to Re: Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by Tabitha on February 15, 2005, at 14:16:34
I don't think you're off topic Tabitha. It's all about choice, the individual's choice and no one else's.
Toph
Posted by sunny10 on February 16, 2005, at 8:17:21
In reply to Re: Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger) » Tabitha, posted by Toph on February 15, 2005, at 16:24:56
the most important thing is that the PERSON have rights... and each person is different- thus wishes are different.
Every wish is as "real" as another. There is not room for "true" and "false" on this subject IMO.
Posted by TamaraJ on February 24, 2005, at 11:22:52
In reply to Can euthanasia be an act of love? (trigger), posted by Toph on February 13, 2005, at 15:37:44
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050224/ap_on_re_us/brain_damaged_woman
Posted by rainbowbrite on February 24, 2005, at 19:17:43
In reply to In the news (possible trigger), posted by TamaraJ on February 24, 2005, at 11:22:52
This story is breaking my heart! How can they do this if it will cause her pain :(
Posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 16:03:34
In reply to In the news (possible trigger), posted by TamaraJ on February 24, 2005, at 11:22:52
It's hard to sort though the media frenzy of this emotionally charged case involving a governor's political agenda, a conservative Supreme Court's finding of the unconstitutional misuse of power, a family feud and a brain damaged woman who cannot tell us if she would like to die naturally or be kept alive artificially in her current state. Without knowing Terri personally, its hard to now the truth for certain. The stench overwhelms me though.
Toph
Posted by TamaraJ on March 1, 2005, at 16:14:15
In reply to the news » TamaraJ, posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 16:03:34
I agree. And, I think as long as politicians view this as just a moral issue rather and issue of humane and compassionate treatment for our dying population, laws will never brought forward for debate. (Perhaps I have not made any sense there. Oh well.) In Canada, even after the Rodriguez and Lambert cases, if I am remembering correctly, the only piece of legislation introduced was a Private Members' Bill (incidently I believe by the MP that was with Sue Rodriguez when she was euthenized voluntarily), and, like most Private Members' Bills, it died on the Order Paper. I don't think any politician wants to go up against a divided constituency to deal with this issue. Get off your soapbox Tamara!
Posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 20:29:05
In reply to Re: the news » Toph, posted by TamaraJ on March 1, 2005, at 16:14:15
You've obviously given this a lot of thought Tamara. Love and compassion trumps personal/legal/religious opinion in my book every time. But to play devil's advocate, end of life decisions should be determined solely by clear and convincing evidence (to use the legal criteria)of the incapacitated patient's wishes expressly stated while competent. In other words, you and I should determine how we die, not a judge, a politician, a religious zealot, or even a friend, lover or family member - only you for yourself and I, for myself.
Is this a trigger for you Tamara?
Toph
Posted by TamaraJ on March 1, 2005, at 20:45:54
In reply to Re: the news » TamaraJ, posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 20:29:05
I hope you don't think me cold-hearted if I am triggered by this discussion. It is a difficult discussion to have, but I would prefer to have it and to have come to a considered opinion/decision before I am faced with such a situation.
I agree that love and compassion trumps personal/legal/religious opinion. Yes, and as morbid as it may be to some, it is the potential for these types of situations that make living wills all the more important. But, a living will would not have done any good in the case of Sue Rodriguez. Hers was a case of assisted suicide - but it was her decision, made when she was competent and of sound mind.
All human beings should be able to live with dignity and should be able to die, when their time comes, with dignity.
Sorry, I may not be making much sense. It has been a few bad days for me. I'll stop now.
Tamara
> You've obviously given this a lot of thought Tamara. Love and compassion trumps personal/legal/religious opinion in my book every time. But to play devil's advocate, end of life decisions should be determined solely by clear and convincing evidence (to use the legal criteria)of the incapacitated patient's wishes expressly stated while competent. In other words, you and I should determine how we die, not a judge, a politician, a religious zealot, or even a friend, lover or family member - only you for yourself and I, for myself.
>
> Is this a trigger for you Tamara?
>
> Toph
Posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 22:21:30
In reply to Re: the news » Toph, posted by TamaraJ on March 1, 2005, at 20:45:54
You make perfect sense to me. It's a wonder how people disrespect the wishes of frail , confused, and ill people by imposing their will, their beliefs, on to them under the guise of knowing what's best for another person. I keep trying to convince my wife to let me go if I am only hanging on by a thread some day. Even healthy, I am mainly tired of living as it is.
Toph
Posted by 10derHeart on March 1, 2005, at 23:20:21
In reply to Re: the news » TamaraJ, posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 22:21:30
>Even healthy, I am mainly tired of living as it is.
(((Toph))) Hang in there, okay? We are not the least bit tired of you...but I do understand the sentiment and (unfortunately) recall the state of mind...one more ((Toph)) - 10derHeartPS Hope the hugs don't offend. Your posts get to my heart, and I'm a hugger.
Posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 23:38:52
In reply to Re: the news » Toph, posted by 10derHeart on March 1, 2005, at 23:20:21
I can say some really stupid stuff too, TDH. Thanks for the kind words.
Toph
Posted by TamaraJ on March 2, 2005, at 15:37:50
In reply to Re: the news » TamaraJ, posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 22:21:30
Thanks Toph. There was a mistake in the first sentence of my last post. It should have read ". . . coldhearted if I am NOT triggered . . ." There are a lot of people who find this type of discussion distasteful. And, I think there are a lot of people who feel that life should be preserved at all costs - even if it means at the expense of another's dignity. Why, because they think it is the moral thing to do? Is it moral to let another suffer - both physically and emotionally? How many people will have to be tried in a court of law and perhaps go to prison for doing the humane and compassionate thing for a loved one? I am just rambling now, so I will shut up.
Oh, and Toph, please do not be tired of living. You are a wonderful person who really makes a difference. I, for one, have always benefitted from your posts, those which are philosphical in nature and those which are humorous and those which are simply supportive and caring. You are a special person (((Toph))).
Take care,
Tamara
> You make perfect sense to me. It's a wonder how people disrespect the wishes of frail , confused, and ill people by imposing their will, their beliefs, on to them under the guise of knowing what's best for another person. I keep trying to convince my wife to let me go if I am only hanging on by a thread some day. Even healthy, I am mainly tired of living as it is.
>
> Toph
Posted by Toph on March 2, 2005, at 21:37:10
In reply to Re: the news » Toph, posted by TamaraJ on March 2, 2005, at 15:37:50
but please see my prior post.
Posted by TamaraJ on March 3, 2005, at 9:08:40
In reply to Thanks » TamaraJ, posted by Toph on March 2, 2005, at 21:37:10
Posted by Toph on March 3, 2005, at 9:32:29
In reply to Sorry. Tamara must learn to read before posting (nm) » Toph, posted by TamaraJ on March 3, 2005, at 9:08:40
Posted by 10derHeart on March 5, 2005, at 0:33:45
In reply to Re: the news » 10derHeart, posted by Toph on March 1, 2005, at 23:38:52
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Relationships | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.