Is destroying life in order to respect it?

[Shu2jack]

I am starting this topic partly to vent and partly to get other's view on the subject.

I work at a children's hospital as a blood gas tech and EKG technician on the night shift. Last night I was able to avoid doing an EKG on a child who was prematurly born after being in the womb only 24 weeks. The reason I was told not to do it was because they were afraid the stickers we use would tear the skin from the child. I do not expect the child to survive, but we are trying.

Tonight I had to do an EKG on a 8 year old child. Walking into the room I thought I was working on someone who was an extreme burn victim. Turns out the kid has a skin disease he has been living with. I couldn't get a very accurate reading because the child couldn't hold still. My very touch and the touch of the equipment caused pain. He kept apologizing for moving and not being able to hold still even though he was in a fair amount of pain.

After thinking about these situations and other things I have seen at the hospital, I have to wonder; Are we doing the right thing by letting some patients (of all ages) live? I see children who WILL die on their hospital bed. The only reason they haven't done so right away is because the parents can't let go yet and the child suffers. (On a colder note: It costs a fair sum of money to keep the child alive, only to die later). In other situations, they know the child will be born messed up. He will live for a few years messed up, he will visit the ICU multiple times in his young life, and he will die young. I could go on, but I believe you guys get the gist of it.

Should we let patients die? (Unless they request medical aid) Sometimes I look at the situation of some people and I think "state (or parent) sponsered torture". Regardless of your views on abortion, suicide, and the death penelty, how can we force people to basically endure torture on their way to death? Are we as a society so hung up on ideology, the thought of dieing, and trying to "respect" life that we can't see what is happening in front of us? Are there cases where the best way to honor and respect life is to end it?

There are so many factors and sides to this issue that I could go into, but I will stop there and see if anyone has their .02 to throw in. Mostly I just needed to vent and let this all out. Thank you all for listening.

 

[KenpoEMT]

The reason I was told not to do it was because they were afraid the stickers we use would tear the skin from the child. I do not expect the child to survive, but we are trying.

...I thought I was working on someone who was an extreme burn victim. Turns out the kid has a skin disease he has been living with. ...My very touch and the touch of the equipment caused pain. He kept apologizing for moving and not being able to hold still even though he was in a fair amount of pain.

I see children who WILL die on their hospital bed. The only reason they haven't done so right away is because the parents can't let go yet and the child suffers. ...In other situations, they know the child will be born messed up. He will live for a few years messed up, he will visit the ICU multiple times in his young life, and he will die young.
Should we let patients die? (Unless they request medical aid) Sometimes I look at the situation of some people and I think "state (or parent) sponsered torture". Regardless of your views on abortion, suicide, and the death penelty, how can we force people to basically endure torture on their way to death? Are we as a society so hung up on ideology, the thought of dieing, and trying to "respect" life that we can't see what is happening in front of us? Are there cases where the best way to honor and respect life is to end it?

Ahhhhhhh, the siren song of euthanasia...

You are welcome to vent here. It is good to let the frustration out a little bit.

how can we force people to...endure...

Allowing people to live does not equate torture. Life is filled with suffering.

I could go either way with regard to those who are on life support. We all are supposed to die eventually; however, let us not be to hasty in turning off the power. Parents are supposed to have hope. Hope in doctors. Hope in a God. Hope in miracles. I say, let us parents have our hope and faith. It isn't selfish to have hope. Unexpected recoveries do happen...even if they don't happen often.
...and then we can grieve knowing that we did everything that could be done for our child.

Suffering is a part of this life. We all suffer in one form or another...we all do. Should we end the life of one who suffers simply because we cannot bear to watch? Children with cancer are often times stronger than their parents and those that treat them.

Who decides where the limit is? What form of suffering can we, in good conscience, provide euthanasia for? I have an associate that honestly believes that children in abusive situations should be euthanized. Does her opinion (as insane as it is) count? Does she get to have a hand in deciding the limits of medicinal euthanasia? ...and why not? She can't bear to watch children suffer either.

What is my answer to your question? Do our level best to let them live. Do our best to provide hope in a hopeless situation. Try like hell to pull a miracle out of our butts. Give them dignity.
...and try to hold on to our humanity.

 

[Simon Curran]

Feel free to vent, you've earned it.

I'm not a parent, so I obviously can't see things so well from a parent's point of view, but for what it's worth, I agree with you that people of any age should not be exposed to the kind of physical torture you are refering to.
That being said, I can understand the loved ones not wanting to let go easily, and at the end of the day, as Theban Legion stated, they are just hoping beyond hope, and that is their right.

 

[Shu2jack]

Allowing people to live does not equate torture. Life is filled with suffering.

I could go either way with regard to those who are on life support. We all are supposed to die eventually; however, let us not be to hasty in turning off the power. Parents are supposed to have hope. Hope in doctors. Hope in a God. Hope in miracles. I say, let us parents have our hope and faith. It isn't selfish to have hope. Unexpected recoveries do happen...even if they don't happen often.
...and then we can grieve knowing that we did everything that could be done for our child.

Allowing people to live doesn't equate to torture. Forcing people to live who will die or wish to die because of extreme physical pain/angiush is torture. I am not saying to be hasty in turning off the switch or that having hope is selfish. I contantly see cases where the children will die and they are in pain. IF by some miracle they will live, they get too look forward to a life in the ICU or in constant pain/discomfort. If a person wishes this for themself, then that is fine. In the case of infants/small children the parents have to make the decision and it is a decision that is clouded. You said, "...and then we can grieve knowing that we did everything that could be done for our child." That is all well and good. But is what YOU need, not always what the child needs.

I guess it depends on your views. A family member once said that suicide is selfish because a person's death will effect and hurt everyone, the person killing themselves are only thinking of what they want. I replied, if a person is truly suffering and within all reason there will not be relief outside of death, then you are being selfish. You want this person to continue to live (and suffer) so you feel better.

Children with cancer are often times stronger than their parents and those that treat them.

Who decides where the limit is? What form of suffering can we, in good conscience, provide euthanasia for? I have an associate that honestly believes that children in abusive situations should be euthanized. Does her opinion (as insane as it is) count? Does she get to have a hand in deciding the limits of medicinal euthanasia? ...and why not? She can't bear to watch children suffer either.

I am not talking about cancer level suffering. I have worked on some cancer patients and worked with some of the kids in our "Psych" ward. These kids are cool.

I can bear to watch children suffer. I work in a hospital, so I have to. My concern is where do you draw the line? The difference between the abused kids and the ones I am talking about is that the abused kids can gain some for of recovery and could continue on to live fufilling and productive lives. The kids I am talking about will not.

What is my answer to your question? Do our level best to let them live. Do our best to provide hope in a hopeless situation. Try like hell to pull a miracle out of our butts. Give them dignity.
...and try to hold on to our humanity.

But that is my problem. Are we giving them dignity? Are we holding on to our humanity? I have always considered mercy to be a very human thing.

 

[Shaolinwind]

My first instinct is to put someone like that out of their misery. I think a lot of families keep their doomed relatives alive out of pure, miserable selfishness.

I am starting this topic partly to vent and partly to get other's view on the subject.

I work at a children's hospital as a blood gas tech and EKG technician on the night shift. Last night I was able to avoid doing an EKG on a child who was prematurly born after being in the womb only 24 weeks. The reason I was told not to do it was because they were afraid the stickers we use would tear the skin from the child. I do not expect the child to survive, but we are trying.

Tonight I had to do an EKG on a 8 year old child. Walking into the room I thought I was working on someone who was an extreme burn victim. Turns out the kid has a skin disease he has been living with. I couldn't get a very accurate reading because the child couldn't hold still. My very touch and the touch of the equipment caused pain. He kept apologizing for moving and not being able to hold still even though he was in a fair amount of pain.

After thinking about these situations and other things I have seen at the hospital, I have to wonder; Are we doing the right thing by letting some patients (of all ages) live? I see children who WILL die on their hospital bed. The only reason they haven't done so right away is because the parents can't let go yet and the child suffers. (On a colder note: It costs a fair sum of money to keep the child alive, only to die later). In other situations, they know the child will be born messed up. He will live for a few years messed up, he will visit the ICU multiple times in his young life, and he will die young. I could go on, but I believe you guys get the gist of it.

Should we let patients die? (Unless they request medical aid) Sometimes I look at the situation of some people and I think "state (or parent) sponsered torture". Regardless of your views on abortion, suicide, and the death penelty, how can we force people to basically endure torture on their way to death? Are we as a society so hung up on ideology, the thought of dieing, and trying to "respect" life that we can't see what is happening in front of us? Are there cases where the best way to honor and respect life is to end it?

There are so many factors and sides to this issue that I could go into, but I will stop there and see if anyone has their .02 to throw in. Mostly I just needed to vent and let this all out. Thank you all for listening.

 

[Bigshadow]

As a parent, I would want to know that I have exhausted every available option before something like that. My view point was different when I didn't have children. NOW, I can *SEE* why parents think the way they do. Unfortunately, human capacity of intelligence and compassion has pretty much taken us out of the process of natural selection. Natural selection for humans is now in human hands. Yes, I agree that in some cases our compassion clouds our decision making abilities. When it comes to children they have hardly begun to live. It is natural for parents to want to ensure their survival. So, I can understand why parents would want to do everything they can.

On the topic of suicide, I firmly believe suicide is a selfishness. In my opinion it is also weak minded. The reason I believe suicide is selfishness is because that person is getting out of their responsibility to themselves and thier families. On many levels each person in a family is a piece of the family puzzle. They have certain responsibilities toward one another. To "Checkout" is to say, I am weak and I only care about myself and nobody else. Each person in a family is bound there, to remove yourself, is to be selfish, because to stay and endure is giving of self for the greater cause. Suicide is for the selfish and WEAK minded.

 

[Shaolinwind]

I dig, but I don't know if the "what about everyone else" argument holds up when someone has no skin and a whole bunch of medium rare muscle tissue.

As a parent, I would want to know that I have exhausted every available option before something like that. My view point was different when I didn't have children. NOW, I can *SEE* why parents think the way they do. Unfortunately, human capacity of intelligence and compassion has pretty much taken us out of the process of natural selection. Natural selection for humans is now in human hands. Yes, I agree that in some cases our compassion clouds our decision making abilities. When it comes to children they have hardly begun to live. It is natural for parents to want to ensure their survival. So, I can understand why parents would want to do everything they can.

On the topic of suicide, I firmly believe suicide is a selfishness. In my opinion it is also weak minded. The reason I believe suicide is selfishness is because that person is getting out of their responsibility to themselves and thier families. On many levels each person in a family is a piece of the family puzzle. They have certain responsibilities toward one another. To "Checkout" is to say, I am weak and I only care about myself and nobody else. Each person in a family is bound there, to remove yourself, is to be selfish, because to stay and endure is giving of self for the greater cause. Suicide is for the selfish and WEAK minded.

 

[Loki]

A family member once said that suicide is selfish because a person's death will effect and hurt everyone, the person killing themselves are only thinking of what they want. I replied, if a person is truly suffering and within all reason there will not be relief outside of death, then you are being selfish. You want this person to continue to live (and suffer) so you feel better.

Excellent excellent quote. Well said.

I'm not a parent, but I feel for you. I have an adorable 11 month old cousin who I know I'd do anything to save if anything happened to her. But there's a point where saving is no longer an option. I don't believe in miracles, I believe in statistical improbabilities. Are they worth keeping a suffering person alive for? Not always.

If your point was euthanasia, then I think in some cases that merits serious consideration. We do it for our pets when they're suffering beyond relief, why can't we do it for humans?

 

[Phoenix44]

Sidestepping the issue of euthanasia, I think it's a different issue when we are artificially keeping a suffering person alive against his or her will. For example, ventilators and tube feeding for someone in pain with a terminal disease who would rather let nature take its course. I'm not talking, for example, of giving a gigantic dose of morphine. I'm talking about removing artificial life support. To me, there's a difference.

I was also bothered by the situation of some extremely premature babies in neonatal intensive care units. We sustain them with ventilators, antibiotics, transfusions, chest tubes, catheters, tube feedings. They have infections, respiratory problems, brain hemorrhages. Then 6 mos or a year later we congratulate ourselves as we hand a (frequently) teen mom a VERY damaged infant requiring round the clock care, while expecting the mom to scrape up the finances to pay for it all! Seems to me that if our society makes the decision to do that, then society should be willing to pick up the cost. Sometimes we are, but frequently we are not.

 

[Rich Parsons]

It is Humane to put your pet down, but it is Humane to keep your family member alive.

I agree this has more to do with selfishness and feelings and pain of the family.


I am in favor of Physician assisted suicide.

Yet, I see gain in what is done with these people while they still live. Improvements in science and treatments have occurred becuase an understanding no matter how limited, was found and then people tried to improve. This helped the next generation, and they intern have helped the next.


Although there comes a point when the quality of life, is no longer of a value to the individual, and I believe they should with review from physicians be given the choice. And for those who can not decide for themselves, or are minors, or too young, I believe the parents and legal guardians should be able to stop treatments or turn off life support machines once again with the review of physicians.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Allowing people to live doesn't equate to torture. Forcing people to live who will die or wish to die because of extreme physical pain/angiush is torture. I am not saying to be hasty in turning off the switch or that having hope is selfish. I contantly see cases where the children will die and they are in pain. IF by some miracle they will live, they get too look forward to a life in the ICU or in constant pain/discomfort. If a person wishes this for themself, then that is fine. In the case of infants/small children the parents have to make the decision and it is a decision that is clouded. You said, "...and then we can grieve knowing that we did everything that could be done for our child." That is all well and good. But is what YOU need, not always what the child needs.

I guess it depends on your views. A family member once said that suicide is selfish because a person's death will effect and hurt everyone, the person killing themselves are only thinking of what they want. I replied, if a person is truly suffering and within all reason there will not be relief outside of death, then you are being selfish. You want this person to continue to live (and suffer) so you feel better.






I am not talking about cancer level suffering. I have worked on some cancer patients and worked with some of the kids in our "Psych" ward. These kids are cool.

I can bear to watch children suffer. I work in a hospital, so I have to. My concern is where do you draw the line? The difference between the abused kids and the ones I am talking about is that the abused kids can gain some for of recovery and could continue on to live fufilling and productive lives. The kids I am talking about will not.


But that is my problem. Are we giving them dignity? Are we holding on to our humanity? I have always considered mercy to be a very human thing.

Thought you were looking to vent. I was just attempting to add a different perspective. Believe what you want.

I could go either way with regard to those who are on life support. We all are supposed to die eventually

What I generally find from the euthanasia crowd is that they are willing to kill someone before all options for saving their life are exhausted.

Are you a parent?

As a parent, I can say that there comes a time to let a child go, but NO ONE will dictate to me when that time is. I will explore every option of treatment for my little ones. I will fight on my daughter's/son's behalf when they are not able to. I will strive to give my children life. You call that selfishness. I call it being a parent that loves his/her child.
...and if the time comes (when all of their suffering is pointless, when there truely is no future except life support machines for them) to let them go...I will.

Don't try to make me out to be some crazy ogre. You aren't the only one on this board that's in the health field. Again, believe what you want.

 

[Phoenix44]

"The Euthanasia Crowd?"

I am a parent. I had a child on life support. This was shortly after the Baby Doe case, where the US Dept of HHS decided it had the right to interfere in the personal decisions of a family in such tragic circumstances. Our doctors contemplated indefinite ventilation, tube feeding, all kinds of medications.

My daughter, mercifully, died peacefully.

I pray you will never be in this position. I assure you, you have no idea what it's like. So I'll thank you not to call me one of "The Euthanasia Crowd."

 

[KenpoEMT]

"The Euthanasia Crowd?"

I am a parent. I had a child on life support. This was shortly after the Baby Doe case, where the US Dept of HHS decided it had the right to interfere in the personal decisions of a family in such tragic circumstances. Our doctors contemplated indefinite ventilation, tube feeding, all kinds of medications.

My daughter, mercifully, died peacefully.

I already answered this:

As a parent, I can say that there comes a time to let a child go, but NO ONE will dictate to me when that time is. I will explore every option of treatment for my little ones. I will fight on my daughter's/son's behalf when they are not able to. I will strive to give my children life. You call that selfishness. I call it being a parent that loves his/her child.
...and if the time comes (when all of their suffering is pointless, when there truely is no future except life support machines for them) to let them go...I will.

I pray you will never be in this position. I assure you, you have no idea what it's like. So I'll thank you not to call me one of "The Euthanasia Crowd."

I hope I am never in that position too. I did not call you one of the "euthanasia crowd." It was a general statement that I find to be true.

 

[Bigshadow]

I dig, but I don't know if the "what about everyone else" argument holds up when someone has no skin and a whole bunch of medium rare muscle tissue.

Unless I am forgetting what I wrote, I am pretty sure that was taken from the paragraph where I was giving my opinion of suicide, not the initial topic.

To be honest, if my child was in the situation you describe above, I DON'T know what I would do. I hope I never have to go through that.

 

[Shu2jack]

Thought you were looking to vent. I was just attempting to add a different perspective. Believe what you want.

I was venting. Your made it seem like you thought I was being weak willed and suggested killing patients every time they have a serious "boo-boo". I suppose we misunderstood each other.

What I generally find from the euthanasia crowd is that they are willing to kill someone before all options for saving their life are exhausted.

In both the cases I mentioned and in the things I was referring to, none of their lives were going to be saved. If they had a miracle, it would be that they would be ok enough to go home to die.

Are you a parent?

As a parent, I can say that there comes a time to let a child go, but NO ONE will dictate to me when that time is. I will explore every option of treatment for my little ones. I will fight on my daughter's/son's behalf when they are not able to. I will strive to give my children life. You call that selfishness. I call it being a parent that loves his/her child.
...and if the time comes (when all of their suffering is pointless, when there truely is no future except life support machines for them) to let them go...I will.

No, I am not a parent.

I can understand fighting for your child's life. I am not saying we shouldn't. The situations I am referring to is the one you described as to when you would let go. When it is pointless and there is life support machines only. (And I have seen worse cases.) The problem is (that I see) is that parents and family DON'T let go. No matter what, that person WILL be kept alive.

Don't try to make me out to be some crazy ogre. You aren't the only one on this board that's in the health field. Again, believe what you want.

I will belive what I want, thank you and I realize I am not the only one on this board that is in the medical field. I wasn't trying to make you out to be a crazy orge. It seemed like you were making me out to be some heartless thug who wanted to kill patients just because they hurt.

 

[KenpoEMT]

I was venting. Your made it seem like you thought I was being weak willed and suggested killing patients every time they have a serious "boo-boo". I suppose we misunderstood each other.


In both the cases I mentioned and in the things I was referring to, none of their lives were going to be saved. If they had a miracle, it would be that they would be ok enough to go home to die.

Apparently we have had a miscommunication, and we agree on this issue.

I can understand fighting for your child's life. I am not saying we shouldn't. The situations I am referring to is the one you described as to when you would let go. When it is pointless and there is life support machines only. (And I have seen worse cases.) The problem is (that I see) is that parents and family DON'T let go. No matter what, that person WILL be kept alive.

...and we agree again.

I wasn't trying to make you out to be a crazy orge. It seemed like you were making me out to be some heartless thug who wanted to kill patients just because they hurt.

A miscommunication. No harm done. We are not very far apart on this issue.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I was going to try and type an intelligent reply to this subject, but I couldn't think of one. All that came to mind is that I would try to keep my own daughter alive as long as I could. The very thought of intentionally severing that tie to life takes me to a place of pain I really don't want to contemplate. I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Shaolinwind]

Unless I am forgetting what I wrote, I am pretty sure that was taken from the paragraph where I was giving my opinion of suicide, not the initial topic.

I gotcha, I assumed you meant any suicide, assisted or otherwise.

To be honest, if my child was in the situation you describe above, I DON'T know what I would do. I hope I never have to go through that.

I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Kids give you great incentive to drive safe and check the batteries in the smoke detector though, don't they?

 

[Bigshadow]

I gotcha, I assumed you meant any suicide, assisted or otherwise.

I was talking suicide of the normal healthy individual that chooses it because they lack the fortitude to stick through the temporary problem. I do realize there are times when people are in a position where there is NO hope of a life beyond their medical condition and do not wish to burden their loved ones with their care, so that they can have a very painful existence at best. If they choose then so be it, I don't think I would see that as being weak. However, I could not imagine a child having those thoughts, no matter how dire their situation. I don't think children think like that.

I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Kids give you great incentive to drive safe and check the batteries in the smoke detector though, don't they?

Yes, children make life very fulfilling!