What are your views about stopping life support when there is no hope of ever recovering. Example: Multiple heart attack victim who has terminal cancer, not breathing on own, not concience, totally unresponsive with no outlook of ever being coherant again, or mostly brain dead. Please be honest in your replies/ views. I am facing this situation and need feedback. (This has taught me to force all of my friends and other family members to have advanced directives)
***************************************************
06-21-04, 10:13 PM
jusork
I'd let them go. I see no problem with ending someone's life that they will never be using (or using in an active way even a little). Why would anyone want to live a few more years just by sleeping through them and never waking up again. You're just sleeping right up until your whole body is eventually done?

06-21-04, 10:28 PM
coldfuse
The hospital is the only beneficiary of keeping this individual alive. The decision to pull the plug will be among the most difficult you ever face, but I believe it is morally sound.

06-22-04, 12:12 AM
shelster
I have seen this situation many times and my family had to go through it as well. Thank goodness my grandma made her wishes well known.

Many times, it is more torture to keep a person alive in that state. Imagine relying on a machine to keep you breathing....What is the goal of keeping this person alive? What is the best outcome? What would this person do if the situation were reversed? Those are important questions when dealing with a family who has a tough time deciding.

If this person is brain dead, no hope for recovery....they will not suffer when taken off the life support. He/She will just slowly stop breathing.

06-22-04, 01:27 AM
DvdGStwrt
The humane thing, the honorable thing, the right thing is to let go and let God or Nature conclude a life.

I am also all for euthanasia, where a terminally ill patient takes the easier way out and by passes a long period of suffering when things get bad. There is a certain amount of dignity that terminal illness can steal from a person. Should they desire a swift painless end to it to preserve their dignity or to end the pain, then the right thing is to honor that request with love.

Both are humane, are the respectful things I would want for myself and I expect no less for others. To allow death to take place is a loving act at times, this is one of those times. Not only for the patient, but for the family and friends who are waiting for that final shoe to fall and need closure in order to move on in their own lives. The illusion of life, a mechanical existence which keeps a body going when it doesn't want to is a false hope, one that stops time and lives and effects all involved, Family, friends, nurses, doctors - all are suffering their own part in this, all are helpless to do anything more.

David

06-22-04, 05:01 PM
honilov
In cases like this, I say pull the plug. We made that decision once with my brother and it's sad to pull it, but it's better.
I'm so sorry that you are faced with this situation, but it's best to pull the plug and let the healing process begin for the family.

(((((Angela)))))

06-22-04, 05:13 PM
MommyTimesTwo
Definitely pull the plug. I watched my healthy, vibrant grandfather waste away to an incoherent skeleton from cancer. He begged us to kill him. It's the only humane thing to do.

If I can put my dog down when it is sick, why can't I also free my loved ones?

06-23-04, 09:45 AM
Georgia85
To each his own but personally I don't want the plug pulled on me nor would I do it for any of my loved ones. I figure that when it my time to go I will so why rush it by physically taking away what is keeping me alive. I believe in miracles and one never knows what might happen. However, there reaches a time where the body will actually start decomposing and at that point then it becomes necessary to end life support.

06-23-04, 09:56 AM
MommyTimesTwo
Georgia

I'm not challenging you at all, I'm curious: why would you want to be trapped in a body that is dead? Medical "miracles" can keep a body from decomposing or otherwise changing for decades after brain death. Wouldn't you want to move on?

06-23-04, 10:40 AM
shelster
To agree with something Georgia said..there comes a point where no life support will keep a body alive. I mean, if a person needs a ventilator to stay alive, eventually their heart and kidneys will fail as well.

So, life support to that degree will not keep a body alive forever.

HOwever, I have had two patients that lived for 20 years just with the aid of a tube feeding, and they had no sign of comprehension, no family to visit them in a nursing home, and had to rely on people turning them every two hours to keep their skin from breaking down.

I would rather be shot than live like that.

06-23-04, 10:49 AM
juanruiz
"not breathing on own, not concience, totally unresponsive with no outlook of ever being coherant again, or mostly brain dead."

These being the circumstances, I'd want the plug pulled on me.

06-23-04, 10:56 AM
MommyTimesTwo
I wanted to say that I hope everyone here who does want to have the plug pulled has a Living Will, signed and notarized, available and known by your spouse or loved ones.

Just having your spouse or your family know your wishes isn't enough. In most states, you have to have the living will or they can't follow your wishes, no matter who knows them or what you've said. There are a multitude of horror stories out there about people who had an unexpected accident or illness and are still being kept alive against their stated wishes for lack of this single piece of paper.

I hope nothing ever happens to anyone in here, but accidents do happen. One year ago my dad was just out riding his motorcycle when a dog ran in front of the car my dad was behind. The car swerved, and my dad didn't have time to react. He ended up flipping over the bike and the bike landed on top of him (and we're talking a Harley here--that's a whole lot of bike!) He had crushed ribs and a punctured lung, along with a concussion. They weren't sure he was going to make it. Thank God he's okay now, but it was at that moment in the hospital when they said they didn't know if he was going to wake up that my mother and sister realized that, if he were put on life support, there was nothing they could do about it. Even though they know he wouldn't want it, he didn't have a living will. (He does now!)

Protect yourself and your family and write it down.

06-23-04, 07:08 PM
frankvan
Thou shalt not kill
But need not strive
Officiously to keep alive.

06-24-04, 11:33 AM
samantha
I belive you and your doctors know when its time to let the person go. When we have to keep them alive by mechanical means and they are brain dead is that really living? This can be one of the hardest decissions to make when i was working when i was working at OSU i had seen this myself several times. I wish you the best but, everyone has to do what THEY think is best.

06-24-04, 02:53 PM
Georgia85
I do have my living will and to answer your question Mx2, while I may want to "move on" it is not my decision to make when it is my time to go.

06-24-04, 02:58 PM
MommyTimesTwo
George

Neither is it a doctor's place to prolong your life beyond that point.

Which is besides the point. I'm glad you have a living will. Smile

06-28-04, 03:53 PM
Elexina
I completely support it. I recommend that everyone let their families know what their wishes are as soon as possible, in case anything traumatic does happen. But if a person is comatose and has no chance at a meaningful life and is likely suffering, I think it is merciful to pull the plug.

06-28-04, 04:04 PM
juanruiz
"I recommend that everyone let their families know what their wishes are as soon as possible, in case anything traumatic does happen."

You have to do more than that...word of mouth is not legally binding. You need a living will, and a DNR form.

06-29-04, 07:59 AM
shelster
Unfortunately Juan, nothing is ever that black and white.

I have seen situations where the person had a DNR, and a living will, but they also had a family who was hysterical and arguing it. In that case, the doctor will perform CPR and heroic measures to bring them back. It rarely works, but it is still done.

In the medical field sometimes its difficult to walk the line between legal and ethical. What might be legal, is not necessarily ethical when the children of the person dying are standing there begging you to bring them back. And you dont have time to rationalize, or explain things to them, you must react immediately. I am not saying its right, just the way it is.

The best advice I can give....discuss not only cpr, organ donation, and ventilators, tube feeds etc...but also death itself. Take the fear out of death and the fear out of talking about it. So if that time (God forbid) should come, no one has any question of your feelings.

If you aren't afraid of death, your family won't be as afraid of letting you go.

My family knows I am more afraid of pain and suffering than I am of death.

06-29-04, 07:33 PM
juanruiz
The whole point of a living will and a DNR is to express the wishes of the individual, not the family. If a doctor will not observe those wishes, then another should be found who will.

06-29-04, 08:17 PM
shelster
Pulling the plug
Oh, I agree with you Juan, but its just not the way it is most of the time.

06-29-04, 09:04 PM
babthrower
I think nature should take its course. We interfere when we artificially prolong the life of someone who would under normal conditions die. This interference is only justified if its purpose is to prolong a life that is conscious and hopeful. So we operate on a child with a defective heart, because surgically corrected it may keep the child alive for years.

But when we force some suffering person who is begging for it to be over to tolerate invasive and painful procedures, our interference is a sin.

06-30-04, 03:30 AM
Jelp01
I have a similar experience to MX2. I watched my dad die by inches of cancer. The last time I ever saw him, I didn't recognize him. I wished he'd died right then and there and was extremely agitated the next couple of days until he mercifully passed away. I say pull the plug and let them go. It would be a hard choice, but it would be one, in my opinion, that would need to be done.

06-30-04, 01:33 PM
Leppi
I guess I am in the minority hre. My belief of not pulling the plug though stems from my religious views. I believe that as long as The body has a soul, they are still alive and therefore there is no reason to pull the plug. Even if the person is brain dead, and completely reliant on life support, they still have a soul. Therefore, I wish to never ever have my plug pulled. As for the people who say, being trapped in the body for longer, aren't you trapped in your body now? I believe that our soul is meant to stay with our body for as long as possible.

06-30-04, 02:05 PM
babthrower
Leppi says:

"I believe that our soul is meant to stay with our body for as long as possible."

In that respect, then, you surpass mother nature and even god himself. Neither of them have qualms about keeping body and soul together as long as possible. Must be nice for you.

It is only since mankind began interfering with the process of life through the science of medicine that lives have been unnaturally extended. Left to nature and to god, people die in droves.

06-30-04, 02:12 PM
Leppi
I do not believe I am surpassing G-d. I believe I am fulfilling G-d's will by keeping the body alive.

06-30-04, 03:21 PM
babthrower
You think that it is god's will to keep the body alive? It's not one of the commandments. The commandment says 'thou shalt not kill'. It does not say that one must strive to keep body and soul together. How did god communicate his wishes to you?

06-30-04, 03:23 PM
Leppi
Living is about keeping the body and soul together. Killing is about seperating the body and soul.

06-30-04, 03:56 PM
MommyTimesTwo
Leppi

When someone is brain dead, do you know their soul is still in their body? When someone is dying and being artifically kept alive, where they have machines breathing for them and making their hearts beat, can you truely say that is being "alive"?

It seems that when God tries to call people, doctors interviene and prevent that from happening. Saving someone's life is one thing. Forcing the empty shell of their body to continue to breath once all life has gone is quite another.

06-30-04, 04:06 PM
Georgia85
"Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple." (1 Corinthians 3:16-17 NIV)
~~~~~~
"Show me, O LORD, my life's end and the number of my days; let me know how fleeting is my life." (Psalm 39:4 NIV)

"My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." (Psalm 139:15-16 NIV)

These talk about God knowing how long your life will be. He knows because He decided. When someone decides to pull the plug they are taking that decision away from God. That is why I believe the way that I do. You can interpret the verses any way you want to. And they can mean different things to different people. But I just wanted to share them with you.

06-30-04, 06:34 PM
MommyTimesTwo
To be honest, I read them to say it should be God's decision when you die. Which is probably why suicide is considered sinful. I look at keeping a brain dead body on life support as just as bad as suicide. Either way, someone is playing God.

06-30-04, 07:46 PM
frankvan
Let me ty to understand this. If I believe someone is brain dead, being kept alive against their wishes by artificial means, and I pull the plug, so to speak - I am thwarting God's will to keep them 'alive'. On the other hand, if someone is bleeding to death and I prevent that from happening by timely application of a tourniquet, I am merely an instrument for carrying out "God's will'. If God is indeed omnipotent, how come he gets the credit for the happy endings and mere man gets the blame for the unhappy outcomes?? In the words of Oscar Wilde: "Thank God I'm an atheist".

06-30-04, 08:54 PM
babthrower
And carrying Frankvan's line of reasoning further:

if it is god's will that we keep other people's body and soul together no matter what, going way beyond what god himself provided in the past, when people's life expectancy was about 40 years on average, even with the best medical care;

then that should be our life's work, and we should go wherever we need to go, and do whatever we need to do, to fulfil god's wish.

Then what are you doing posting on the internet, Leppi? Shouldn't you be in Afghanistan, finding the unexploded shells so that no further deaths will occur? Shouldn't you be in the city ghettos, getting drug users to stop, using force if necessary? (Remember, their wishes don't count.) Shouldn't you be in South Africa, where deaths due to AIDS has reached its highest level ever?

Believe me, you have a lot to do. You had better sell your computer and buy an airline ticket today, and go and keep souls in bodies. It's god's will.

06-30-04, 09:10 PM
samantha
But, isn't putting someone like we do that is brain dead on a ventilator playing God? Not taking them off? God didn't invent ventilators ..man did..

06-30-04, 09:19 PM
MommyTimesTwo
Exactly, Sammy.

When someone is brain dead, they are never going to get better. Never. That's why they need ventilators in the first place--their brain isn't even on automatic pilot. It's dead.

07-01-04, 05:31 AM
shelster
Ok, before everyone jumps all over Leppi, lets remember also, that if a person is brain dead, they are also not suffering....I tend to forget this as well.

There isn't anything wrong with keeping someone on life support until their other organs fail.

Its just not what I would want.

If its God's will, the other organs will fail as well.

I look at it this way (especially when it comes up at work). Nothing I can do will save a life if its Gods will that the person die. So, if it is his will,no ventilator will keep a person alive.

07-01-04, 07:13 AM
clarebear
I personally believe that if there was NO hope, then to pull the plug would be a humane thing to do. The hospitals are the ones who benefit from hopeless life support. Can you imagine how much money they make each day to keep a feeding tube and vent on a patient who is brain dead? Probably in the thousands!! Think of the money the family pays for years in copays. And what about those without insurance? The family depletes their savings and borrows from their home or their retirements or who KNOWS what else! I personally wouldn't want to put my family through that.

There is a song by Metallica called One. A man is kept on life support and wishes to die. In the video, the nurse finally pulls the plug and frees him.

Partial Lyrics*

... Back in the womb it’s much too real
In pumps life that I must feel
But can’t look forward to reveal
Look to the time when I’ll live

Fed through the tube that sticks in me
Just like a wartime novelty
Tied to machines that make me be
Cut this life off from me

Hold my breath as I wish for death
Oh please god,wake me...

Darkness imprisoning me
All that I see
Absolute horror
I cannot live
I cannot die
Trapped in myself
Body my holding cell....

I think it really would be like the song describes if someone could speak. If I was brain dead my heart would be singing that song. If I can not live and I can not die, it would be time for me to go. I would hope I would be set free.

*LyricsFreak.com

07-01-04, 07:49 AM
shelster
Clare, the hospital rarely makes money on a situation like that. Medicare and other insurances won't pay the full amount that is billed. There are man power hours that are lost in so many regards, nursing, medical, radiological as they are testing for brain death. Not to mention clergy and ethics committees.

In that song, the man is not brain dead, and it is his desire to die. In someone who is brain dead, there is no desire one way or another.

07-01-04, 08:26 AM
clarebear

quote:I think it really would be like the song describes if someone could speak. If I was brain dead my heart would be singing that song.



I said that is what it would feel like.

I stand by my opinion.

07-01-04, 01:48 PM
Leppi

quote:Originally posted by samantha:
God didn't invent ventilators ..man did..



I guess this is where we disagree. I believe that everything that happens in this world is because G-d wants it to happen. And that includes the invention of ventilators. G-d wanted there to be ventelators, and therefore that is why it was invented. And therefore, now that we have the means and ability to allow someone to continue living for longer, we should have thm live for longer.

quote: Originally posted by babthrower:
Then what are you doing posting on the internet, Leppi? Shouldn't you be in Afghanistan, finding the unexploded shells so that no further deaths will occur? Shouldn't you be in the city ghettos, getting drug users to stop, using force if necessary? (Remember, their wishes don't count.) Shouldn't you be in South Africa, where deaths due to AIDS has reached its highest level ever?

Believe me, you have a lot to do. You had better sell your computer and buy an airline ticket today, and go and keep souls in bodies. It's god's will.



Babs, I believe that I am doing my best to help people in the area where I live. and I do try to do that. Pulling the plug and selling my computer are to totally unrelated things. Why don't you sell your computer first?

07-01-04, 03:31 PM
babthrower
Pulling the plug
I'm not the one who's telling others what god wants, above and beyond what the bible tells them. Therefore I have different priorities from yours. I can keep my computer. Wink

07-01-04, 08:03 PM
frankvan
" G-d wanted there to be ventelators, and therefore that is why it was invented. And therefore, now that we have the means and ability to allow someone to continue living for longer, we should have thm live for longer."

How do you know when they satisfy your requirements? When has the 'soul' left the body? When rigor mortis sets in ? When they start to stink?

07-01-04, 10:33 PM
babthrower
No, no, Frank, I am afraid you are very wrong. Lazarus had been dead for four days, and stinketh when he was raised. So you see we cannot tell when the soul has separated from the body. So we must keep all corpses on life support -- forever! Of course that will mean bumping people who, from our crass materialistic point of view, are much more alive and who just need some intensive care for a day or so to set them on the road to recovery. But who are we to judge? So we have to have it on a first-come first-served basis, because it would be very wrong of us to presume to decide when someone is dead -- i.e. his soul has separated from his body.

So when someone is on life support, he must never be taken off it. Once someone's heart has stopped beating, and whose brain no longer generates waves, we must pump air into his lungs, put him on a cardiac bypass pump so that his blood will continue to circulate, feed him intravenously, put him on dialysis to compensate for his inoperative kidneys, have his bowels evacuated by manual extraction implements,put him on urinary catheters, preserve his skin from decay by daily swabbing with antiseptics and monitor his sepsis status at all times, have his blood shunted through an artificial liver machine to compensate for his failed liver, (alternatively we could give him a whole series of liver transplants from healthy donors, when one new liver becomes necrotized because of the condition of the surrounding tissues, hey, implant a new one!) monitor and continually adjust his glucose and insulin levels, and maintain in an antiseptic condition the network of intravenous lines, feeding tubes, nasogastric tubes, suction pumps, drains and catheters required to keep the patient's body from manifesting those distressing signs of decay which are so displeasing to the lord.

07-03-04, 01:00 PM
frankvan
Thanks, Bab. for clearing that up so nicely. But the next question that pops into my troublesome irreverent brain: Won't we put the poor undertakers out of business?? Are you sure G-d isn't French?

07-03-04, 04:12 PM
babthrower
The undertakers will just have to retrain as intensive care hospital workers. Actually there would be little retraining required; the procedures would be much the same,just running tubes in and exchanging fluids, except that this time the clients are never disposed of. The undertaking is perpetual.

07-04-04, 09:25 AM
kittypal
We just faced this a while back, my mom was very ill and did have a living will that was given to her doctors and we had a copy also..last time she was hospitalized they talked her into going on a ventilator to see if they could get her "through" it...when they took it off she was able to breathe, but not well....she said no more anything...they took her off the meds that helped her breathe and just doped her up so she wasn't in pain...I knew she wanted to go so I didn't try to talk her into anything...shw held on for four days and then died. I am greatful that her wishes were granted.

07-04-04, 10:29 AM
methos
If there is no chance of recovery, I see pulling the plug as the best thing. All that is being accomplished in that case by maintaining "life" support is allowing the family to live in denial. Ultimately, it would be healthier for them to say their goodbyes.

As for God's role.

If an omniscient God plans a miracle, pulling the plug will not stop Him.

If it is God's will that they were put on life support, it is every bit as much His will when they are taken off.

I don't expect everyone to agree with me, I only expect those responsible for carrying out my final wishes to carry them out.

04-25-05, 07:17 AM
justme
i am sorry to hear about your situation...
my opinion?
who are WE to take away someones life? were talking about a LIFE here...
its a tough decision - but i dont think its fair for us - humans - to take someones life away.
there is a purpose for that person being alive. even if its on a machine.

04-25-05, 08:24 AM
babthrower
Who are we, indeed. Who are we to try to interfere in the divine scheme of things by saving a life? For most of human existence, people succumbed to various plagues, to injuries sustained in battles and hunting, and to 'old age', and people accepted this as god's will. Medical care was mostly quite useless, and only served to comfort the subject, or to give psychological (placebo) support to his/her own immune system and healing mechanisms. Survival or death were in god's hands, and everyone understood and accepted that. God's will was done. People lived on average to about forty years. As in the lower animals, once one had passed one's breeding prime, one shuffled off.

Then along came that demon Science, and humans began to have an impact on the survival of the injured, the ill, and those whose bodies were becoming too ancient to function independently.

Now we keep people alive using 'heroic' means. This is clearly usurping decisions that beleong to god alone.

Let's give the power back to god. If we have faith, god will keep us alive as long as it is his will that we live, anyhow. I'm afraid that if we interfere, we will be sending the souls of those we 'save' straight to hell.

04-26-05, 07:25 AM
justme
Amen.

04-26-05, 03:46 PM
gerry

quote:
Originally posted by babthrower:
Who are we, indeed. Who are we to try to interfere in the divine scheme of things by saving a life?
Let's give the power back to god. If we have faith, god will keep us alive as long as it is his will that we live, anyhow. I'm afraid that if we interfere, we will be sending the souls of those we 'save' straight to hell.

Those of us who are not suicidal cling on to life as long as we can. We make every effort to save it, as long as it is reasonable to do so. No one except the weird and wicked would allow a sick baby to die without medical help...God would ask no less from us. So I don't understand your message about interfering with God's plan that we must all die someday according to His will.

04-26-05, 06:03 PM
babthrower
Gerry, I'm trying to point out the problem of trying to second-guess god.

People do far too much of that sort of thing as it is. If god had wanted to be clear to people, he would re-issue the testaments annually, like the telephone book, amended so that it will be really useful and up to date. JW's and Christians wouldn't have to argue about whether blood transfusions are 'eating' blood. As soon as the misunderstanding arose, god would clear it up. Ought the pope actually to rule the nations of the world, as one claimed in the papal bull known as Unam Sanctam? Or did he just really, really want to rule the world, and so he used god's will as his justification? Almost 700 years later, we still don't know for sure.

So I made quite a reasonable case, I think, that it can just as easily be called 'god's will' to let the brain-dead just slip away, and that to prevent it is man's arrogance.

This is a hot topic right now, pun intended, because of the influence the New Right has on American foreign policy. Shall we go in and nuke the Arab nations? Why certainly. It's god's will.

04-26-05, 06:58 PM
MrsS
Folks, I've been quiet on this 'til now because I firmly believe that "end of life choices" are a deeply personal matter and that it is both cruel and arrogant for outsiders (Politicians, evangelists, Church represntatives {besides the family's own clergy} and well meaning strangers) to try to impose their spin on an already unbearably painful crossroads.
If you believe in the ideal of continuing to breathe as long as possible, regardless of quality of life/chance of recovery, then by all means, put that in writing, make sure that your primary care physician,your lawyer,
clergy (if you have such), and your family know your wishes... If you do not want to cling to this mortal coil by artificial means, put THAT in writing, again make sure that the people who will be making this call for you know what you want.

No decision is "right" or "wrong" except the decision to intervene in the choice made by another person.

04-28-05, 09:32 AM
frankvan
The widespread acceptance of the wisdom of providing advanced directives and powers of attorney for health care isssues fails to address the question of the patient who fails to do either, or the one who leaves instructions that nothing is to interfere with his continued breathing and clinging to life by any available means. It seems perfectly reasonable to imagine a future where it becomes possible to keep someone who is brain dead but physically robust breathing and vegetating indefinitely. Don't we need some provision in law for the approved , and authorized pulling of the plug under such circumstances ? Confused

04-28-05, 10:13 AM
babthrower
The only thing I can think of to overcome the inertia of the current 'train' of thought is limited facilities. If a case became publicized in which, for example, an otherwise healthy infant who was injured and required a facility that was tied up tending to a brain-dead body, and had been tied up for so many years that all relatives who had known the body were dead, I suppose the irony would not fail to be appreciated.

But short of that, I'm afraid a vitiated sentiment will continue to dominate thought in North America. I think the Europeans may have more sense.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,