Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
"Death With Dignity" laws...my sister is irate!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 350393" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>Perhaps the points to hold onto here, are "informed choice".</p><p></p><p>We need choice and the right to choose. But it needs to be fully informed choice. And we need to be sure, for others, tat they had full information of all available choices. Building in choice is vital, but it is easy to forget that some of those involved can have a vested interest in guiding a patient's decision in ways tat could risk removing free choice. An elderly relative whose care is going to be a financial burden, perhaps. Or who is leaving a great deal in her will which will be a lot less after expensive treatments to prolong her life have used up funds. Or pressure on a patient by medical staff who need the bed vacated...</p><p></p><p>On the other side - we don't want our last days spent in futile screaming agony, just to keep someone else's moral code happy. I know I don't.</p><p></p><p>I have considered suicide in the past, mostly because of the pain I was in. I can look back now and I'm glad I'm still here. I am grateful now for good palliative care which focusses primarily on keeping me comfortable and functioning. But I'm also aware that there are idiots in the medical profession who see my pain regime now, as dangerous (ie the rheumatologist who seemed to think I would be healthier on long-term prednisone, than long-term morphine - the "morphine" scares some people who really should know better).</p><p></p><p>Whatever system is voted in to allow legal "informed choice", it needs to be well supervised to ensure that nobody is pressured unduly, either way.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 350393, member: 1991"] Perhaps the points to hold onto here, are "informed choice". We need choice and the right to choose. But it needs to be fully informed choice. And we need to be sure, for others, tat they had full information of all available choices. Building in choice is vital, but it is easy to forget that some of those involved can have a vested interest in guiding a patient's decision in ways tat could risk removing free choice. An elderly relative whose care is going to be a financial burden, perhaps. Or who is leaving a great deal in her will which will be a lot less after expensive treatments to prolong her life have used up funds. Or pressure on a patient by medical staff who need the bed vacated... On the other side - we don't want our last days spent in futile screaming agony, just to keep someone else's moral code happy. I know I don't. I have considered suicide in the past, mostly because of the pain I was in. I can look back now and I'm glad I'm still here. I am grateful now for good palliative care which focusses primarily on keeping me comfortable and functioning. But I'm also aware that there are idiots in the medical profession who see my pain regime now, as dangerous (ie the rheumatologist who seemed to think I would be healthier on long-term prednisone, than long-term morphine - the "morphine" scares some people who really should know better). Whatever system is voted in to allow legal "informed choice", it needs to be well supervised to ensure that nobody is pressured unduly, either way. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
"Death With Dignity" laws...my sister is irate!
Top