Points up the need for legal euthanasia

Post #199,534 by tuberculosis 3/19/05 1:44:48 PM Reply	Points up the need for legal euthanasia Because, you're right, the feeding tube option is barbaric and will drag on for something like a month (you have to keep her hydrated because dehydration really is agony). That said, if a nurse won't do it, show the family member how. I'd do it for mine. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
Post #199,537 by mmoffitt 3/19/05 2:27:26 PM Reply	Would training be necessary? The intent is to kill her, yes? Withhold food from a family member. I still don't know if I could do that. I think it might be because I know better than most that allopathic medicine is not what it is commonly understood to be. It's an experiment - and not too damned good of one at that. Most people (no implication for the folks here) believe physicians actually know why they are doing what they do when caring for a patient. In addition, most hold that physicians understand what their treatments do. That this attitude is prevalent is indicative of how successful the Memorization Doctorates have been at conning the public. What your typical md knows is: Patient exhibits symptoms X, Y and Z. The PDR says (or the OTJ training they got as residents and interns) that in such a case we do treatments A and B. Ask them why and the honest response is that of 1,000 people with symptoms X, Y and Z treated with A and B, 700 got better, 200 didn't get worse and only 100 died. With so much knowledge lacking among our medical "professionals" I can't see how I could ever be convinced by them that starving a relative was the "best" course of action. bcnu, Mikem Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer. God Bless America.
Post #199,539 by tuberculosis 3/19/05 3:43:53 PM 3/19/05 3:49:23 PM Reply	Not kill, let her go - she's already dead. Withdrawal of support (feeding tube, respirator, stabilizing medication, etc) is the only legal option for allowing someone to die now. All but the feeding tube will typically result in death in minutes. Starvation will take days. That sucks. Why can't we use the same lethal injection protocol used for capitol punishment? Its specifically designed to be humane (unlike starvation) and I see no difference between this and "putting down" a terminally ill animal. "It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets" --Voltaire "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush Edited by tuberculosis March 19, 2005, 03:49:23 PM EST Expand All History
Post #199,575 by Ashton 3/20/05 1:42:33 AM Reply	Re: Would training be necessary? The intent is to kill her, My 'M' 'D' experience is similar to your take. That's not the issue here, though. The issue is analogous to the Brompton Cocktail cock-up - whereby US MDs cannot prescribe its most effective ingredient (heroin / diacetyl morphine) but must use the Disneyland pharm-chem PC substitutes. Data be damned: DEA + maudlin sentimentality Rulez the stunted Murican psyche. This is about the (equally unavailable option) of using the same 2-stage process used to humanely off (other) animals - the first shot is a nice feel-good narcotic which produces unconsciousness; the second is lethal via mentioned K/Na imbalance - intentionally. (Ms. Gray died in my arms (a neat, feisty cat - with mouth cancer from a #&^$& "flea" collar) with her face nuzzled into my hands, even before the feel-good shot. It would have been criminal Not-to have ended her suffering. But then, animals deserve the better treatment in these circumstances - they've never built a nuke, so they are morally superior, hence deserve the Best.) It took less than 2 minutes, allowing for my insistence that she enjoy some final period pain-free, before the end. Fundies will continue to obsess on these and all other issues, while perpetually ignoring all grander issues (like say, the 100K+ casualties of all ethnic stripes including WASP, in just our first pair of Neoconman Wars). We see there is no solution to the latter; probably not to the former, for any foreseeable - given the demise of any sort of Representational Republic. May more and more of the young coalesce around.. How do I get out of this Chickenhawk Outfit?
Post #199,698 by mmoffitt 3/21/05 9:12:45 AM Reply	It does have at least something to do with MD's... and their art. For, are we not relying upon them to determine "the vegetative state"? I'm reminded of how far off these vaunted "professionals" were wrt anesthesia (they can't hear us, except, oops, some of them can). We can, of course, never be certain what is going on in her mind - if anything. And I believe it can reasonably be argued that until we are that certain, starving her to death may not be the most humane option. And - most of all in this case - keep in mind that whatever our positions on this issue are, we have all made them in a vacuum. Not a single one of us has seen her or her medical records. Relying upon the press for this sort of necessary background is as full of folly as relying on Tom Delay imo. bcnu, Mikem Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer. God Bless America.

Welcome to IWETHEY!