UK's Death Pathway (Infant Death ment.) - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: UK's Death Pathway (Infant Death ment.)

  1. #11
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    This whole thread is a reminder about why I support euthanasia. If a terminal illness comes to the point where everyone (doctors, the patient, or the legal guardians of the patient) agree that the patient is so terminally ill that they should cut off all means of sustaining life, why on earth do we have to put people through the suffering of waiting for them to die of lack of food or water??? Why don't we give them a large dose of morphine and let them die comfortably and peacefully?

    Maybe I'm missing something, but from reading the article it seems like they are not doing this to save money, but because these children are so terminally ill and suffering that it is deemed (by both their doctors and their parents) that the kindest to let them pass. Which, while very sad, is the right thing to do in some circumstances IMO. However, rather than removing food and water and waiting for them to pass, it seems to me that once that decision is made, it's madness to withhold food and water and wait for that to kill them. Again, a dose of morphine would be a heck of a lot more humane.
    Last edited by Alissa_Sal; 12-03-2012 at 06:30 PM.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  2. #12
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spacers View Post
    My opinion is that "Bernadette Lloyd" either doesn't exist or, as a hospice nurse whose job by definition is to manage the pain of the dying, is not doing her job properly and should be promptly fired for incompetence.
    So I guess they have decided to do an independent review for no reason?

    Many people have claimed loved-ones were put on the pathway - which can involve the removal of drugs, nutrition and hydration if deemed to be of no benefit to the patient - without their knowledge. Some doctors have claimed it can hasten death.

    Now Mr Lamb has announced a wide-ranging review, to be overseen by an independent chairman, which will report back to him in the New Year.

    It will look at a number of issues, including why doctors are sometimes not informing relatives of decisions to put patients on the LCP, and the question of payments to hospitals for meeting targets on their use of the pathway.

    The Daily Telegraph revealed last month that six in 10 NHS hospital trusts had received payments totalling ?12 million or more for attaining these goals. In some hospitals more than half of all dying patients are put on the pathway
    Liverpool Care Pathway: far-reaching independent review announced - Telegraph
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  3. #13
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,219

    Default

    That article states they are reviewing claims that patients are put on it without notifying the families properly.

  4. #14
    Posting Addict Rivergallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    9,761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spacers View Post
    This, exactly. When DH & I decided to become parents, one of the first decisions we made was that we would not want our child to suffer pain for no purpose. At my age we knew that chromosomal problems were much more likely and we would not have continued a pregnancy with a diagnosis of an untreatable problem that would cause severe pain. I have no problem with allowing a child who is going to die from their condition anyway to die sooner, and hopefully more quickly & painlessly. Keeping someone alive when all they're doing is suffering is selfish.
    Sorry totally disagree.. we are all "going to die from"our"condition anyway". I do agree with eleviate as much pain for these patients as possible, but I know many people living with Chronic pain and do not think we should just kill them by not giving them food, water, etc.
    DH-Aug 30th 1997 Josiah - 6/3/02 Isaac 7/31/03

  5. #15
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivergallery View Post
    Sorry totally disagree.. we are all "going to die from"our"condition anyway". I do agree with eleviate as much pain for these patients as possible, but I know many people living with Chronic pain and do not think we should just kill them by not giving them food, water, etc.
    No, we aren't. I have seen family and friends suffer from cancer that they have no hope of recovering from. Pain management was the only concern for all involved. They stopped eating and, well, they were ready to die. (My gma told my mom flat out she was ready to go.) At some point the question becomes: for whose benefit is their suffering while they are dying a slow death? Is it for the family's benefit because the family isn't ready yet? Or for the paitent's benefit because who are we to play God or judge the quality of their life? Or is it for society's benefit so we can uphold our morals?

    People make these kinds of decisions when a person ends up on life support. Do you "pull the plug" or keep their bodies "alive" indefinitely?

  6. #16
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ethanwinfield View Post
    No, we aren't. I have seen family and friends suffer from cancer that they have no hope of recovering from. Pain management was the only concern for all involved. They stopped eating and, well, they were ready to die. (My gma my mom flat out she was ready to go.) At some point the question becomes: for whose benefit is their suffering while they are dying a slow death? Is it for the family's benefit because the family isn't ready yet? Or for the paitent's benefit because who are we to play God or judge the quality of their life? Or is it for society's benefit so we can uphold our morals?

    People make these kinds of decisions when a person ends up on life support. Do you "pull the plug" or keep their bodies "alive" indefinitely?
    Yes, this. "Chronic Pain" makes it sound like these kids just have a bad back or something. These kids are terminally ill with no hope of recovery and in pain. I think at some point there has to be a consideration where you ask why you are drawing out the suffering for an inevitable conclusion. I saw my grandma die slowly and in great pain from cancer. To use the example that someone else threw out earlier, we would not treat a dog that way. Literally, when our dog had cancer, we put her to sleep when her suffering got to be too great, not because we didn't love her or value her, but because we DID love her and knew it was selfish to keep her around when she was in pain and dying simply because we weren't ready to let go. That was a decision made out of 100% love, and it amazes me that we can't do the same for humans who we love that much more.
    fuchsiasky and Jessica80 like this.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  7. #17
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,481

    Default

    We're not talking about arbitrarily killing off people with chronic pain. We're talking about people suffering from horrible diseases or medical conditions that are going to kill them slowly and painfully within a few months, helping them die a faster and easier death. Some of us wish that for our loved ones, when there's no hope of recovery and their spirit is gone or their pain outweighs any pleasure they are getting from their life. Here's the story of my Nana. I've often said that dying is hardest on the ones left behind, but it shouldn't be literal agony for the ones dying, either. Of course, no one should be forced to do this, and that is what seems to be the problem with the program in the OP. My stepdad fought cancer for many years, and he was actually winning the battle when he died. But if he'd ever gotten to the point where he said, "I don't want to live like this anymore," I'd have done whatever I legally could to help him die as quickly and peacefully and painlessly as possible. And if I'm ever put in the position, I will do that for my husband or child. I love them too much to let them suffer needlessly.
    David Letterman is retiring. Such great memories of watching him over the past thirty-two years!

  8. #18
    Community Host wlillie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    6,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessica80 View Post
    No it is not.

    It means that they can set a set rate for doctors for X procedure. Maybe 2000.00. It doesn't mean that they can say that a person or someone of a certain age cannot have services.

    Insurances ALREADY do this. It is called the allowed/contracted rate for services.
    Um. People come one. Use some freaking logic. When these little committee's decide to set the price so low on procedures they don't deem beneficial for society, Dr's are going to STOP PERFORMING THEM> so it is the EXACT same thing, but if you'd prefer to bury your head in the sand, more power to you. It's far less stressful than to read and realize where our country is headed with this bill, I promise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal View Post
    This whole thread is a reminder about why I support euthanasia. If a terminal illness comes to the point where everyone (doctors, the patient, or the legal guardians of the patient) agree that the patient is so terminally ill that they should cut off all means of sustaining life, why on earth do we have to put people through the suffering of waiting for them to die of lack of food or water??? Why don't we give them a large dose of morphine and let them die comfortably and peacefully?

    Maybe I'm missing something, but from reading the article it seems like they are not doing this to save money, but because these children are so terminally ill and suffering that it is deemed (by both their doctors and their parents) that the kindest to let them pass. Which, while very sad, is the right thing to do in some circumstances IMO. However, rather than removing food and water and waiting for them to pass, it seems to me that once that decision is made, it's madness to withhold food and water and wait for that to kill them. Again, a dose of morphine would be a heck of a lot more humane.
    Morphine costs money.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessica80 View Post
    That article states they are reviewing claims that patients are put on it without notifying the families properly.
    hmmm. Sounds like something I want in our country. Perfect.

    I'm so mad. If they vote in another democrat in 2016 and we have 12 straight years of people who don't think of the future and take the "wait and see" attitude we're so ****ed.

  9. #19
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,595

    Default

    Sorry I disagree that dying of starvation and thirst is not suffering or inhumane.
    Rivergallery and ClairesMommy like this.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  10. #20
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessica80 View Post
    That article states they are reviewing claims that patients are put on it without notifying the families properly.
    Thats not all it says.
    It will look at a number of issues, including why doctors are sometimes not informing relatives of decisions to put patients on the LCP, and the question of payments to hospitals for meeting targets on their use of the pathway.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions