Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How a Living Will can bring about your premature death
RFFM.org ^ | August 12, 2008 | Bill Beckman

Posted on 08/12/2008 8:05:23 AM PDT by Daniel T. Zanoza

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last
To: LikeLight
Your take on this illustrates how the popular presumption has shifted toward death (euthanasia, assisted suicide, whatever).

Exactly, the "conventional wisdom" these days seems to be that doctors should 'err on the side of death" and to this end they have adopted the attitude that if someone's life doesn't meet their arbitrary standards of "quality" that it isn't really life (or at least not "life worth living").

41 posted on 08/12/2008 9:05:51 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
I was answering the rhetorical question the author posed about “why not organ transplants? why is it about feeding tubes and ventilators?” Because people don’t want to merely exist as a hunk of inert protoplasm sucking in nutrients and excreting as the only characteristics of being alive. That’s why. And until the RTL recognize this deep-down wish to not be a hunk of meat with no prospects other than ingesting and excreting, they will never win battles here.

Okay?

11 posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2008 11:23:52 AM by VictoryGal (Never give up, never surrender!)

*********************

Okay!

42 posted on 08/12/2008 9:07:08 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; DJ MacWoW; LikeLight

>>People certainly are quick to snuff out a viable life. And then defend it.

>Very true.

Very false. Decisions in families to do this are often prefaced by years of discussion and soul-searching.


43 posted on 08/12/2008 9:07:16 AM PDT by VictoryGal (Never give up, never surrender!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: esquirette

ping for your comment, please


44 posted on 08/12/2008 9:08:27 AM PDT by RightField (The older you get .... the older "old" is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The “living will”. What irony.


45 posted on 08/12/2008 9:08:28 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
to meddle in my family in some of the most gut-wrenching and private decisions, well.... it just makes me livid.

Understood. But how do you think the family feels when the hospital chooses to "meddle" in a way that kills a person they wanted kept alive?

46 posted on 08/12/2008 9:09:18 AM PDT by LikeLight (http://www.believersguidetolegalissues.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
I understand everything that you just said. Unfortunately, the tendency is to kill even the viable people so the law needed to step in. A brain-killing stroke is the end of life. But congestive heart failure isn't. I have a 45 yr old relative that suffered congestive heart failure. Fortunately, his wife is a nurse. He is now home, recuperating.

For the sake of our loved ones, we need to be VERY clear in our instructions about health and resuscitation.

47 posted on 08/12/2008 9:11:11 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

I’m definitely in the minority here but I just watched my Mother die from ALS aka Lou Gehrigs Disease. She was well aware that it would kill her very slowly. She signed a living will while she still could stating that she did not want a ventilator or a feeding tube to keep her going.

I also know another person that was on a ventilator and feeding tube and totally bedridden for 8 years. His family suffered emotionally, financially, spiritually, you name it.

Which decision was the best?


48 posted on 08/12/2008 9:12:17 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
Decisions in families to do this are often prefaced by years of discussion and soul-searching.

Which is then ignored by hospitals and courts.

49 posted on 08/12/2008 9:12:24 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal; DJ MacWoW; LikeLight

My father, who passed in early June this year, sounds a lot like your grandmother. He hated docs and hospitals, so to his very good fortune, when he had the heart attack, he was dead before he hit the floor. We were lucky to not have to address this issue, though we would have, had he survived, given the existence of his advance directive.

We are all commenting on this story, for which we have only the barest minimum of actual facts, based on how we are filling in the gaps of our knowledge with our own biases and prejudices. It’s normal to do things that way.

Here is what I know: I do not want ANYONE outside of my family meddling in my family affairs, especially when it comes to end of life decisions. It is not anyone’s concern except ours, and we will deal with it as we see fit, in light of what we know about our family.

What’s next for the meddlers in end of life decisions? Getting involved in our start of life decisions? Who when and how many babies to have? Of course that’s not your business, and neither is the end of life decision!!!!!


50 posted on 08/12/2008 9:16:15 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: caver

A terminal disease changes the parameters. The man in the story had congestive heart failure, was alert and had made his wife his named surrogate. The court removed her as surrogate and killed him. Different situation from yours.


51 posted on 08/12/2008 9:16:49 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: dmz

People get the courts involved when they sign LEGAL Living Wills. It then becomes a LEGAL decision.


52 posted on 08/12/2008 9:18:49 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

OK, I’ll buy that. But this story is advocating everyone do away with living wills. I can’t go along with that.


53 posted on 08/12/2008 9:20:07 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
Very false. Decisions in families to do this are often prefaced by years of discussion and soul-searching.

And they are almost exclusively modeled after boilerplate "living wills" that use broadly defined terms to end life.

Explain how it is that "years of discussion" can possibly predict the ACTUAL scenario -- because they can't. Explain how "years of soul-searching" can predict how you will ACTUALLY feel if you become disabled in a catastrophic accident -- because it can't.

Don't get me wrong, I AM NOT disputing the importance of living wills, advance medical directives and medical powers of attorney. What I am saying is that in most cases, people opt for the boilerplate versions that are distributed by hospitals and used by lawyers who really don't know what they are doing.

54 posted on 08/12/2008 9:21:53 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: caver

There are alternatives to Living Wills that are much better. That’s the main thrust of the article.


55 posted on 08/12/2008 9:22:26 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW ("Make yourself sheep, and the wolves will eat you" Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza; VictoryGal; dmz

Mr. Pinette wanted to die, and he did. The government doesn’t own a patient’s life, and neither does a patient’s spouse (who in this case was legally named as a surrogate to make medical decisions for him IF he could not communicate himself). Even if he had been unable to communicate, a named surrogate does not have the right to direct treatments in clear contravention of the patient’s own wishes as expressed in a living will. The outcome was exactly what Mr. Pinette wanted — that in the event of the sudden emergence of situation where he would die unless he had medical interventions that he DID NOT WANT, he would not be subjected to the unwanted interventions and would die. Many people are well aware that in a situation like this, emotionally panicked relatives may have trouble letting go, even if they intellectually know that the patient wants to be allowed to die. A living will is an effective way to deal with this problem.


56 posted on 08/12/2008 9:24:39 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

a death sentence IF YOU SIGN A FORM WILL WITHOUT FILLING IT OUT.

A living will can state “keep me alive” or “take ALL measures without exception.”

It is a MYTH that living wills always state “kill me.”


57 posted on 08/12/2008 9:28:28 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

A surrogate does not have the right to make medical decisions that oppose those of an alert and communicative patient, nor to make medical decisions in contravention of the patient’s written advance directive. It appears that the court in this case didn’t even need to “remove” the surrogate, but just confirm to the hospital that the surrogate had no authority to override this patient’s wishes, as expressed BOTH by the alert and communicating patient at the time AND by the patient’s advance directive.


58 posted on 08/12/2008 9:31:34 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

The main thrust of the article is the fact the author has no clue about the law of living wills or advance directives.

Right concept and incompetent reporting.


59 posted on 08/12/2008 9:33:09 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
 

 

  The man in the story had congestive heart failure, was alert

Only alert according to his wife  from another report

 


Kirkwood noted in his order that Alice Pinette did not offer independent evidence to challenge the doctors' conclusions. "Her credibility is questioned considering the medical evidence," Kirkwood stated. "She presented no independent verification of her perceptions of his abilities."Alice Pinette, also 73, left Kirkwood's courtroom in tears and did not comment on the ruling. Her attorney William Ruffier said he is not sure there is an issue to appeal and doesn't think there are others who could confirm her observations.

60 posted on 08/12/2008 9:33:33 AM PDT by grjr21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson