Here's another one, from a Dr. Dresser:
http://www.bioethics.gov/background/dresser.html
"So another reason for not giving full weight to
advanced directives would be the judgment that many
people actually want to give their families and
doctors some flexibility at the bedside. So that would
be consistent with an autonomy perspective on handling
these problems."
"Now, a couple hard questions regarding this issue of
how and when to treat a supervening illness in a
dementia patient. These are both questions that courts
have struggled with."
"One is that when you're evaluating the benefits and
burdens of different medical approaches, including
foregoing treatment, is it appropriate to consider not
just the burdens and benefits of the treatment
intervention itself? So, say, it's a feeding tube, you
know, the pain involved in putting that in or any
restraints that might be necessary if the patient is
uncomfortable with the feeding tube."
"But is it also appropriate to consider the kind of
life that a successful treatment will bring the
patient? So this gets into the quality of life
consideration."
See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1379840/posts?page=16#16
"The only solution for the (Social Security) "crisis", which is a crisis in overall spending, therefore is to grow the economy.
No. There is another possibility: harvest the drain, and pocket/reinterpret the numbers to account for the savings.
AKA euthanasia, viaticals and the "right to die." Gees. Even its initials are SS."