To: Canticle_of_Deborah
A patient who has been clear she wants to feel as little pain as possible at the end of a terminal condition ought to be entitled to that. The nonsense about not giving addictive drugs (or illegal narcotics, for that matter) to the dying is just so immoral.
Others would prefer to be lucid and able to communicate right up to the end, even if in great pain. I think it's a personal choice, and hopefully people who know they are dying get that resolved so that everyone is on the same page with the plan.
353 posted on
10/21/2003 7:10:17 PM PDT by
ChemistCat
(It's not over till she's better. He may still have killed her. Pray!)
To: ChemistCat
A patient who has been clear she wants to feel as little pain as possible at the end of a terminal condition ought to be entitled to that. The nonsense about not giving addictive drugs (or illegal narcotics, for that matter) to the dying is just so immoral. I don't disagree. But there's a difference between keeping someone pain-free and killing them.
You want to take your own life, go for it. People have been doing it since biblical times. Leave healthcare workers out of it and don't turn healing institutions into death factories.
To: ChemistCat
My brother has terminal cancer, and his doctors sent someone to his house to discuss how he wants to die.
I'm glad it's going to be decided beforehand. I would hate to figure that out when a loved one is suffering.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson