Posted on 06/22/2005 1:25:39 AM PDT by FairOpinion
The politicization of Terri Schiavo prompted the American Medical Association on Tuesday to adopt policy opposing any legislation that presumes patients would want life-sustaining treatment unless it is clear that they would not.
Tuesday's action at the annual meeting of the nation's largest doctors group also reaffirms existing AMA policy that says it is ethical in some cases to discontinue life-sustaining treatment if it is in the patient's best interests.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
PRAY!!!!!!!!
Where do you work?
It sounds like you would fit well at the Clearwater hospice..
I hear they have a few openings for nurses that are willing to follow their "policies".
Halls said it all. Pray.
Here is a different take from Cheryl Ford:
AMA Doctors Oppose Legislation Protecting Disabled Patients
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 21, 2005
Chicago, IL (LifeNews.com) -- The American Medical Associated yesterday adopted a resolution opposing any legislation that would make sure disable and incapacitated patients are not refused lifesaving medical care.
After the starvation and dehydration death of Terri Schiavo, some states are looking at proposals to make sure food and water are not removed from patients who can't make their own medical decisions and have not previously asked that they be deprived such care.
However, the AMA says it will oppose any legislation making that kind of determination.
Many of the doctors attending the group's annual meeting in Chicago said they don't want government to get involved in the doctor-patient relationship, according to an AP article.
Dr. Michael Williams, a Johns Hopkins Hospital neurologist who sponsored the measure, told the Associated Press that, while Terri's "circumstances were heart-wrenching and compelling, they're so rare that they're not a good basis to revise existing law."
"I wish there had not been politics involved in it, and I hope there won't be in the future should similar cases arise," he said.
But others say making sure patients don't become victims of euthanasia, like Terri, is critically important.
Nancy Valko, of Nurses for Life and a leading monitor of end-of-life issues, says the need for the legislation the AMA opposes is great because many hospitals are adopting "medical futility policies." She indicates doctors and hospital officials are more quick to give up hope on treating a patient and deny further lifesaving medical treatment.
Also on Tuesday, the AMA reaffirmed existing policy saying it is ethical in some cases to stop life-sustaining treatment if the doctor believes it is in the patient's best interest.
Because of the kind of policies the AMA favor, some who specialize in monitoring euthanasia issues say patients should make their medical requests known now to prevent winding up in a situation similar to Terri's.
Wesley Smith, a leading pro-life attorney who specializes in bioethics issues, says people should make their wishes known beforehand.
"I think people need to create advanced directives in which they say, 'I don't want to be dehydrated to death and have my food taken away if I become cognitively disabled,'" Smith explained.
"We always hear about doing away with treatment, but they can also be used proactively to say, 'Look, don't take any actions to intentionally kill me,'" Smith concluded.
Please Help LifeNews.com
Please consider a donation to LifeNews.com, PO Box 5422, Helena, MT 59604. We also accept donations through PayPal at news@LifeNews.com or you can make a secure credit card donation to support pro-life news by clicking here.
Comments or questions? Email us at news@lifenews.com.
Copyright 2003-2005 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved.
For information on advertising or reprinting news from LifeNews.com, email us.
To change your profile/unsubscribe: http://www.listcast.com/x?u=35587076o-f651c14e
We do have to be careful about defending this AMA "ruling" because I believe there are a large number of doctors that are members and will adhere to their crazy policies.
Great - glad you noticed that. I was looking back to see where you got that she was "for" pushing some along.
She appears to be the kind of nurse we would wish.
The AMA - is that a voluntary organization that doctors choose to join or is it "the physician organization that all join".
How much power do they exert? Are they the final determiner of policy for all the hospitals, specialty boards, etc.?
Because, it they are not, I would expect many doctors would no longer want to be affiliated with them.
Don't know how many doctors are members but for those members they have to adhere to policies to get the "perks".
I'll see what I can find out about the percentage of MDs on their roster.
I will too.
The general consensus is about two out of three MDs. (the good guys are out numbered?) If the demographics I found are correct there are approx one million US Physicians with 700,000 being members of the AMA
That would make it closer to three out of four. Let me know if you find something more concrete, I don't have much time today. Thanks.
http://www.togopeacefully.com/DOCTOR.html
....survey of Wisconsin physicians which found that 27% of them said they would be willing to perform euthanasia if it were legalized. Catholic and fundamentalist physicians were less likely to be willing. Family and general practice physicians were most willing ....
In 1995, the Center for Ethics in Health Care at the Oregon Health Sciences University in Portland surveyed 2,761 of the state’s physicians after Oregon voters passed Measure 16 allowing physician aid-in-dying. Dr. Lee reported the following numbers:
73% believed that terminally ill persons have the right to suicide;
66% believed that physician assisted suicide is ethical;
60% believed that physician assisted suicide should be legal;
46% would be willing to comply with a patient’s valid request;
21% had been asked for a lethal prescription in the past year;
7% had written a lethal prescription before Measure 16 passed.
Dr. Bachman reported that of 1,119 Michigan physicians surveyed in 1994 and 1995 40% favored a law permitting physician-assisted suicide. When asked if they themselves would be willing to participate in physician assisted suicide or in voluntary euthanasia, 52% said they would not, 13% said they might participate only in assisted suicide and 22% said they might participate in both.
The July 14, 1994, New England Journal of Medicine contained a “Special Article” entitled, “Attitudes Toward Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Among Physicians in Washington State.”
The results: of the 1,355 eligible physicians who received our questionnaire, 938 (69%) responded. Forty-eight percent of the respondents agreed with the statement that euthanasia is never ethically justified, and 42 percent disagreed. Fifty-four percent thought euthanasia should be legal in some situations, but only 33% stated they would be willing to perform euthanasia. Thirty-nine percent of the respondents agreed with the statement that physician-assisted suicide is never ethically justified, and 50 percent disagreed. Fifty-three percent thought assisted suicide should be legal in some situations, but only 40 percent stated that they would be willing to assist a patient in committing suicide.
A January 1988 poll of 7,000 physicians in Colorado polled by the Center for Health Ethics and Policy at the University of Colorado found that 14% have helped patients stockpile lethal doses of drugs; 60% had had patients for whom euthanasia would have been justified if legal; 35% would have injected a lethal drug dose had such a practice been legal.
A sample of 600 physicians in California in 1988 found that 95% of them who have been asked to hasten death agreed that such a request can be “rational.” Nearly 23% said they had already helped people die, some of them have aided three or more patients to die. Forty percent said they thought other doctors hastened the death of some patients despite the legal prohibition.
The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine reported in February, 1996, that a survey of 879 doctors in adult intensive care units throughout the United States found that 96% of the doctors had discontinued medical treatment by either withdrawing or withholding treatment with the expectation that the patient would die as a result. Of the total, 85% had done so at least once in the last year.
Dying Well Network knows physicians in the Spokane, Washington area who are willing to aid terminally ill persons to hasten death, but does not connect terminally ill persons with these courageous physicians. Persons seeking aid-in-dying are directed to their own physicians.
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Reinhardt noted,
The Oregon AMA refrained from taking a position on a successful ballot initiative to legalize physician assisted suicide because its membership was sharply divided on whether to back or oppose the measure. Many more doctors support physician-assisted suicide but without openly advocating a change in the legal treatment of the practice. A recent study of Oregon physicians found that 60% of those who responded believed that physician-assisted suicide should be legal.
Wow, we are in trouble.
And, the God-complex that plague physicians lends itself to them thinking they know the answers to all.
A JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) study found that 48% of seriously ill patients wanted to "use all available treatments no matter what the chance of recovery,"
compared with 31% of patients who disagreed, also found that among physicians, only 7% agreed with the pro-treatment position, compared to 81% who disagreed.
Why should we require all this folderol to prevent medical murders? Even Terri at least got a show trial purporting to prove she wanted it. These wonderful docs don't even want that much.
Well if everyone involved is of good will, your wishes may get followed, but throw a stinker with a Philadelphia lawyer into the mix and all bets are off.
Psychotic is an understatement. Doctors could never actually know more than they do. Doctors only spent 12+ years in college...
Since my husband died of cancer, I no longer work. I have kept up my license, though. I will either volunteer for hospice or volunteer in our local Christian Free Clinic.
All hospices are not like the one where Terri was kept. The only one where I have been is where one of my sister-in-law's best friends spent her last couple of weeks. She had ovarian cancer, which she had fought for several years. She hung on long enough to see her son graduate from high school. I believe she was 47 years old when she died.
This hospice is a beautiful place, very serene. The patients have beautiful views of the outdoors. Those who are able can sit outside in the beautiful gardens. Teresa could not. She had hospice nurses and volunteers at home up until just before she died. At that point, she needed around the clock care and needed to be in the hospice. She died very peacefully there with her family by her side. She was not starved nor was she dehydrated.
I don't know if they have to belong or not. I get the Virginia Nurses' Association Newspaper, but I am not a paying member. That may just go along with my license since I am licensed in Virginia. I get some American Nurses' Association Literature, but I am not a member. I wonder if these are simply representative bodies for nurses and the AMA is a representative body for doctors for the political arena and one can join or not join as one chooses? I don't think a doctor or a nurse has to follow anything other than the oath they took when they became a doctor or a nurse. I know I don't, other than the rules of my employer if I am employed.
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.