Posted on 03/04/2011 5:41:50 AM PST by wagglebee
The family decided that they wanted to bring Joseph home to die while in their care, in the same way that they cared for their first child who died of a similar condition more than 8 years ago. The family asked that a tracheotomy be done to allow Joseph to breath on his own, so they could bring him home.
The issue is, who has the right to decide? Does the hospital and doctor, or does the family have the right to decide on how to care for their terminally ill child?
Exactly, the state wants to take control of Baby Joseph because they think that death is better for him.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
In this case, I do not see any chance that Baby Joseph will undergo a miraculous recovery. The controversy, as I see it, is whether his death should be hastened in the hospital, or allowed to occur naturally at home. There is no logical reason why a tracheotomy can't be done so that Baby Joseph can be brought home to die comfortably instead of in the sterile, cold, unfriendly environment of the hospital.
The only reason that I can think of is that the state wants to exert as much control as possible.
Exactly right.
The parents have gone through this tragedy before; therefore, they know what to expect. It isn’t like the hospital doctors don’t think they can go through this alone. The parents should be able to take their little one home, love him for the time he has left on this earth. Not only will Baby Joseph die hearing his parent’s voices but the parents can say good-bye in their own personal way. They deserve that much. IMHO
Thank you for posting this. It provides clarification for a lot of the objections I’ve heard raised.
Could the parents not pay for the tracheotomy themselves?
“”I have not indicated in any way what I would want in such a circumstance””
I hope no one here will put themselves in such a position. Health Care Directives are easy enough to do. We needed to prepare new ones as our old ones had expiration dates and we had moved. I found our new state approved directive online and printed them; signed and witnessed and filed away where they can be retrieved easily and given to a doctor and/or hospital.
Of course, all of it becomes moot if the decision is taken out of our hands ala obamacare!
The story of Baby Joseph is heartrending in many aspects, and I pray God's help and peace for him and his family.
This is the face of socialized medicine.
It depends on your definition of “ordinary care” vs. “extraordinary care,” something that can be difficult to define. You state that a tracheotomy is “not extra-ordinary,” on what do you base this?
You also open a wider question - where does the line lie for a family to decide on care that is considered medically futile? What about the rights of the medical worker to refuse to initiate care they feel is medically futile? (Yes, I am aware that in *this* case, there is disagreement about whether the care is futile or not. I am also aware that I have no clear answer for the question, and I am curious if you feel you do have a clear answer.)
Ordinary and extraordinary medical care has been pretty well defined. Of course there are debates, but trachotomies have NEVER been considered extraordinary care (the fact is that this is one of the oldest and most common surgical procedures in the world).
You also open a wider question - where does the line lie for a family to decide on care that is considered medically futile?
Many states have stripped this right from families.
What about the rights of the medical worker to refuse to initiate care they feel is medically futile?
I wouldn't consider that a right.
Baby Joseph's parents want to take him home, they realize that he is likely to die within a relatively short period of time, they are their parents and this is their RIGHT.
However, to do this, he needs a tracheotomy, this is a routine, simple and inexpensive procedure, but the hospital is refusing.
If you know what you’re doing, you can do a trach with a penknife and half the body of a pen. In about one minute.
The family has a new attorney who seems to
be setting a very different tone.
Will post more in a bit.
Mama Grizzlies unite! Baby Joseph’s new attorney sets new tone.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/03/03/17487251.html
As to your statement "this is one of the oldest and most common surgical procedures in the world," All I find is this which indicates tracheotomy was known, but far from common. The earliest known procedure is actually skull trephination, for which evidence is found in the Neolithic period, 7000 years ago. (And I don't know that's considered "ordinary" care, either.)
I absolutely agree it is their right to take him home. The question is whether it's their right to have the hospital perform a tracheotomy. And as I pointed out, they could take him home with an endotracheal tube in place, and an ambubag.
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.