That’s what I think. This is an advertisement for death.
I’m not so sure. My FIL had advanced directives...no feeding tube, no ventilator. He contracted MRSA pneumonia after a surgery to repair his hip (he had fallen.) He was 93 years old, we had his wishes in writing along with a health care surrogacy document and almost everyday the physicians pushed for a feeding tube and ventilator. He had been transferred to a “specialty hospital” for folks with chronic problems (I believe you could substitue the word “terminal” conditions.) He was the only patient in the hospital that was not on a ventilator and did not have a feeding tube. One woman, whose husband was in the room across the hall, told us how she had been pressured into the ventilator and feeding tube after her husband suffered a massive stroke. And now, many months later, he was still in the same state, physicaly with no improvement and no response, but alive because of the machines.
Years ago I attended a seminar with Dr. Koop and Francis Schaeffer. I can distinctly remember Dr. Koop commenting on the advances in modern medicine and not starting extraordinary measures when someone is deemed terminal(I believe the discussion centered around Karen Ann Quinlan.)
I disagree. It's reality. If you want to fight for life (a life that really isn't life and isn't worth living) then that is your business...but it should also be YOUR money. Not mine. And not the taxpayers. I really don't have an issue helping save lives but when we go beyond the reasonable...so "mom" can carve out an extra month or two at the cost of $300,000...then...I have an issue.
I have an issue 1) ethically and 2) financially. Ethically is a no brainer. Come on...live life and die with some dignity. Financially: Why should my tax dollars go to that...or an increase in my insurance premiums? I'm willing to chip in a little if we can save a life...but if we are just kicking the can down the road a little...count me out.
Agreed. I have already fought this fight once and would do it again.