Posted on 07/06/2019 6:55:44 PM PDT by marshmallow
France’s highest appeals court has ordered Vincent Lambert’s food to be removed following a six-year-long legal battle for his life.
The 42-year-old nurse, now in a hospital in Reims, suffered an accident in 2008 which left him quadriplegic and with extensive brain damage. He is described by some as “semi-conscious,” and by others as being “in a vegetative state.” Vincent can sleep and wake up, respond to some voices, can swallow, and breathe on his own. He is not dependent on machines to live, but he is dependent on nutrition and hydration being delivered in a special manner, like many people.
The Court of Cassation’s final ruling means that Lambert, who is not otherwise ill or at the end of his life, would be removed from food and water and left to die slowly, which can take 14 days or more. The decision cannot be appealed in France, but his parents are fighting the order and have threatened to press charges for murder if his food is removed. However, Vincent’s wife and six of his eight siblings believe he should be forced to die.
(Excerpt) Read more at liveaction.org ...
Of course you have to take it on a case by case basis. This person's life is already over with. There's nothing left; just a one-time person waiting to die and suffering in the process. He can't speak, see, or do anything. He is already dead for all practical purposes. His continued suffering only benefits one entity; the hospital or paid care givers of his shell to keep his body alive so they can continue to get paid a crazy amount of money. If he could speak; I bet he would ask for an overdose of morphine or other drug so it would be like going to sleep then never wake up on this plane again. His afterlife will give him what he craves. That is if he even has enough brain power left to understand his situation.
No one is talking about "killing everyone in pain". I have no idea where you got that idea.
“...quality of life is a slippery slope. Lots of bioethicists out there have lists on who they think should be killed because they are like the Nazis and see no worth in a life that is crippled, brain damaged, etc. Be afraid, be very afraid...”
It is our duty to plow on to the last breath. Avoiding extraordinary measures is a prerogative but active euthanasia leads right to Doctor Mengele.
When YOU charecterize a thing as “torture” that God does not regard as torture YOU are playing God. In other words you accept God’s creation but only up until a certain point...
Can he pray?
How, exactly, do you know what God thinks? Bibles were written by men. We can only go by what we mere humans think of as torturous.
It’s inhumane to let this poor soul suffer needlessly. Surely no good and merciful God would want that.
We don't know, but if he could, I bet he would pray for death to relieve his suffering. I would.
Some religions require you prolong life in all cases, but ironically Catholicism does not. So we can pull a feeding tube that is unwanted (the original court case on this, the Brophy case, was a man who told everyone he didn't want to be kept alive with tubes).
So if you state in a living will, or via a health care proxy you don't want CPR/Resuscitation/ breathing machine/ dialysis/chemotherapy/ high doses of narcotics to keep the pain away/ Tube feeding, it is your choice.
What I am protesting is that the state ordered this.
and the trends to put feeding tubes into people who can eat, then remove them with the object to let them starve to death. It is this last trend that made Pope John Paul II warn about removing feeding tubes.
Tube feeding is a godsend to those caring for people with swallowing problems so they can be cared for at home, (my aunt cared for such a child for 28 years). With proper help (government paid caretakers, helpers from family, friends, and fellow church members) the person is cared for properly and lovingly.
but the nursing home makes more money to feed them by a tube (which means they keep them in a room, often sedated, instead of interacting with them and taking them out to eat and socialize with other patients).
as for being dead “for all practical purposes”? ah, that is also a problem. for that is YOUR opinion, not his nor the person's family in this case.
this is a slippery slope, for the “bioethicists” actually have made lists of “personhood”, where they eliminate the right to life from not only the comatose, but those with minimal awareness, those with severe mental retardation, those with senility, those with schizophrenia or severe mental illness and babies up to 2 years of age.
These are hard questions, but in the USA you have a culture of death that is pushing “assisted suicide” and euthanasia to save money.
Don't confuse your wish to avoid unwanted extraordinary treatment with what is going on here.
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.