A dignified death???

[felix]

Consider this scenario. You have been a virtual cabbage for longer than you care to remember. After a long court argument, it is finally agreed that you should be allowed to die 'with dignity'. Here are your options:

1) An overdose of morphine (or potassium chloride).

2) A bolt through the brain stem.

3) They pull out your water tube and watch you die of thirst.

Of course you don't get a say in the matter but what would you be hoping for? If you aren't sure, try going without water for three days then read the question again.

 

[jtaunton]

You need to have killed someone first to qualify for 1) or 2)......

 

[AdamW]

You forgot to mention that the final say is had by your ex-husband, who has since remarried and started a family with another woman, and your own family who still love and care for you have no say in the matter.

If this is (by any chance) in reference to the recent events in the US, I think that the ex-husband did it merely to alleviate his own psychological stress. In my opinion he forfeited any say in the matter when he started again with another woman.

 

[Diyisfun]

I don't think an Ex husband/wife qualify as a next of kin. You are obviously not divorced.

 

[jtaunton]

Not sure I agree - This man's wife was dead, and the fact that some doctor had plugged her into the mains and called her still alive didn't mean she wasn't gone. The fact that he moved on didn't mean he had loved his wife any less, or didn't feel the loss but he was, by any measure, a widower.

 

[AdamW]

Perhaps he wasn't divorced but he does have a new partner with whom he has had children.

Surely if you were in such a state you wouldn't want your wife to go sha**ing someone else and having his babies before you were even dead? I am all for moving on, but you move on AFTER your spouse/partner dies, not before

If you want to get rid of your wife whilst she is in full control of her mental faculties, she gets to empty your bank account and keep the house.

If you want to get rid of your wife whilst she is in a PVS, you get to kill her.

 

[AdamW]

Not sure I agree - This man's wife was dead,

Blimey, US doctors are pretty slow at writing death certificates then...

 

[felix]

You need to have killed someone first to qualify for 1) or 2)......

That just about sums it up. Dogs, horses and convicted murderers get a quick death. Thanks to the way the law stands in the US (and UK) human vegetables have to be allowed to die of natural causes. This case is an interesting legal precedent. I suppose it is now OK to lock somebody in a cell with no food or water and watch them die. Natural causes again? I doubt that Amnesty International would agree!

One way out - obviously not applicable in this case - is to switch off artificial life support. This doesn't always work. I recall another case in the US of a woman who spent many years on a life support machine after a barbiturate overdose left her apparently brain dead. After the usual prolonged legal wrangle the doctors turned the machine off but her heart didn't stop! I don't know what happened next.

The question of whether she should have been killed or not - because make no mistake, that's what happened - is a whole new can of worms. Personally I wouldn't want to be kept alive as a vegetable. I choose two cans of Carlsberg Special followed by the captive bolt - while I'm not looking!

 

[AdamW]

Perhaps we need an opt-in scheme here. If they said "All vegetables will be turned off after 30 days unless they have stated their wishes to the contrary". It could be like a donor card, or even integrated into the ID card scheme. If you want to be kept alive, you have to opt in. If you don't, then they turn you off after 30 days. You get the choice.

It would have to be this way round, if they kept everyone alive who hadn't opted to be switched off/euthanased, we would have hospitals of people on life support.

I have no problem with someone being turned off if that was their wish. Problem is no-one ever makes such wishes clear.

 

[kendor]

regardless of others involved surely it was an elongated form of euthanasia that the doctors decided upon that lasted 12 days!! it would have been more dignified and humane to have given a lethal injection when they pulled the food lines out.
once the decision is made make it quick!
a similar situation happened with my mother they withdrew all medication and food she was still consious with her eyes open, the doctors made a comment about "quality of life" so we took their advice relying on their expertise and experience and thankfully it was over within 12 hours or so, but i can only wonder whether she suffered( pain wise) during that time or not, certainly her breathing was laboured.

 

[2scoops0406]

Perhaps we need an opt-in scheme here. If they said "All vegetables will be turned off after 30 days unless they have stated their wishes to the contrary".

You couldn't do that!! Half of my work "colleagues" would be wiped out

 

[AdamW]

You say potato, I say IT professional.

But seriously, if there was a new law past that meant you would be switched off if vegetablised after a preset time, unless you signed up to a "please don't pull the plug" scheme, what would you choose?

It isn't an easy choice to make, but it could relieve some of the stress burden from the family of the patient if they know that their wishes are being carried out. How many mothers spend the rest of their life sitting in the hospital next to their son who fell off his moped as a teenager, in the hope that he might recover? How many mothers do you know who would say "It's been a couple of months, s*d it, let's pull the plug."

Does anyone know how the accuracy of a "persistent vegetative state" diagnosis? What percentage of these cases recover to some degree?

 

[felix]

Does anyone know how the accuracy of a "persistent vegetative state" diagnosis? What percentage of these cases recover to some degree?

And therein lies the dilemma. I've never had to make the decision to 'pull somebody's plug' and hopefully never will. My gripe is not with the decision to kill the unfortunate woman but the way they went about it.

The only people even remotely qualified to make the decision to kill or not are doctors - and they're not infallible so let's make that a unanimous decision by at least two of them. If this principle is acceptable then give them the legal right to do what they think is best for the patient and use the KCl/morphine/barbiturate/captive bolt/anything that does the job instantly.