Mais qu'est-ce que Dieu foutait avant la création?

[mousme]

My uncle's radiation therapy has apparently been moderately successful. That's my mother's brother, who lives in Connecticut and has been suffering from MS for the past forty-odd years. He was diagnosed with lung cancer last year and given about six months, but now they're saying maybe two years thanks to this latest treatment.

I don't know if this is a good thing. The man is seventy years old, and can barely lift his hands anymore. He can't hold a spoon to feed himself. Now, thanks to the radiation therapy, he's too weak to talk for more than a few sentences at a time, and it's affected his voice so that he can barely speak above a whisper.

They're still giving him cigarettes to smoke, too, which boggles the mind in many ways, but it's not my decision to make, I guess. His wife bought him a carton. Makes you wonder whose side she's on. :P

+++

My other uncle's surgery is scheduled for a few weeks from now. That's my father's younger brother (well, one of them: he's got three), who has some as-yet-to-be-properly-defined brain problem which is like an aneurysm but isn't quite an aneurysm. Apparently it's a hemorrhage forming a pool of blood on the brain, and said pool of blood can continue to expand unchecked and cause all sorts of problems. Then again, this is all second-hand information that I got from my father, who once again was in full-fledged denial mode and couldn't remember the name of the beast but affirmed that it was nothing he'd ever heard of.

He still hasn't told anyone in the family about the surgery, although when he appears with huge scars in his head a few explanations may well be in order. I guess we'll just have to cross that bridge when we come to it.

Comments

[djs-specs.livejournal.com]

I don't know if this is a good thing. The man is seventy years old, and can barely lift his hands anymore.[snip]

Its situations like this that I can't understand... When did life become about how many years you had than how well you lived? I just don't get the idea myself - but I'm also young and more or less healthy. Maybe things change as you get older and the ol' grim reaper starts breathing a bit heavier down the back of your neck.

*shrug*

That's just what I think - I suppose it kinda goes without saying that I believe that there should be legalised euthanasia.

Anyhoo, *hugs* if you wanna talk, you know where to find me (although an email telling me to kick YM in the guts wouldn't go astray...).

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry to hear that. It sounds like bad times are forthcoming. :(

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

Although I concur with euthanasia, I can imagine that if you had only a few months left, you might really want all of them than say 60-odd years left. Perspective on the quantity remaining kind of changes things.

What I don't get is how the Hippocratic oath applies to all of this (palliative care, euthanasia and so forth). I guess another big question is, if it's legal to kill someone (regardless of circumstance) whose hands are authorized to do so?

[mousme.livejournal.com]

This isn't the question for me in this case. My uncle could have been given lots of good pain medication and allowed to live his last six to eight months with dignity, slipping quietly into death. Now he's got two years in which he'll be too weak to even talk or feed himself, and be in constant and probably agonising pain. I'm not sure it's a good trade-off.

[djs-specs.livejournal.com]

Well, like I said, I'm still young and relatively healthy - maybe when things start to fall to pieces I might want to last until I'm 150 come hell or high water. *shrug* Its just one of those things you don't know until you've been there, and all the postulating in the world won't change that.

As for *how*... Well, I can't remember who invented it, but there was a nifty (well, on a technical level) little device that was rather similar to what's used for carrying out lethal injection death sentences. Except it was hooked to a computer where the patient could opt out at any point before the final dose that would stop their heart. All the health practitioner would have to do is fit the IV line and then just leave the room.

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

It still sounds like it violates the Hippocratic oath. Maybe they have to interpret or update the oath for modern times or something... Or maybe they don't take it quite as literally anymore.

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I guess it must've either been

a) his choice (or possibly his wife's if he is unable to speak for himself)

b) a situation where recovery and improvement is possible during the two years.

If not, I can't imagine what whoever was thinking.

[djs-specs.livejournal.com]

Well, I guess if you wanted to be specific, having a health professional inserting an IV line is indirectly aiding a patient in committing suicide. But is doing that, in itself, inherently harmful? Not really.

Its all down to technicalities really. I personally think that if the oath needs to be changed in order that euthanasia is legalised, then it should be done. That way the patient can be more or less assured that their departure from this life is as painless and stress-free as possible.

*crawls back into her corner* Sorry Phnee, didn't mean to jump on my soapbox in your journal.

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

Actually, I just looked up the oath... it's clear in some parts, confusing in others. "I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel;" seems pretty straightforward.

But "I will not cut persons laboring under the stone, but will leave this to be done by men who are practitioners of this work." tells me nothing.

Actually, I am amazed that a lot of the oath still fits with today's society. But changing an oath? Doesn't that kind of detract from swearing the oath in the first place? Kind of loses its meaning or importance to some extent.

But oaths are a whole other discussion in itself.

-------------------------------

Totally forgot we were in somebody else's journal. Actually, knowing me (and how I first "met" djs_specs, I'd probably have gotten carried away anyways. :) Sorry about that, hope we're not disturbing you.

[djs-specs.livejournal.com]

Looks like you've got hold of the ancient oath there - of the modern ones, only 14% of the regional variations even *mention* euthanasia (according to Survivor MD (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_today.html)). Fewer mention abortion, which also features in the ancient version, and look how that one's getting ignored nowadays.

Personally, while its all grand and wonderful to be reciting an oath to be written in antiquity, oaths that're that old have little relevence to today's society. I mean, there are certain factions in the US who want to remove the mention of God from the pledge of allegiance because not every American is religious nowadays (a different case back when it was written). Oaths need to change with the times and to reflect the changes in society - back when the Hippocratic oath was written, they just couldn't save lives how we do today. All they *had* was supportive medicine, a way to keep a patient comfortable while they shuffled off this mortal coil. Its a different case nowadays, and I often think that doctors are under pressure to be seen *doing* something, so they'll keep trying to save this patient until the patient (who often doesn't know better) or their relatives (who're driven by emotion and a fear of loss) tell them to get lost.

My two cents, take it or leave it as you so desire :)

[vureoelt.livejournal.com]

Ah, indeed I do. Although interestingly, the one I have's description of abortion in it is so narrow that I don't think it actually is practiced today: "and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion.", where the defintion of pessary is something resembling a contraceptive cervical cap or suppository of some description.

No, I agree that oaths need to be updated to reflect and preserve the spirit that it wa intended in, but how you change them is tricky business.

Funnily enough, though, your description of the medicine back when the oath was written sounds a lot like, well, euthanasia: "a way to keep a patient comfortable while they shuffled off this mortal coil." With a bare bodkin.

*ahem* Sorry, channeling Shakespeare apparently. Anyhow, it's not just any pressure, it's legalistic pressure. They have a duty and obligation to try to save people, if they don't know the wishes of the person. Certainly they may advise, but ultimately, "it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God."

So, I guess you were right, the lethal injection doohickey would be feasible if the patient had the ability to stop it somehow (presuming motor functions work and so forth). I'm certain there'd be a mess of stuff to do but theoretically it sounds acceptable.

... but I'm still taking your two cents! :D *yubyubs your two cents*

*whispers* One day... I will have a dollar! A whole dollar! BWAHAHAHA! :)

[djs-specs.livejournal.com]

Well that is the main problem with the 'suicide machine' - the patient needs to be aware and capable enough to back out if they get a case of cold feet. But then, they need to be aware and capable enough to agree to use it in the first place...