Death by Starvation

[tqualey]

Actually, rrp, what you are saying is that anyone who disagrees with you is supporting murdering the unwanted… and this is not what is being said. I submit that wabrams has properly address the matter of the OP which is a DYING PERSON (not an about-to-be-murdered-unwanted-person) who could not handle food or fluids. The analogy given was proper - but, you have not only chosen to reject it - but to insult the poster.

I submit your movement back and forth between what others are saying and what words you want to put in their mouths is causing a lot of unnecessary difficulties.

No one is trying to hijack any thread - you would be well advised to go beyond your personal experiences and read what others have actually written. For those who are concerned about ‘death by starvation’ I would recommend that they enact a Living Will and a Durable Medical Power of Attorney that clearly identifies what it is they want when they are considered to be dying and, if the disease process / organ failure that they are dying from runs its natural course, this person would be dead within six months. As we can see from the OP, much needless grief and aggrevation could have been spared if the family was on the same page as the dying aunt.

Euthanasia is condemned by the Catholic Church. No one is recommending. encouraging, advocating the acceleration of death. Hospice does not engage in euthanasia. Catholics may freely use hospice when they are dying. The OP was addressing a person who was actively dying - BUT - family members did not want them to die and were all set to violate this dying person’s integrity by ignoring their request and getting them to a hospital for some type of IV infusion of nutrition and fluids. While the ambulance may not have been in a position to refuse such a request, the medical professionals would most certainly have done so - especially, as evidenced by the fact that the person died enroute to the hospital.

Your statement is a canard and you make it clear that you have not read my posts. In all my posts my posts regarding this I have made it clear that this only applies to those who are able to receive it. For example in the statement you selectively quoted, removing my specific reference to the limitations, I implied that here as I said “to accelerate death”.Please stop diverting the issue by such needless statements.

 

[Holly3278]

It was wrong to starve her to death. I am not saying that your family is guilty of anything. Rather, I am saying that the hospice is guilty. It is gravely immoral to starve a person to death.

 

[Rence]

And once again, I appreciate Tom and Razz(name removed by moderator)'s posts. They are articulate, informative and correct. I wish more people would read them, that way they would be so confused. It’s easier to understand these issues when clinical people, like nurses, explain end of life caregiving issues

 

[dontknow]

Once again there’s much disagreement on this topic.

I personally appreciate all of the clear and supportive remarks made on behalf of what Hospice is and does!

In general, posters who make rude and cart blanch responses on behalf of the Church or of themselves certainly do not add favorably to a conversation. There is more than one way to make statements.

This topic has been discussed at large with our Pastor and I can assure you his remarks are much more pleasant than some made here.

I have a LW , DPA and my wife & I know and understand each other’s wishes.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Holly3278,

I am not entirely sure what you have read to date on this thread but two things should be immediately pointed out (and, I encourage you to go to the OP and read the sequence of events as described there). I have two comments to make:

1.) The name of the thread is unfortunate in that it does not describe what took place. The person was dying of some disease and was put on hospice. This means that at least one Medical Doctor believed that this person had less than six months to live if the disease process ran its natural course. This means a person with a terminal diagnosis is really terminal. The certainty of death is very present with this person. This person did not die of starvation. (You see, that would have been murder and I am confident, given the way that the OP wrote the story, if there was the slightest possiblity that the dying aunt had died of starvation, the police would have been involved and the murder arrested and charged. If you want an example, just look to Dr. Kavorkian who stepped over the line.

2.) Life is a natural process, and what follow is death - another natural process. There comes a point when life - despite the best of efforts - can not be maintained. The purpose of hospice is to ease the transition from life to death. Speaking as a Registered Nurse, I can tell you without fear of contradiction that there are painful deaths that take place every day. Forcing food and fluids into someone who is actively dying causes pain, requires the body to respond in a way it was trying to move away from and puts this person at risk for complications that will result in a painful death. If the family of the OP had respected the dying aunt’s wishes a lot of things would have been different, but one thing is for sure, she would not have had a traumatic death in the back of an ambulance.

It is immoral to act in such a way as to actively hasten anyone’s death - through any means. What the OP described does not fit this prohibition. I would recommend you re-read this and think about your own end and what it is that you would like done for yourself so that these wishes can be reduced to writing and you select someone who will abide by them. The aunt of the OP was not so fortunate.

God bless

It was wrong to starve her to death. I am not saying that your family is guilty of anything. Rather, I am saying that the hospice is guilty. It is gravely immoral to starve a person to death.

 

[rpp]

Actually, rrp, what you are saying is that anyone who disagrees with you is supporting murdering the unwanted… and this is not what is being said. I submit that wabrams has properly address the matter of the OP which is a DYING PERSON (not an about-to-be-murdered-unwanted-person) who could not handle food or fluids. The analogy given was proper - but, you have not only chosen to reject it - but to insult the poster.

I submit your movement back and forth between what others are saying and what words you want to put in their mouths is causing a lot of unnecessary difficulties.

No one is trying to hijack any thread - you would be well advised to go beyond your personal experiences and read what others have actually written. For those who are concerned about ‘death by starvation’ I would recommend that they enact a Living Will and a Durable Medical Power of Attorney that clearly identifies what it is they want when they are considered to be dying and, if the disease process / organ failure that they are dying from runs its natural course, this person would be dead within six months. As we can see from the OP, much needless grief and aggrevation could have been spared if the family was on the same page as the dying aunt.

Euthanasia is condemned by the Catholic Church. No one is recommending. encouraging, advocating the acceleration of death. Hospice does not engage in euthanasia. Catholics may freely use hospice when they are dying. The OP was addressing a person who was actively dying - BUT - family members did not want them to die and were all set to violate this dying person’s integrity by ignoring their request and getting them to a hospital for some type of IV infusion of nutrition and fluids. While the ambulance may not have been in a position to refuse such a request, the medical professionals would most certainly have done so - especially, as evidenced by the fact that the person died enroute to the hospital.

Aside from your personal attack, you have so utterly misrepresented what I have posted that it cannot be reconciled with reality. I will not rise to your your bait.

Oh, and use a spell checker.

Goodbye for good.

 

[tqualey]

Good-bye and God bless

Aside from your personal attack, you have so utterly misrepresented what I have posted that it cannot be reconciled with reality. I will not rise to your your bait.

Oh, and use a spell checker.

Goodbye for good.