End of life scenario

[Adamski]

If a person were in a car crash and were hooked up to devises to keep them alive and if the devises were disconnected they would probably die does that go against catholic teaching? Even though they are being kept alive artificially ?

 

[Miserissima]

Thus, if a patient has suffered brain damage to such an extent that survival will not include the ability to lead a life even approximating the normal, or if the disease processes in a patient have debilitated the patient beyond any hoipeful prognosis, it is very likely that a consideration of all of the circumstances of the individual case will lead to the sound moral judgment that artificial resuscitation, whether manual or mechanical, may be considered in that particular case to be a relatively extraordinary means of prolonging life. Once this judgment is reached, then the wishes of the patient become the operative norm for further treatment.

ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=367160

 

[Miserissima]

Here’s one that’s easier to read:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=11891586#post11891586

" Generally speaking the Church teaches that we must administer ordinary and proportionate care to the sick and dying. However the individual does have the right to refuse extraordinary and disproportionate care."

and:

" A DNR is not suicide if it is ordered to avoid disproportionately prolonged suffering."

 

[Adamski]

Ok I have read both of those before, my main though is imagine this is your three year old and you don’t have any official paper work saying DNR and this child has been hooked up to machines that are not making them any better but just maintaining a unresponsive state

 

[JohnMPhilomena]

Ok I have read both of those before, my main though is imagine this is your three year old and you don’t have any official paper work saying DNR and this child has been hooked up to machines that are not making them any better but just maintaining a unresponsive state

As a parent, I believe you can have the machines disconnected. I’m sure this would be the most difficult decision a parent would have to make. But the machines are extraordinary care. Ordinary care would be providing food and water.

 

[Cricket2]

Ok I have read both of those before, my main though is imagine this is your three year old and you don’t have any official paper work saying DNR and this child has been hooked up to machines that are not making them any better but just maintaining a unresponsive state

In the case of a minor or child the parent can make this choice. In this scenario physicians would more than likely have the ability to indicate the child’s prognosis, if they were brain dead and whether they had a prognosis of any possible recovery. The use of “machines” could certainly be seen as extraordinary means and viewed as something that should be stopped.

I think in most cases like this what usually happens is the family is asked if the want a DNR order put in place for the child. So should they go into cardiac arrest nothing is done to reverse that. Other extraordinary means that might be stopped would be the use of antibiotics in the event of infection.

Certainly each case must be dealt with in the context of the event that brought the child to such a state. I don’t believe that there is any wrong in deciding to stop extraordinary care when it is apparent there is no reasonable chance of recovery. I sometimes think there is more wrong in refusing to let a person go in peace. (I am not talking about some deliberate act of euthanasia.)

Having worked with the dying for many years I can only say there are certain signs that death is coming and there is often great dignity allowed the dying person when we STOP care that is no longer benefiting them. For example, when my grandmother was dying she no longer wanted to go to the doctor or to continue any of her medications. Hospice was called in, all of her medications were stopped except those to keep her out of pain and she never returned to the doctor. Her heart was dying and there was nothing to do about it.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Ok I have read both of those before, my main though is imagine this is your three year old and you don’t have any official paper work saying DNR and this child has been hooked up to machines that are not making them any better but just maintaining a unresponsive state

By “machines” you mean a respirator for breathing?

As long is there is breathing the heart can still function even though the brain may be non functioning. The purpose of a machine is to help get a person through a crisis. What is the realistic expectation that the person will be able to get off the machine and function breathe on thier own? Is there brain activity?

 

[Miserissima]

CCC 2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of “over-zealous” treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.
The Catechism expresses that the parents / legal guardians decide for a child, just as Cricket said.