Not providing medical treatment when it could help?

  • Thread starter Thread starter system
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

system

Guest
First, let me say, I’m close to this situation, but do not want to get too personal. Here goes:

I’m confused as to what is being done, or not being done in this situation. Patient is a 92 year-old woman. She has Alzheiner’s and has been in a Catholic Nursing home for about 9 years. She doesn’t know when her own family visits. It’s sad, but it is what it is. She has contracted pnuemonia once or twice over this period and was taken to the hospital and treated with Antibiotics and recovered.

She has again been diagnosed with pnuemonia, but one of the adult children, a nun, has decided they will not bring her to the hospital this time. And just let things “take their course.”

I don’t know much about these “end of life” scenarios, but I really have a bad gut reaction to that decision! Isn’t there something wrong in NOT trying some simple medicines? I’m not talking extraordinary measures, just an IV or some pills, like before.

Can someone help me out here? 🤷

Wouldn’t the Catholic approach here to try simple treatment? Is it immoral, or worse, to let someone die in this situation?
 
can’t possibly answer, I am not the woman’s doctor, so I don’t know what Letting Nature Take Its Course means in this situation.
 
Catholic moral theology does not *require *that a patient accept any medical intervention. You are not required to go to a doctor; you are not required to accept treatment; you are not required to take medication. If a family member has power of attorney to make financial and medical decisions on behalf of the person, the one exercising power of attorney can make those decisions for the patient. Each person in such a position is responsible for making the best decision he or she can.
As this is not your family, let it be.

Matthew
 
drafdog said:
Catholic moral theology does not *require *that a patient accept any medical intervention. You are not required to go to a doctor; you are not required to accept treatment; you are not required to take medication. If a family member has power of attorney to make financial and medical decisions on behalf of the person, the one exercising power of attorney can make those decisions for the patient. Each person in such a position is responsible for making the best decision he or she can.
As this is not your family, let it be.

Matthew
Click to expand...
Thanks Matthew.

The person who has power of attorney did not make this decision, and that person is my wife, so it is at least family-in-law.
 
drafdog said:
Catholic moral theology does not *require *that a patient accept any medical intervention. You are not required to go to a doctor; you are not required to accept treatment; you are not required to take medication. If a family member has power of attorney to make financial and medical decisions on behalf of the person, the one exercising power of attorney can make those decisions for the patient. Each person in such a position is responsible for making the best decision he or she can.
As this is not your family, let it be.

Matthew
Click to expand...
That’s a bogus argument. The patient is incapable of making decisions for herself. She simply has pneumonia, that is not terminal cancer.

To deny someone basic medical attention is willful neglect with the intent to euthanize someone.

Anyone who saw a child with an infection and said they were going to “let it run its course” would be hauled off to jail.
 
Here’s something that should help clarify the situation as well.

U.S. Bishops, Nutrition and Hydration: Moral and Pastoral Reflections:

”Therefore we are gravely concerned about current attitudes and policy trends in our society that would too easily dismiss patients without apparent mental faculties as non-persons or as undeserving of human care and concern. In this climate, even legitimate moral arguments intended to have a careful and limited application can easily be misinterpreted, broadened, and abused by others to erode respect for the lives of some of our society’s most helpless members. In light of these concerns, it is our considered judgment that while legitimate Catholic moral debate continues, decisions about these patients should be guided by a presumption in favor of medically-assisted nutrition and hydration.”
 
GerardP said:
She simply has pneumonia, that is not terminal cancer.

To deny someone basic medical attention is willful neglect with the intent to euthanize someone.

Anyone who saw a child with an infection and said they were going to “let it run its course” would be hauled off to jail.
Click to expand...
Just to reiterate the question:
She has again been diagnosed with pnuemonia, but one of the adult children, a nun, has decided they will not bring her to the hospital this time. And just let things “take their course.”
Click to expand...
😦

I would fight for her life.
 
BillP said:
EVERY birth results, eventually, in certain death.
Click to expand...
Thanks Bill, for the obvious. As a friend of mine says, “none of us get out of this alive.”

However, it has nothing to do with this situation, does it, Bill? Are you advocating withholding medicine when it would clearly save her life?

Sorry if my sense of humor is not tuned up during this stressful time
 
I could not withhold treatment of the pneumonia if it were my relative. If she has alzheimers for nine years already, she isn’t going to last long in any case. With that disease a point comes when the organs start to fail one by one and it is all over. It seems somewhat cruel to let someone die from treatable pneumonia. There used to be a saying, however, that pneumonia is the friend of the old and frail.
 
GerardP said:
That’s a bogus argument. The patient is incapable of making decisions for herself. She simply has pneumonia, that is not terminal cancer.

To deny someone basic medical attention is willful neglect with the intent to euthanize someone.

Anyone who saw a child with an infection and said they were going to “let it run its course” would be hauled off to jail.
Click to expand...
That’s what I thought, too. And yet, I figured I would come to CAF and present the situation, because I figured I would get some wisdom and church teaching on the matter.
**
It’s seems pro-life here just means anti-abortion, and the old are a different class. **

Pnuemonia was definitely a “natural death” a 100 years ago, and it still can be. But she is living proof that pneumonia can be treated successfully at a late age. I just have a gut feeling that they (the adult children) have lost the all endurance and will to see any more suffering.

And yet, allowing this to happen without treatment, will actually cause suffering. (and death)

And - (disclaimer) I don’t mean to sound judgemental of them either. My immediate family has been facing a long term illness and suffering of my dad, but not as long as this family has watched this.
 
I hope I don’t sound trite, but what do you think Jesus would think of a person in your position if you just stood by while they let her die? There doesn’t seem to be much conflict in my mind.

Sorry, but I’m just about to be baptised and I have a new found “Jesus” sight! Wow, things are much more clear now!

God bless you in your decision.
 
The Church’s moral position is generally that we are not required to undertake “extraordinary measures” to save life, but are obligated to take ordinary measures.

But keep in mind that those terms are not defined in medically certain terms. Some treatments for a 20 year old which are considered ordinary, might be considered extraordinary for a 90 year old with other serious medical problems. Each case ought to be considered on its own merits.
 
max37 said:
Thanks Bill, for the obvious. As a friend of mine says, “none of us get out of this alive.”

However, it has nothing to do with this situation, does it, Bill? Are you advocating withholding medicine when it would clearly save her life?

Sorry if my sense of humor is not tuned up during this stressful time
Click to expand...
I wasn’t trying to be humorous, I think we often forget that death is a natural part of life, not an enemy to be feared and held at bay as long as possible.

YES, I would withhold the medical care under discussion. In my opinion, medical care wouldn’t “save” her life, it would only prolong her death.
max37 said:
Pnuemonia was definitely a “natural death” a 100 years ago, and it still can be. But she is living proof that pneumonia can be treated successfully at a late age. I just have a gut feeling that they (the adult children) have lost the all endurance and will to see any more suffering.

And yet, allowing this to happen without treatment, will actually cause suffering. (and death)
Click to expand...
There is a reason that Pnuemonia was once called the “old person’s friend”. I think it is possible that God gave her the pnuemonia to bring her home.

At any rate, there is nothing in Catholic theology or teaching that demands that we must avail ourselves (or those we are responsible for) of medical care. Every person has to make the decision about what level of care is appropriate for them self and those they are responsible for. And every person would, I suspect, draw that live in a slightly different place. I personally wouldn’t treat the Pnuemonia if I were in that position. Patently you would. So I would ask, where would you draw the line in this case? Would you give her, say a heart or liver transplant?
 
max37 said:
That’s what I thought, too. And yet, I figured I would come to CAF and present the situation, because I figured I would get some wisdom and church teaching on the matter.
**
It’s seems pro-life here just means anti-abortion, and the old are a different class. **

Pnuemonia was definitely a “natural death” a 100 years ago, and it still can be. But she is living proof that pneumonia can be treated successfully at a late age. I just have a gut feeling that they (the adult children) have lost the all endurance and will to see any more suffering.

And yet, allowing this to happen without treatment, will actually cause suffering. (and death)

And - (disclaimer) I don’t mean to sound judgemental of them either. My immediate family has been facing a long term illness and suffering of my dad, but not as long as this family has watched this.
Click to expand...
Do you have exactly the same information the family of this woman? Do you know all the details and what has gone into this decision?
 
max37 said:
That’s what I thought, too. And yet, I figured I would come to CAF and present the situation, because I figured I would get some wisdom and church teaching on the matter.
**
It’s seems pro-life here just means anti-abortion, and the old are a different class. **
Click to expand...
Don’t give up so quickly. 😉
Have you looked at the archived Terry Schiavo threads?
 
Ramalama said:
I hope I don’t sound trite, but what do you think Jesus would think of a person in your position if you just stood by while they let her die? There doesn’t seem to be much conflict in my mind.

Sorry, but I’m just about to be baptised and I have a new found “Jesus” sight! Wow, things are much more clear now!

God bless you in your decision.
Click to expand...
Not trite at all. I feel like the only one in this situation that sees what you see.

I wish it WAS “my decision.” I can only hope to influence my wife.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top