Not providing medical treatment when it could help?

[JRKH]

Thanks James. As DVIN just said above, you have been “blessed” with suffering. Like you, this is the second time for my wife to live through this. Her father had AD and deriorated and died in 1991. Now, she’s reliving it with her mother, and you are reliving it with your wife.

My wife is also thinking the worst, that since both her parents had it, she and her brothers and sisters will likely have it.

So who knows? I may be in your shoes sometime in the future
ready or not.

God Bless

Thank you for your kind words.

I too worry about this in my own life.
Plus, my son has AD on both sides of the family so he will be a greater risk than I.
We can only hope the some of the truly promising research bears fruit soon.
Fo now we must stay as active as possible. We have a “quote” on our living room wall that goes:
“An Idle Mind is The Devils Playground, and the Devil’s Name is Alzheimers”

God be with you.

James

 

[maryj]

Dearest Max37,
May God comfort and console you and yours in this time of great stress and grief.
I lost my mother last July, just short of her 89th birthday. She had had a stroke a year earlier, and with help, we (I am the youngest of 11) were able to keep her at home until she died. It was a long year of suffering for her, and for us.she was admitted to the hospital numerous times during that year. It was very stressful, tiring, and emotional. I’m sure if you’ve spent many days sitting in a hospital, you’ll know exactly what I mean. She was tired, she carried her cross with a dignity, she trusted in the Lord…And so do I… If you have ever been the one to be a primary care giver, you will know how hard it is to medically, and physically take care of someone of this age. I spent many an hour in our Adoration chapel, what I heard was this…“Trust in Me”. I went to our priest and asked exactly what it was that was expected out of us in this situation. He told us our moral responsibility was this, Food and Water, Medical treatment was not required. We called in hospice. Mom lived three more months, hospice helped us tremendously in keeping her as comfortable as possible. Now my question to you is this, why do you want her to live? Seems like a simple question to answer doesn’t it. Of course we love our parents, but is delaying her death more about us than it is about them? It’s a tuff one to answer isn’t it. I know how you and your wife feel, I really do. Your Mother inlaw has lived a long life, much longer than I hope to have to endure, but I know what lies a head for her. It is a reward she has waited her whole life for. May God send His angels to lead her home, if it be His will. I will pray for your family, Trust in Him, it is in His hands not ours. God Bless. If you have any question please feel free to PM me.

 

[maryj]

DVIN,
I am praying for you now.
May God grant you His strength and courage and peace as He calls your loved one home to Himself.

As to the feeding issue, we found out that, once the patient stops eating, the digestive system basically stops functioning, so trying feeding tubes is not really a viable option. It is good that you give a little water. With Dad, mom would keep some crushed ice in the freezer and we would put small bits of it on his lips. It helped to keep his mouth from drying out too much.

My dad lasted just about 6 days from the time he stopped eating. Of course each case is different.

Also, it can be helpful to the family if you talk quietly to him and let him know it is OK for him to leave now.

God be with you and your family.

I want to take the time here to put in a plug for hospice here. They were absolutely fantastic with my mom and with all of us. I can’t thank them enough. (This was Hospice of Cincinnati.)

Peace
James

To feed, when the systems are shutting down, can be very painful for the person. I will plug Hospice again also, if you can donate to them, please do. Their work is so important.
Just one more comment, My Mom hung on to life for about seven days when she was barely able to even open her eyes. She had turned blue from lack of oxygen, and we knew that death was coming just not when. The last night she was alive she struggled, it was heart wrenching, she was in and out of consciousness, and at one point she opened her eyes and looked directly at me, as she held me by the front of my shirt, she whispered to me “I can’t do this anymore” I told her immediately it’s Ok mom, I’ll count to three and this will be done. I counted to three, she laid her head back and shortly therafter she took her last breath. It’s so important to let them know it’s ok, because it is OK.

 

[JRKH]

To feed, when the systems are shutting down, can be very painful for the person. I will plug Hospice again also, if you can donate to them, please do. Their work is so important.
Just one more comment, My Mom hung on to life for about seven days when she was barely able to even open her eyes. She had turned blue from lack of oxygen, and we knew that death was coming just not when. The last night she was alive she struggled, it was heart wrenching, she was in and out of consciousness, and at one point she opened her eyes and looked directly at me, as she held me by the front of my shirt, she whispered to me “I can’t do this anymore” I told her immediately it’s Ok mom, I’ll count to three and this will be done. I counted to three, she laid her head back and shortly therafter she took her last breath. It’s so important to let them know it’s ok, because it is OK.

What a beautiful story.
May God console you.

Peace
James

 

[GerardP]

“First of all, do any of you here think it’s a crime to help a suffering human end his agony? Any of you think it is? Say so right now. Well, then, what are we doing here?”

“My intent was to carry out my duty as a doctor, to end their suffering. Unfortunately, that entailed, in their cases, ending of the life.”

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/413WC1JKHEL.AA280.jpg

I’m seeing some posts that are too reminiscent of arguments I’ve heard before. People are being mislead by Doctors and most gravely by priests it seems.

 

[JRKH]

“First of all, do any of you here think it’s a crime to help a suffering human end his agony? Any of you think it is? Say so right now. Well, then, what are we doing here?”

I’m seeing some posts that are too reminiscent of arguments I’ve heard before. People are being mislead by Doctors and most gravely by priests it seems.

May I suggest starting a new thread for this discussion?

James

 

[maryj]

“First of all, do any of you here think it’s a crime to help a suffering human end his agony? Any of you think it is? Say so right now. Well, then, what are we doing here?”

“My intent was to carry out my duty as a doctor, to end their suffering. Unfortunately, that entailed, in their cases, ending of the life.”

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/413WC1JKHEL.AA280.jpg

I’m seeing some posts that are too reminiscent of arguments I’ve heard before. People are being mislead by Doctors and most gravely by priests it seems.

Let me get this off hand remark clear, are you speaking to me?

 

[GerardP]

Let me get this off hand remark clear, are you speaking to me?

Not in particular. But I do think there are several posters here who have adopted views that are philosophically very similar to Dr. Kevorkian’s.

In going back and looking over your recent posts, I am flummuxed as to what would spur your question to Max, “Why do you want her to live?” That’s a question that I would never fathom to ask simply because my wants are not relevant to what God wants. Also, that question begs the opposite question, “Why do you want her to die?” The answers I’m sure would be very revealing.

 

[maryj]

Not in particular. But I do think there are several posters here who have adopted views that are philosophically very similar to Dr. Kevorkian’s.

In going back and looking over your recent posts, I am flummuxed as to what would spur your question to Max, “Why do you want her to live?” That’s a question that I would never fathom to ask simply because my wants are not relevant to what God wants. Also, that question begs the opposite question, “Why do you want her to die?” The answers I’m sure would be very revealing.

I didn’t, but that is not in my hands is it.

 

[JRKH]

Not in particular. But I do think there are several posters here who have adopted views that are philosophically very similar to Dr. Kevorkian’s.

In going back and looking over your recent posts, I am flummuxed as to what would spur your question to Max, “Why do you want her to live?” That’s a question that I would never fathom to ask simply because my wants are not relevant to what God wants. Also, that question begs the opposite question, “Why do you want her to die?” The answers I’m sure would be very revealing.

If it comes to such a question as this, the answer for most is that we don’t “want her dead”. What we want is for her to LIVE at peace with our Lord.

If you cannot see that. If you can’t see that one can lovingly let someone go to God, then you have closed your mind to compassion and can only see “it is written”. You, “bind up loads for others to carry”, being more interested in the letter than the spirit of the “Law”.

There is a huge difference between not interfering with the natural progression of a disease and the intentional speeding up of the process ala kavorkian. Your previous post is purely inflamatory and should be withdrawn.

I end now for my anger is getting the better of me.

Peace
James

 

[seekerz]

In response to the original post, I think that our position as Catholics should be crystal clear and it’s amazing we need a thread this length.

Are we the same people trying to convince the rest of the world that what they see as a ball of cells is a human being and that killing it is murder?!

Unbelievable. This woman can in no way, shape or form be mistaken to be anything other than fully human, yet we need to debate whether it’s immoral to administer antibiotics? If that’s truly reflective of our modern-day Catholic conscience, then I say shame on us!

 

[JRKH]

In response to the original post, I think that our position as Catholics should be crystal clear and it’s amazing we need a thread this length.

Are we the same people trying to convince the rest of the world that what they see as a ball of cells is a human being and that killing it is murder?!

Unbelievable. This woman can in no way, shape or form be mistaken to be anything other than fully human, yet we need to debate whether it’s immoral to administer antibiotics? If that’s truly reflective of our modern-day Catholic conscience, then I say shame on us!

Maybe I missed something - Did someone actually say that it was immoral to administer antibiotics? If so I don’t remember reading it.

Also, I don’t see you equation of “ball of cells” vs end of life issues being the same thing.
If the “Ball of Cells” is not interfered with, it becomes (in most cases) a fully functioning human being and continues on through life to it’s inevitable end.
In the case of the OP, if the “fully human” women is not interfered with, she will beocme fully spirit and return to God. Which, of course, is the ultimate goal of us all. If she is interefered with by the use of antibiotics, her return to God will be delayed by a few weeks or months.

In the first case it requires an action (abortion) to end the natural cycle. In the second the natural cycle will not be interupted by either an action or an inaction. Only the timing will be effected. The patient is terminal, barring divine intervention in the form of a miracle. And since God has set these things in motion, why should we interfere with how he chooses to end this persons life?

Assuming you have read all the posts here, you should have read about the loving, tearful, prayerful aspects that go into these decisions. You might have read my point regarding the ultimate purpose of medical treatment. If you did not it is repeated below.

Now the ultimate purpose of medical treatment is to retore the body to health. Or at least a reasonable level of health which allows the patient to continue to live their life.
If a person with advanced AD is given treatment for a “curable” disease (in this case pneumonia) what is the expected outcome of the treatment? Is it to increase the patients chance at recovering? Making the patient more comfortable? Is it simply to keep the person alive a bit longer because you cannot accept the end which is already so close?

You seem to believe that we are in sin if we, as family and caregivers to our loved ones, decide not to interefere with the natural course of events; if we choose not to interfere with God’s plan. But this cannot be known unless you can see with the eyes of the Father, into the hearts of those involved.

If you believe this, fine, then when you are placed in this position, you will have the oportunity to make the decision that your heart tells you is right for your loved one.

Peace
James

 

[lovesMary]

I think a woman, in her 90s, living in a nursing home, in the later stages of Alzhiemers, can be considered to be medically at the “end of life”. Therefore, the Church allows for comfort measures only to be given, at the decision of the next of kin or DPA. Antibiotics can be considered extraordinary in the circumstance of end of life.

There is room for personal choice for Catholics as to what medical care they will accept, based on their individual circumstances. What is unbearable to one person is acceptable to another. What is extraordinary care in one case is ordinary in another. The Church gives us guidelines, and God has given us intelligence with which to discern, to the best of our ability.

 

[system]

In the case of the OP, if the “fully human” women is not interfered with, she will beocme fully spirit and return to God. Which, of course, is the ultimate goal of us all. If she is interefered with by the use of antibiotics, her return to God will be delayed by a few weeks or months.

Well, being the OP, I should try to clarify. Since I am someone who nearly died from Pneumonia, I may be biased in some way. If I believed that she would simply turn from human to spirit and go back to God, I may have reacted differently. But knowing pneumonia, I thought that she would suffer greatly, drown in an ever-increasing gathering of fluid in the lungs, then die and go back to God.

If my opinion, which was to administer normal treatment, seemed cruel or unloving in any way, it may have to do with my memories of gasping for every breath and drowning from fluid in my lungs.

In the first case it requires an action (abortion) to end the natural cycle. In the second the natural cycle will not be interupted by either an action or an inaction. Only the timing will be effected. The patient is terminal, barring divine intervention in the form of a miracle. And since God has set these things in motion, why should we interfere with how he chooses to end this persons life?

Again, to clarify my thinking when I started this. I did not believe that only the timing would effected. I know that other systems are going to shut down; probably soon. There will be no way to stop that. And there may be a chance she has a peaceful death in her sleep without drowing from pneumonia, gasping for air.

So who am I to decide that is right? Just a son-in-law who is low on the totem pole and never even got to give my opinion! (But we sure did get to explore the subject HERE! )

You seem to believe that we are in sin if we, as family and caregivers to our loved ones, decide not to interefere with the natural course of events; if we choose not to interfere with God’s plan. But this cannot be known unless you can see with the eyes of the Father, into the hearts of those involved.

Again clarifying the original post - Yes, with my basic and incomplete understanding of Catholic thinking, I believed someone would be guilty of grave sin by not treating her. (And, yes, my wife felt the same way )

I surely don’t KNOW for a fact what’s God’s opinion would be on what was grave sin and what would be compassionate "letting go, " in each individual case, but in this case, my opinion was to go for the ordinary treatment.

I don’t know what happens next, and I do believe you are right, that this treatment only delayed the inevitable death which is coming, probably soon. My opinion, which could be wrong in many people’s eyes, is that avoiding death via pneumonia was an act of kindness and the right thing in this case.

I’ve heard the old slogan, “pneumonia is the old person’s friend” but I think that is a strange expression and it is no one’s friend. a car accident with an instant death could be a friend. Drowning on the inside just doesn’t seem friendly to me.

Again - I’m not commenting on any other person’s experience, trials or suffering. I Just came here for advice and hopefully to find a solid “Catholic Answer”

 

[lovesMary]

Here is an interesting article on this subject, I excerpted part of the article, for the rest click on the link.

groups.google.com/group/sci.med/browse_thread/thread/4e790a455bae838f/1e113ac23d641fcb

**Study Suggests Antibiotics Are Overused
Study: Antibiotics May Be Overused in Nursing Home Residents Suffering
From Dementia
By CARLA K. JOHNSON Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press
CHICAGO
02-25-2008 **

*A woman dying of Alzheimer’s has a fever. Should she be given
antibiotics? Many people would say yes. But a provocative new study
suggests that antibiotics are overused in people dying of dementia
diseases and should be considered more carefully because of the
growing problem of drug-resistant superbugs.

The study raises ethical questions about when it’s acceptable to
withhold perhaps futile treatment and let people die, and whether
public health issues should ever be considered.

“Advanced dementia is a terminal illness,” said study co-author Dr.
Susan Mitchell, a senior scientist with the Harvard-affiliated Hebrew
Senior Life Institute for Aging Research in Boston. “If we substituted
‘end-stage cancer’ for ‘advanced dementia,’ I don’t think people would
have any problem understanding this.”

Many experts, including the Alzheimer’s Association, consider
Alzheimer’s and other dementias to be fatal brain diseases. Patients
die of infections such as pneumonia and other complications, but the
underlying cause is damage to brain cells… *

 

[JRKH]

Max,
I hope I have not caused you undue distress with my responses to some of the posts here. As you may have noted, I suggested that those wishing to continue this discussion might want to start a new thread since you had posted that the decision was already made to treat the pneumonia.

Well, being the OP, I should try to clarify. Since I am someone who nearly died from Pneumonia, I may be biased in some way. If I believed that she would simply turn from human to spirit and go back to God, I may have reacted differently. But knowing pneumonia, I thought that she would suffer greatly, drown in an ever-increasing gathering of fluid in the lungs, then die and go back to God.

A sound and loving position. Made not to try and extend existance but to be of aid and comfort to your loved one. I agree wholeheartedly.

If my opinion, which was to administer normal treatment, seemed cruel or unloving in any way, it may have to do with my memories of gasping for every breath and drowning from fluid in my lungs.

To be honest Max, I don’t think that one or the other decison is “right” or “wrong” in the case of advanced AD. Only different.

Again, to clarify my thinking when I started this. I did not believe that only the timing would effected. I know that other systems are going to shut down; probably soon. There will be no way to stop that. And there may be a chance she has a peaceful death in her sleep without drowing from pneumonia, gasping for air.

So who am I to decide that is right? Just a son-in-law who is low on the totem pole and never even got to give my opinion! (But we sure did get to explore the subject HERE! )

We can be a pesky bunch around here. Alas it is the nature of open public forums.
I guess I shouldn’t keep posting on this, but it does get my blood up to hear people declare things so dogmatically when there is so much more to consider. They seem to substitute blind adherance to some “Law” ahead of the great commandments to Love God and Each other as ourselves.
Again I can only apologize if I have caused you personally any distress.

Again clarifying the original post - Yes, with my basic and incomplete understanding of Catholic thinking, I believed someone would be guilty of grave sin by not treating her. (And, yes, my wife felt the same way )

I surely don’t KNOW for a fact what’s God’s opinion would be on what was grave sin and what would be compassionate "letting go, " in each individual case, but in this case, my opinion was to go for the ordinary treatment.

I don’t know what happens next, and I do believe you are right, that this treatment only delayed the inevitable death which is coming, probably soon. My opinion, which could be wrong in many people’s eyes, is that avoiding death via pneumonia was an act of kindness and the right thing in this case.

Given what you have posted, I entirely agree. It brings her, and her family, greater comfort and peace. She is not suffering.

I’ve heard the old slogan, “pneumonia is the old person’s friend” but I think that is a strange expression and it is no one’s friend. a car accident with an instant death could be a friend. Drowning on the inside just doesn’t seem friendly to me.

Again - I’m not commenting on any other person’s experience, trials or suffering. I Just came here for advice and hopefully to find a solid “Catholic Answer”

I’m afraid that some here (including me I guess) have taken you specific situation and expanded and digressed into a more general debate on the end of life issues. If you wish us to end it I will certainly comply.

May God be with you in this difficult time.

Peace
James

 

[system]

Max,
I hope I have not caused you undue distress with my responses to some of the posts here. As you may have noted, I suggested that those wishing to continue this discussion might want to start a new thread since you had posted that the decision was already made to treat the pneumonia.

A sound and loving position. Made not to try and extend existance but to be of aid and comfort to your loved one. I agree wholeheartedly.

To be honest Max, I don’t think that one or the other decison is “right” or “wrong” in the case of advanced AD. Only different.

We can be a pesky bunch around here. Alas it is the nature of open public forums.
I guess I shouldn’t keep posting on this, but it does get my blood up to hear people declare things so dogmatically when there is so much more to consider. They seem to substitute blind adherance to some “Law” ahead of the great commandments to Love God and Each other as ourselves.
Again I can only apologize if I have caused you personally any distress.

Given what you have posted, I entirely agree. It brings her, and her family, greater comfort and peace. She is not suffering.

I’m afraid that some here (including me I guess) have taken you specific situation and expanded and digressed into a more general debate on the end of life issues. If you wish us to end it I will certainly comply.

May God be with you in this difficult time.

Peace
James

Thanks James!

No, I don’t think you have brought me distress and I think it’s fine that the subject is being discussed. (but there was one or two…)

One of my own personal struggles is two words someone mentioned many pages ago:
**“second guessing” **

I have it in many areas of my life and that idea or decision that was so clear yesterday, today looks like it is built on sand.

I’m sure you know the feeling.

I guess the thread should stay in case it does some people good.

Blessings!

max37

 

[seekerz]

I stand by my original remarks. A life is a life: embryo or terminal, elderly nursing home resident.

Giving antibiotics is a routine intevention unless the bug is resistant to all the common ones and requires the less commonly used, very expensive ones.

The study quoted above is simply asking, whether, in view of resistant super bugs, antibiotics should be used in the elderly and terminally ill. In other words, are we putting other people at risk by treating these dying elderly with antibiotics. Why someone’s medical care should be decided based on the needs of others, I’m not quite sure.

What does terminally ill mean? That the person is dying of a particular disease like cancer or as the study claims, dementia. Pneumonia, unless resistant to all antibiotics, is not by itself a terminal illness. Why should people be left to die of it? We treat pain in terminally ill patients, why not pneumonia which can be a very painful condition?

If people are terminally ill with a condition, let them die of that condition, not of having routine medical care withheld.

 

[wabrams]

I stand by my original remarks. A life is a life: embryo or terminal, elderly nursing home resident.

Giving antibiotics is a routine intevention unless the bug is resistant to all the common ones and requires the less commonly used, very expensive ones.

The study quoted above is simply asking, whether, in view of resistant super bugs, antibiotics should be used in the elderly and terminally ill. In other words, are we putting other people at risk by treating these dying elderly with antibiotics. Why someone’s medical care should be decided based on the needs of others, I’m not quite sure.

What does terminally ill mean? That the person is dying of a particular disease like cancer or as the study claims, dementia. Pneumonia, unless resistant to all antibiotics, is not by itself a terminal illness. Why should people be left to die of it? We treat pain in terminally ill patients, why not pneumonia which can be a very painful condition?

If people are terminally ill with a condition, let them die of that condition, not of having routine medical care withheld.

I’m not attacking you with this question, but do you think that a person with AIDS who doesn’t want to fight it would be morally right to stop recieving treatments?

 

[seekerz]

I’m not attacking you with this question, but do you think that a person with AIDS who doesn’t want to fight it would be morally right to stop recieving treatments?

That depends on the treatment. If the person had such bad lung disease for example, that even with medicines, he would still need a mechanical ventilation, I see nothing wrong in such a person refusing treatment. If the person had cancer spread throughout the body and such that treating the AIDS would really be pointless, again I see nothing wrong in refusing treatment.

Heroic measures are optional. Routine measures, in my mind, especially where withholding those would result in death, are not optional.If God provides man with the knowledge and skill to heal or treat diseases, I believe it is wrong to hasten death by refusing them.

HIV infection, in the developed world at least, is becoming more and more like any chronic disease such as diabetes or asthma, which untreated would result in death. I don’t believe we would debate very long over the morality of withholding insulin or breathing treatments now, do you?