• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Physician-assisted suicide

The thing is that it communicates a general state of mind regarding diminishing states or unmanageable pain. Contrary to 107's rather gloomy and pessimistic view of doctors, the very vast majority of them are truly committed to doing what's best for their patients. Having an organ that can communicate one's desire not to live in pain- or on life-sustaining technology- can make it easier for all involved to get to WFU71's situation where the doctors and family are communicating between the lines.

I don't have a pessimistic view of doctors. I just realize that bad one's exist. My main concern is family coercion or manipulation (which can often even be unintentional). Saying you don't want to live in pain doesn't mean much when you are healthy.

I can't imagine a scenario where I would support physician assisted suicide based on a living will. Before the state sanctions killing another person (even with their permission) it should be absolutely certain of that person's intentions AND be absolutely certain that the person has no chance of recovery or achieving a manageable level of pain. A living will does not accomplish that.
 
Just to be clear (and redundant), living wills and physician-assisted suicide, while both end-of-life issues, are separate concepts.

At this time, assisted suicide is out of the hands of physicians, considering that it's largely illegal. The most we can do is provide pain relief, which just so happens to hasten death in many instances. I guess we can call it ethical tap-dancing, but the hastened death is considered incidental to the primary goal of relief from suffering. Were it to become legal on a large scale, I would imagine many physicians would have a problem with it, seeing as it requires an act of commission that violates our first principle of primum non nocere.

Living wills are fantastic in principle and highly problematic in practice. For one, too few people actually have one. Secondly, they're woefully lacking in details. They often will decline things like "heroic measures" or "life support", but these are meaningless terms to a physician. The living will needs to include specifics, like do you want to be intubated? Do you want CPR? Mechanical ventililation? Do you want IV vasopressors? IV antibiotics? Palliative surgery? And this list goes on. In the absence of specific directives, the next of kin will almost always choose to do more rather than less, and physicians will go a long with it because no one want the liability of being accused of withholding care.

Lastly, living wills hold up right until the point that there is a family dispute. If the spouse is still in the picture, then it should theoretically be up to them, but adult children really muddy the water. And God forbid that the spouse is gone and there are multiple adult children. Invariably, there's the estranged daughter that lives a thousand miles away and didn't participate at all in end-of-life care who shows up at the 11th hour. That person always wants a full-court press and is appalled at her siblings for wanted to "pull the plug". And, in the absence of a POA, that daughter shares co-equal decision-making authority with the other siblings. No physician will withhold or withdraw care in that scenario.

Tl;dr: get a living will and make it detailed. Also get a medical power of attorney. But most importantly, speak with your family so that they understand your desires. Next of kin often won't follow your wishes, even if they're clearly outlined in the living will, if they're coming out of left field. Conversely, things are more likely to go smoothly with someone who has conveyed their wishes personally, even if those wishes are enumerated in a legal document.
 
That's a terrific post.

Family disputes in end of life situations occur way too often. I agree it is usually the child from furthest away who is riddled with guilt over their absence (and also free from the emotional burden of seeing their loved one decline).

I was the far away child when my parents came down with the illness that ended their lives. In my father's case I arrived at the hospital 25 minutes after he died. Several years later my mother's health declined to the point she needed nursing home care. Of course, I picked the nursing home. I introduced myself to that fine facility's administrator, flipped my business card on her desk and apologized in advance for the hell I was going to cause her. I think I told her I was her worst nightmare - the guilt riddled child from 500 miles away who knew more about nursing home care than anyone in the management company she worked for. Even though I knew all about the guilt absent children feel, I was helpless to adequately control my emotions.

If any of you find yourselves in one of these situations, start dealing with the absent child's guilt as soon as the illness occurs. If you turn out to be the absent child, God help you.
 
Last edited:
Man, tough topic. Sorry to hear about this. Thankfully, both my parents died in what I think was pain free (or short lived) and expedient fashions.

As a Christian, I find solace that life is defined not to merely physical life but eternal life offered through god's grace. For this reason, one ending a life full of pain is really not an issue to me. After all, life is eternal.

Im sure this is flawed but one that I've justified.
 
Back
Top