Hi Pog - I'm thinking about your Dad & hoping he, and you, will soon find some peace.

In regard to your question - it's a tough one. Somebody once said "Just because we can do something, it doesn't necessarily mean we should" - and I fully agree. The challenge comes in defining "too long". Most hospitals now have medical ethics teams to explore the most complex situations.

I work in health care, often interacting with families whose loved ones are aged and nearing death. Some families understant this as a natural course of events, to be honoured, and they journey with their loved one through that final chapter, with comfort and quality of life at the top of their agenda. Others rail against the inevitable, imploring those working in health care to take dramatic, heroic measures to stave off their pending loss. And of course there are many in between who choose some measures, for some time, keeping an eye on the whole picture.

More and more often, individuals and families are being asked to make end-of-life decisions. It's a really important thing for ALLof us to talk about what our wishes would be, so family can honour that if placed in such a decision making position. It really eases things so much, when one knows these wishes ahead of time.

For me personally, it's not a matter of the quantity of time, rather the subjective quality of the life lived. When it's my time to go, I hope to make a quick exit, not lingering sadly. And yes, I've discussed it all with my family.

Good question, and good post, Carolla. I would tend to agree. Anecdotally, though, I would have to say that yes, sometimes, medical science is used to keep someone alive too long, where too long is defined by the quality rather than quantity of their life. But the word "sometimes" in that sentence is important.

Carolla I have to agree with you. We need to take the weight and burden off those who care about us by expressing what our desires actually are. I have a durable power of attorney for medical care. I have written down my wishes. I cannot let anyone have to make those decisions.

Pog, my thoughts are with you.

I like this post. I want to offer a bit of sidebar which will not at all even attempt to answer your question, just a little extra. My PhD thesis mentions this aspect of humans.
It's a trait that is a left over remnant from before the fall of mankind that we want to have eternal life here on earth. God created Adam and Eve to live on earth and to never know about death or to ever experience death, thus they were created to have eternal life. This is why the promise of eternal life is such a major thrust throughout the rest of the bible. God is making the attempt to draw believers back into the original state of creation. People (for the most part at least) tend to want to live longer by any means necessary. Whether by staying healthy to live longer, to have medical treatments to prolong death, or to put an exuberant amount of vitamins and chemicals into our body to stay alive for just a few extra years.
Individuals have their own particular reasons for staying alive longer, but I'm excited to see that we, as God's precious creation, have remnants of his creation left inside of us. C.S. Lewis mentions this topic a bit more in the books Mere Christianity and The Weight of Glory (both lovely books!).

By the way Pog, I just read about your dad on the next thread and my prayers are with you. Sorry to hear about all that.

Hi Pog

So sorry to hear about your dad. I hope the days ahead are better. Such a sad and difficult time!

When my father was dying of cancer, I was still living in the US and coming back here all the time. I was use to what I saw as the American medical model- do everything you can, all the time, whatever tests, whatever longshot treatment, no matter what the cost. Right to the end.

So I was so surprised and at first, taken aback by how the Canadian system dealt with my dad and his cancer. Sure there were things they might try for his cancer, they said, but given his age and condition, they were unlikely to work and better to focus on palliative care, managing the symptoms and pain, and quality of life.

I loved my dad sooo much, and I would have given anything for him to keep living as long as possible. I know he too wanted to live as long as possible. Yet he and I both understood this philosophy of Canadian medicine and it made sense to us. It seemed sane. It seemed reasonable. It seemed accepting of both life and death and the limits of science and man.

I honestly believe that had he been in a system that pushed every possible treatment, he'd have spent his last limited days in discomfort, and lost time in the hassles of treatment adn appointmenst and hospital stays, and we would have focused on all the wrong stuff. Fortunately we did not do that- we had time and quality to enjoy life instead, to the end (pain free it turns out).

I think there needs to be a balance between "doing everything possible" and letting the patient die comfortably.

It seems far too often in Canadian hospitals (especially rural ones), likely due to an overtaxed medical system, that patient's conditions are allowed to degrade, and patients allowed to waste away and die without even remotely exhausting available forms of treatment.

Pog
I am sorry to hear about the trouble your father has been having and I hope that he does recover.
In answer to your question I think that in some cases medical science may be keeping people alive too long. I think that all of us should decide how we want to be treated when we are appraoching the end of our life, and communicate this to the other members of our family. It is a very difficult decision for a family member or even a health care worker to decide whether or not to withdraw life support systems from a loved one. Many people fear death and would want to prolong life as long as possible regardless of the circumstances. My Dad lived until he was 94 and was still reading two books a day from the library up until a week before he died. He was still gardening a year before he died. He made it well known to the family and to his doctor that he did not want to be resucitated if it meant living in a nursing home and not able to do anything for himself. To him quality of life was more important than length of life. Fortuneately for him, he had both.
I pray that your father will be as fortuneate.

i used to work as a nurse as well, and i've seen people go to just ridiculous extremes to try and prolong the life of a loved one... in one case, we had a woman in her 80s who had had a number of severe strokes, and she was a vegetable. it was brutal to watch her daughter call every doctor, try every method she could find, give her mother every fricking vitamin... it was just so hard. and of course, as with all patients relatives, it was us who were at fault for the fact that her mother wasn't up and walking around like she used to be before the strokes. it reminded me alot of the situation down in florida last year, where that womans family wouldn't let the feeding tube be removed after it had been proven that their daughter was GONE, all that was left was this shell with the most basic of brain stem reflexes. it was so sad to see that family turn against itself like that, and i blame the doctors who kept thinking that they could 'simply rearrange the deck chairs on the titanic and make it float again....' this woman wasn't coming back, and to give her parents hope was the cruelest thing i ever saw.

i'm with whomever it was above who said MAKE A LIVING WILL. my mom is a devout catholic, and there is no doubt in my mind that she would be in there with the coloured lights to try and prove that i still had a chance if that ever happened to me. i made a living will, and gave a copy to my parents, my husband, and a good friend, just to make sure that there is no way that my family will ever have to suffer through what that florida family had to endure.

It is with some trepidation that I enter this conversation. I have thought long and hard about this question in recent years, but from another angle. I am the mother of a profoundly disabled, medically fragile young boy. My son suffered a catastrophic birth injury about eight years ago and has required increasingly complex care since that time. Aggressive life saving measures were used at birth and on two occasions we were asked if we wished to discontinue life support...we didn't. I thank God everyday that my son is in my life, however the burden of care that my family, and in particular me as his primary caregiver must shoulder is overwhelming and exhausting. During my darkest hours (that come and go) I wonder if we made the right the decision, but ending your infant's life is a decision no parent should have to make. Incidentally, he carries a diagnosis of CP (among many others) like Tracy Latimer and is maintained on a feeding tube like Terry Shiavo.

I agree that medical science can and does preserve life at the expense of quality of life. However, it is an unbelievably complex and delicate line between the two states. And despite living this life for eight years I am no further to an answer than I was when this journey began. My biggest concern is the fact that medical science can keep people alive but then sends them home to families, communities and social/health service sectors that are often ill equipped to handle the unrelenting demands of their care (think homecare funding cutbacks, nursing shortages etc.). The burden of care then falls to the immediate family, often a woman, who is left to shoulder the unrelenting responsibilities. I struggle with this most of all. I struggle with a society that does this and then stands in harsh judgement of a man who felt the only way to end his daughter's suffering was to end her life. How could we, as a caring society, let any father, or anybody, reach such a place?

I agree clear feedback about when and how to end one's life in the form of a WRITTEN and SIGNED living will is an excellent idea. However, that still leaves lots of us living with the consequences of assertive medical management. In response to that I would like to see an increased emphasis on creating caring communities that welcome and support diverse abilities. Perhaps a good place to start would be making churches fully accessible!

the latimer case pissed me off, for this reason...

rober latimers lawyer, rather than just plead a moment of insanity, actually tried to have the law changed to allow for euthanasia. instead of trying to help this guy, this fricking ass of a lawyer figured he was gonna make a name for himself by being THE GUY who got euthanasia on the books.

if he had pleaded temporary insanity?? fine. who among us can honestly say that we wouldn't have had a really bad day and made a really stupid decision, especially when you consider the fact that this family is all alone out on the farm there, with NO respite... the fact that they had suffered so long that it actually GOT to that point was heartbreaking, and then to watch that A*(*)&*( of a lawyer try and make a name for himself at robert latimers expense...

yep, robert latimer is in prison, just because this lawyer wanted to make a statement.

Dear Specialmom -
Thank you so much for your thoughtful response. You are so right in pointing out that our officially sanctionned, publicly funded community supports are woefully inadequate, usually leaving women to shoulder the burden of care with little or no respite. Most people hear that the government's doing a great job of expanding "home care" services - little do they know until they need to access these services how overtaxed and underfunded they are. It's a grim surprise to many.

Thank you also for helping us to remember that issues of death and disability do not just touch those who have lived long lives. Prenatal death, birth injuries, critical illness in our children - those are things the vast majority of us have no direct experience with, and scarcely can imagine.

I'm happy to tell you that our church building has recently undergone major renovation, and accessibility was an issue well attended to - important for everyone, whether because of a temporary disability from a broken ankle or such folies, or because of limitations otherwise acquired. Accessibility is a topic dear to my heart, and one focus of my advocacy and social justice activities in my own community.

Blessings and courage to you, as you make your journey with your precious child.

Hi pog. I often think about old pets and old people, Many would say it is a ridiculous comparison, however, I find it odd that we can euthanize an old/sick pet but cannnot put our loved ones out of their misery.

I don't want to waste away. When I get close to the end I want to go out with a bit of my dignity and pride. I would rather have an 'accident' and be done with it.

Good luck with your dad.

In my opinion, there are many 'side issues' surrounding this topic. In general, however, I think we have allowed 'medical science' far too much latitude over human existence. So much so that it is almost impossible for life to exist naturally. We seem to have forgotten that we are only a part of creation - we have relinquished the controlling factors to increase the skills of those engaged in medical fields. Population control is now available because of medical and genetic research and the pharmaceutical support industry.

I think the problem is that science moves faster than society is able to cope with this dilemma. It is an issue fraught with conflicting emotions and ideologies developed at a time when such possibilities did not exist.

I agree with specialmom, it is not enough for medicine, and, in the larger context, society to give the tools to extend life; it must also provide the support for those that accept those tools to fulfill it.

To me, this is such a personal decision that there should be no pressure, one way or the other, placed on the individuals faced with making it. The responsibilities of others is to respect, and where necessary support, the decision.