END OF LIFE ETHICAL ISSUES

[Wrangler]

Your fully developed philosophy of life is unable to answer my simple question:

IF YOU REQUIRED AN APPENDECTOMY....
TO SAVE YOUR LIFE....
WOULD YOU REFUSE IT....
in support of your philosophy that NOTHING should be done medically because it would be PLAYING GOD.

I've answered this question multiple times already.

No.

I know I’m in the minority and reject the ‘slippery slope’ fallacy of being in favor of EOL care.

the entire purpose of the medical profession is to <NOT let nature take its course>.

You are not understanding what I am writing. We "play God" and should "play God" before and @ EOL.

 

[Wrangler]

I didn't know we were discussing the medical profession.
That is NOT what this thread is about.

I'm not even really discussing euthanasia.

LOL. The ethical issues regarding EOL do not pertain to plumbing or road construction. Of course it pertains to the medical profession!

 

[GodsGrace]

It reminds me of Do not resuscitate.
Or when a person asks not to be put on life support where it is only the machines keeping them alive. same with a family having to decide if it’s time to turn off the life support. It’s a hard decision for the family. I’ve had to be apart of making this decision but I don’t get how they said it’s not the disease but the choice to not intervene any longer that caused the death.

I have a friend that believes what you say above.
If you keep feeding a person forcefully, they will live longer than normal.
So it's believed, by some, that if you stop the food and water, it's THAT that is making them die.

If the sick person that is dying would just be left to their own resources,,,,they would die sooner.
BUT in each case it IS the disease that is killing them.
If there were no disease,,,,they wouldn't be sick.
There would be no need to force-feed.

So, yes, I agree with you.

I know of one who voiced no feeding tube be inserted and that was their wishes for their family to follow. So I’m confusedwhy the Vatican is the one making the decision of what is allowed when it happens already within families with someone passing? The family in discussion of what course to take. “They noted that for patients in a vegetative state, there are some who argue that when food and hydration are suspended, death is not caused by the illness but rather by those who suspend them.”

Let's be careful....what you underlines above is what the CC USED to teach.
They have changed their position on this.

I think that, as a church, they are obligated to teach what they believe to be morally correct - as all churches should.
But then, of course, each case is very different, the wishes of the person enters into the decision, and there's a lot to consider.

I must say that, for this change, I DO agree with the CC.

No use to force-feed a person that is on their way to dying.

I’ve heard but I haven’t experienced it yet…that cancer is often not what kills a persons but that they stop eating. when a person is close to death the biggest sign is they stop eating. I don’t know if any of that helps. But it does seem to be a natural thing that happens even in people who are not in a vegetative state …no longer taking in food or drinking as the dying process happens.

Many different medical situations can kill a cancer patient before the cancer does.
But you're right.
When a person is close to death, they stop eating.
This is normal and should be respected - especially if there's pain or some other condition that makes death imminent.

 

[GodsGrace]

I've answered this question multiple times already.



You are not understanding what I am writing. We "play God" and should "play God" before and @ EOL.

LOL
OK Wrangler.
I don't see your reply but just your philosophy.

I'll tell you the answer for you:
If you had a terrible pain in the abdominal area and were told that it was necessary to operate to remove your appendix....
you'd say OK.

 

[Wrangler]

I'll tell you the answer for you:
If you had a terrible pain in the abdominal area and were told that it was necessary to operate to remove your appendix....
you'd say OK.

Yea, that’s what I meant when I said I would not refuse it.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yea, that’s what I meant when I said I would not refuse it.

Then I apologize for not understanding you.
OK.
NOW we could discuss your philosophy, if you want to.

Mine is that when a person is at the end of their life,
the best we could do is make them comfortable and not
try to keep them alive and all this ESPECIALLY if they're in pain
or are having some other difficulty.

I live in Italy and have been gone from the US for a long time so
I don't think I know what's going on over there anymore....
Here doctors are willing to help you out and carry out your wishes.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Let's be careful....what you underlines above is what the CC USED to teach.
They have changed their position on this.

I didn’t underline it. I don’t think I did. Instead it was copy and pasted from the OP. My own reason for copy and pasting it from the OP was show the part I was commenting about. Not to over state anything. This was my line of thought. I get they have changed their position on this. But what of all the past where many members must have come up against these decisions in life with a dying family members. I’m not Catholic. Until they changed their position…did people only do as the CC said to do when making those tough decisions in real life? Did they adhere to what the CC position was at the time? And now they are free to choose otherwise since the CC has changed their position on this? How closely do the members do as the Vatican says what is allowed?

 

[GodsGrace]

I didn’t underline it. I don’t think I did. Instead it was copy and pasted from the OP. My own reason for copy and pasting it from the OP was show the part I was commenting about. Not to over state anything. This was my line of thought. I get they have changed their position on this. But what of all the past where many members must have come up against these decisions in life with a dying family members. I’m not Catholic. Until they changed their position…did people only do as the CC said to do when making those tough decisions in real life? Did they adhere to what the CC position was at the time? And now they are free to choose otherwise since the CC has changed their position on this? How closely do the members do as the Vatican says what is allowed?

Actually Victory, most Catholics don't even know what their church teaches.
When it comes to most anything, they make up their own mind.
But you're right....the CC has changed it's position and this means that, yes - they were wrong before or they're wrong now.
Personally, I believe they were wrong before.
I know you haven't read every post here, but my belief is that when a person can no longer eat OR drink water, and there's no hope of recovery and death is imminent, then there's no use in making the person suffer in force-feeding them.
I do believe a person should be hydrated till death. Dying from dehydration is very ugly.