Going Gentle Into That Good Night

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]

Certainly the amount of pain a person may be in makes a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the easy one and best left to the assisted suicide argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because it's expensive does that mean we should really let somebody die just because the money will help other people in the long-run?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the tough one. Should we spend $1M to let someone live for 6 more months, or help cure malaria in a third-world country?
Some consider it a limited resources/best utility argument. I'm not sure how far I can go down that path, but until money grows on trees...


[ QUOTE ]
One girl who was probably about 8 was shaken as a baby and would mostly just lie there and MAYBE occasionally move or offer a half-smile.
A couple of the kids with down's syndrome are handicapped enough where I very much doubt they could hold down even the simplest of jobs when they grow into adults. I could be wrong on that with them though, but certainly not with the girl who just lies there and can't talk or communicate really.

If we are judging life by ability to contribute anymore or even about being conciously aware as I think has been mentioned a couple of times in this thread then are we really that far away from saying these mentally and physically handicapped kids should just die too because they are just a drain on our society and resources and aren't really doing anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's where the argument starts getting ugly. The questions that I ask myself are:

If I were in that bad of a condition, would I want someone to pull my plug for me? Most likely yes.

If my child was in that condition, would I be able to do that for them? I don't know... nor do I know if I SHOULD be able to.

[samjjones]

[ QUOTE ]
Medical technology has definitely extended our lives a great deal, often at the expense of quality of life.

[/ QUOTE ]

LFS - Please contact ZeeJustin for more details about some exciting possibilities in this area.

[Resident Cynic]

What's the difference? We all end up worm [censored] anyway.

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
Ideas like yours are what [censored] up our public health system so bad - the Birch-ish, puritanical insistence on saying that, since we have to take medicine out of the private sector, we might as well try to run it as much like the market as possible. No. That conflicts interests, priorities, and creates ridiculous scenarios, like the awful power of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, the malpractice snarl, the culture of soaking, whereby it's in doctors' best interests to order the most elaborate treatments possible, the eternal escalating war fought between treatment, administration and litigation, etc. etc. etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hear, hear.

[ QUOTE ]
Nations with socialized medicine don't have this [censored]. They don't spend all their health dollars on insurance premiums and malpractice litigation. It's because they admit the obvious. Once we decide as a society that nobody will die for lacking the ability to pay for care, it's over. Health becomes a public good and should be treated as such -- in the public sector.

[/ QUOTE ]Waiter, please, a round of drinks for this gentleman's table, with my compliments.


Mickey Brausch

[donkeylove]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll gladly go gentle into that good night.

[/ QUOTE ]


I just don't see how anybody can know they will feel this way at 90.

[/ QUOTE ]

I almost felt this way at 30 with a lot of life ahead of me, so I think I'm qualified to say I will feel it at 90. I wasn't talking out of my ass. I have been there with the tubes sticking out of me,nauseous,in tremendous pain,having poisons injected into me to save my life. Hair falling out,avoiding the mirror because you don't even want to see yourself. Your family suffering almost as much as you because they have to watch. I had 8 surgeries before I was 32 and each one takes a little more out of you. The op said pancreatic cancer was the most likely culprit. Have you ever seen that up close and personal? I have and it's no picnic. Thankfully it's usually swift. I can say with certainty I wouldn't want to go through that at 90, and your stupid comment strikes me as most likely made by a 20something who has never been truly sick.

Edit-I just checked out your blog and see your definitely not a 20 something. Still a dumb comment.

[/ QUOTE ]

What Microbob said was not stupid, it was just his opinion. You also stated your opinion. Like it or not I agree with him and think you are fooling yourself. Compared to when you were 18, do you feel exactly the same way about things now? If you don't, then how can you say what you will want at 90.

And in case you are wondering, I am not a 20 something and very recently had a serious health problem. That shouldn't mater though and I don't know why you place such importance on it.

[/ QUOTE ]


I got kicked in the balls for the 1st time at 5, and it sucked real bad. I occasionally catch a knee in the balls playing hoops now, and it still sucks just as bad as it did 30 years ago. Now will I enjoy getting kicked in the balls at 90? I can't be sure, but I would bet a lot it is still gonna suck real bad. I deal with it now because it's gone in 5 minutes and I return to life. Have I changed my opinion on many things since 18? Of course everyone does. Agony and suffering is still the same at 90. I know exactly how I will feel about it at 90. It will suck, but unlike before,there will be no upside to beating it.

You act like you're not gonna die. Your 90. How you feel about it is of no importance. It's happening. You say I am fooling myself? Your the only one fooling yourself if you think what you feel matters? Your a sad man if your still hanging onto your fears and some pipe dream at 90. As far as placing importance on having been there. Only an idiot would comment on being in this womans position having not been there. Reminds me of the right-wing whackjobs in Florida commenting on Terry Schiavos quality of life. Try living like that for 20 years then come talk. Shakespeare said,"everyone can master a grief but he that has it".
Truer words have never been spoken. Everyone has an opinion on how you should fight on and battle when your the one on the hospital bed. When it's their time, things often change.

That type of care at 90, fighting cancer and various ailments, is akin to your doctor saying,"Hey good news, we will kick you in the balls today,but we are pretty sure through our advanced medical techniques that we can keep you alive for another month, and then we can kick you in the balls everyday till you eventually end up in the same place anyway"..

There is no joy being that sick. There are fates worse than death, and that situation is one of them. Medicate me,make me comfortable,and forget about any life preserving medicine because it's all downhill from there anyways. If I haven't answered the great questions of life, and put away my fear of death by 90, it ain't ever gonna happen. As far as saying glad, I was just using a play on words in reference to the Dylan Thomas poem LFslim paraphrased in his title. But health is not an option at that point. It's either more pain and suffering or fading away quickly in a medicated haze. It doesn't matter if your glad about it. It's simply reality.

[donkeylove]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for diverting funds from elder care to cancer treatment for an uninsured youngster, it's a nice warm and fuzzy thought, but it's inimical to the very foundations of a free society.

[/ QUOTE ]

The hell it is.

It may be inimical to the foundations of a free market economy, but we've already decided that that isn't going to apply to health care anyway, by having a public health care system in the first place. Ideas like yours are what [censored] up our public health system so bad - the Birch-ish, puritanical insistence on saying that, since we have to take medicine out of the private sector, we might as well try to run it as much like the market as possible. No. That conflicts interests, priorities, and creates ridiculous scenarios, like the awful power of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, the malpractice snarl, the culture of soaking, whereby it's in doctors' best interests to order the most elaborate treatments possible, the eternal escalating war fought between treatment, administration and litigation, etc. etc. etc. Nations with socialized medicine don't have this [censored]. They don't spend all their health dollars on insurance premiums and malpractice litigation. [ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ] It's because they admit the obvious. [ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ] Once we decide as a society that nobody will die for lacking the ability to pay for care, it's over. Health becomes a public good and should be treated as such, in the public sector.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's because they admit the obvious.

exactly

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]

While making any number of relatively mundane procedures prohibitively expensive for the uninsured.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the part that is not true.

natedogg

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
Relatively simple injuries and illnesses (broken legs, appendicitis, etc) that barely require hospitalization would have meant almost certain death not all that long ago. So what's the difference between that and treating an old person for old age?


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the former category comprises conditions which are oftentimes inexpensive and simple to treat, after which an individual may well live a long, full life. On the other hand, "old age" is state of being where either the whole body or one or more of the important organs are approaching their breakdown point, meaning that little can be done to prolong life.

FWIW, my understanding is that the average human lifespan hasn't changed all that much in the past hundred or so years...if you exclude individuals who didn't survive childhood. Indeed, the huge increases in lifespan over the past couple of hundred years is due mostly to the reduced incidence of childhood deaths.

For those of you who doubt this, take a walk through an old cemetary, and check out all of the headstones of people who were born before 1900 who still managed to live to 65+. I assume that working hard, and not gorging oneself on processed foods to the point of obesity, goes a long way towards keeping someone alive, even without all of the late 19th century advances in medical science.