"Heroic measures, or not" Topic

A bigger readership inhabits TMP Plus than the Bluey Fezzy. And this topic doesn't have to invite a religious discussion per se.

Question: when it comes time to decide what ought to be done to continue life, do you believe that every option available should be pursued? Or do you believe in healthy living is enough? In other words, do you believe that every "heroic measure" is your obligation, or do you believe that (since death is inevitable) once "nature" decrees that it is time to cash in your chips, your obligation to stick around is over?

My mind is on this all the time anyway, but yesterday's funeral for an uncle of my wife makes the question a very present one: it was revealed to us that the uncle had anguished over whether or not to take the options the docs offered, following a stroke that made it virtually impossible for him to swallow. As I understood it, he could go on meds and a feeding tube, etc., until his swallowing ability returned (if it returned). Or, he could simply do nothing, slip into starvation, go unconscious and die. He did not know what to decide, until talking with loved ones convinced him that he would not be morally or ethically remiss if he chose to do nothing. He could choose to die. Which he did. It took most of two weeks.

A lot can be said for quality of life as compared to just life.

Having been temporally disabled (loss of use on arm in one case and leg in another), I'm not all that sure I would want to continue. Surprisingly, after my ankle fusion surgery I determined it was worse than the lose of use of my arm.

If it were a permanent loss of mobility, I'm not sure I would want to go on.

A few years ago a 40 year old co-workers health suddenly went south in a big way. His future was to remain bed ridden dependent on machines to keep him alive. He had fully mental facilities and could communicate with no issues.

After a few weeks he opted to have the machines shut off. I hope I would have the courage to follow his lead.

Thanks for the reply.

There are others who would view this as a form of "suicide", because we don't get to choose when death takes us out. We live in an age when all manner of alternatives to simply "choosing to die" are presented to us. Therefore we should accept the age in which we live and pursue staving off Death as long as possible.

We could get into the reasons why people believe this; they span the spectrum from "this is the only life we have" to the religious allowing that the timing of death is God's province. We shouldn't assume that a miserable "half life" is to be avoided, if that is our lot. Etc.

I don't want any responses to these questions to turn into a debate/argument over whose world view is the right one. A simple statement of what you would do when facing these choices is what I am after. It would be very satisfactory of this thread attracted a good number of respondents. I'm after some kind of cross-section of opinions; at least a TMP denizen cross-section! :)

That falls back on "what you should do" compared to "here's what I would do". It's a tough call on a decision we, hopefully, will not need to make.

As had been said, when our pets are terminal and in pain we are more compassionate to them then to our selves (or loved ones).

I personally believe in having as many options as possible open to me, so I can choose which to take based on whatever situation I should find myself in. That includes having a full suite of medical options to sustain me, a do-nothing pain-free fade-out, and doctor-assisted suicide (with a due process) – which we just got in Canada, although I haven't fully delved into the details as to whether it's good, functional legislation or just a way to avoid a Supreme Court decision that opens the floodgates.

I can see myself taking any of those three roads, my first pass in most cases (assuming I have mental faculties to make a choice) is taking A but holding B and C in reserve in case I'm wrong about A (as VCarter related). It's pretty much the most libertarian opinion I have.

On a side note, we had to make a decision for my dad a few years ago, and though his passing was unexpected, he'd made his general wishes known to us, so after the last realistic heroic effort was made by the doctors we asked for the respirator to be turned off.

What was further comforting was in his effects in the hospital we found his handwritten notes to himself of his discussions with the doctors about quality of life going forward, and that reinforced what he had expressed to us, he had no interest in quantity if there was no quality. So I guess my final thought is that it is incredibly important to make one's choice(s) known to one's family.

My Dad was faced with the 'not able to swallow' bit
following surgery on his mouth. A feeding tube was
emplaced and life became very difficult for Mom.
After about 3 weeks, Dad's heart failed so Mom was
no longer burdened.

Two years later, my brother Bob (diabetic) went into a
coma and was put on life support. He'd been comatose
for a while before he was found (Bob lived alone).
Doctors said (and showed us) he had no brain function.
Mom (with my support) had to make the decision to either
leave him on the machines which were sustaining him,
or have them turned-off. His doctor explained to us
what Bob's 'life' would be like.

She opted for the latter and could only say 'I'm glad I
didn't have to do that in your Dad's case.'

My father recently passed after a very long decline, because language was among the first things he lost we were never quite sure if he was as out of it as he appeared or trapped inside his head unable to communicate. The DNR was put in place a year ago after a heart attack and we were told it would be "days not weeks" then his heart recovered but his brain never seemed to and he hung on and on.
As hard as it was he showed no interest in assisted dying while he could communicate and I'm glad the option was not available because my mother did not need the stress and guilt of having to make such a call.

Dad had 10 years warning that this was coming he even knew what he had to do to avoid it (give up the booze) but he wouldn't accept that.

For myself if I knew that such a fate was my future then I would take up a more dangerous hobby and attempt to set some record that pushed the limits. Not a deliberate suicide just something that if I succeed at I become a hero and if I fail I avoid a dreadful slow decay.

Robert

Sometimes a lingering death is not all about us or our quality of life. If your brain is not functioning, then you don't likely know if you have a good quality of life or not. Several members of my family have died, often after long illnesses.

I think a long illness may be the opportunity for those who will remain living to bring themselves to an acceptance of their new reality, without the presence of their loved one. One relative was in ICU for six months, unconscious for nearly all that time. It took that long for his sisters and his niece to realize he was going to die and for them to prepare. He did not suffer, he was asleep and unaware, the doctors kept telling us in a few weeks he would get better, but he never did.

With his family by his side, he woke up for a moment, nodded when asked if he wanted us to pray for him, and he died with us all there, praying as he asked.

I think assisted suicide is immoral, unethical, and simply killing the most vulnerable in society. I think if you have someone who's prognosis is death, and they are receiving maintenance that only prolongs their suffering, the sort of thing they did not have 200 years ago in our technological society, that stopping that maintenance is simply allowing nature to take it's natural course. At some point you are prolonging death, not prolonging life.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek

We had two well-educated, very intelligent relatives who chose the assisted suicide route (Washington state.) Both suffered from painful, debilitating cancer with no chance of recovery. We miss them and think of them often. I still don't know how I feel about their decision but it is what they chose.

I am closer to Mike's view. My mother had 6 years of back and forth with metastatic breast cancer. She was dragging herself into work until her boss told her to stay home. They had a trip to Nova Scotia planned when it hit her liver. That was a Friday and she died at home in the early hours of Sunday morning after her children had arrived to say good bye.
My mother in law fought brain tumors for about 4 years. Three surgeries seemed to extend her life, but the third one left her paralyzed on one side and bed ridden. She slipped into a coma the doctors said was permanent. The family gathered, she returned to consciousness to say good bye and died peacefully 2 days later.
My uncle lived 2 years with stage 4 liver and lung cancer. There was no sign of a cure, but the cancer took an inexplicable time to finish things. I saw him less than two weeks before he died and he was in great spirits with a continual stream of visitors.
With my mother and mother in law we endured a lot of happy talk about how this last treatment was successful. Neither had a pleasant fight, but both got to see grandchildren grow. I have some skepticism about medicine. I think the body is so complex that they will be certain of things that are not true and inexplicable things happen. Miracle cures have occurred, less often than not but the would not be miracles if they were common.
The early off ramp allows you to choose at a point in life where many choices are constrained. It allows you to keep some agency. I do worry about some abuses,but I also worry that it may not give families time to come to grip the death of a loved one. Sometimes it takes you fighting an unwinnable fight to help loved ones really come to turns with losing you.

When one of my younger bros suffered a stroke,it was touch and go for a while,medically induced coma,life support, and all . He was also going to lose both legs due to diabetic complications. Eventually he recovered from most if not all of it,and apart from a bit of droop in one eye,his memory is just as sharp as ever,he's getting around in a wheelchair and on a pair of prosthetic legs and a walker. I talk with him on the phone nearly every week. He has a tough attitude.

How old is your brother, Wolfman?

A workmate of mine was a severe diabetic. On a holiday up around the Yellowstone area, he went into diabetic shock or similar, in the middle of the night; he was in his late forties early fifties. His wife discovered his coma and got him medical intervention as quickly as possible. He nearly died, went blind, became an invalid. His life after that was, as far as I could tell, pretty bleak, and not long, a few years as I recall. He came down to where he used to work once and said hello to his workmates. He seemed upbeat, pleasant. But he looked pretty hellish to me. I had to ask myself, why? All that effort to stave off death a few years, with quality of life severely diminished, a constant drain on his wife as she cared for him, etc.

If we have a "tough attitude", I doubt that it dies with us. That is part of who we are, regardless of where or when.

It seems that that attitude is the determining factor in whether or not to fight to stay here. Age plays into this, but not always.

53,and another who's 52(I'm 54). Surprisingly the youngest had just returned from a hospital stay following a heart attack(and balloon surgery on his arteries) when he found the other coldcocked on the floor at home. Both are reasonably OK now. Been keeping a close watch on my own stuff,and so far,heart's OK,upped my dosage of Victoza in the morning,and my A1c has improved quite a bit. The 53 y/o bro likes to exercise his brain with puzzles,and other hand-eye coordination activities. Also,he gave up smoking.