Would you let your {family member} die?

[Dante]

I just read an article about how the parents of a girl in intensive care were asked by doctors to let their daughter go, citing expenses, poor quality of life, and the low chance of finding a cure for their daughter's condition.

If you given the power to "pull the plug" on a family member, what would you do?

[Silly Kitty]

The only time I would pull the plug on a family member would be if they were brain dead. If there was no way they were ever gonna be the same. If there was no way they would be able to eat by themselves or eat period. I love my family and if theres hope I would keep them alive.

[Dynamite220]

There are some circumstances involved. Did the person leave a living will? Did they tell you personaly weather they want to live or die in said situation? If you don't know then you have to air on the side of life, but I believe that every person should have the right to decide when and how they want to die. It is, after all, their life to give away isn't it? If you know that they want to die, then go ahead and pull the plug. Otherwise, no.

[Sky Warrior Bob]

Every case is different, and its very hard to give a answer to this question on the vague premise that's been put forward. I mean, Dante we don't even know any details about the case you're citing. I mean, can you at least give us an idea on what condition the girl was in?

Was she in a coma perhaps? I certainly could see that, since comas can be tricky things.

KC

[Kikuichimonji]

here are some circumstances involved. Did the person leave a living will? Did they tell you personaly weather they want to live or die in said situation? If you don't know then you have to air on the side of life, but I believe that every person should have the right to decide when and how they want to die. It is, after all, their life to give away isn't it? If you know that they want to die, then go ahead and pull the plug. Otherwise, no.
Just so you know, this argument also supports suicide of many kinds.

The only time I would pull the plug on a family member would be if they were brain dead. If there was no way they were ever gonna be the same. If there was no way they would be able to eat by themselves or eat period. I love my family and if theres hope I would keep them alive.
That's not what braindead really means. Braindead means they've stopped thinking. You can lose the ability to eat and still be conscious. To me, it seems selfish to kill them if they're not able to be like they used to be. It makes it look like you're only with your family members for your own benefit - once they're no longer useful to you, you throw them away. Not saying you believe that, but that's what your viewpoint comes down to - either that, or you don't want them to have to live the way they do. But I believe that any form of life is better than none. If they're still thinking, you don't have the right to make that decision for them simply because you wouldn't want them to live that way.

Like I said in an earlier thread - if the mind is braindead, they have ceased to be. If it is not, you need to take into account the costs of keeping them alive - will it hurt the family more than help the victim? I have no way of comparing suffering of many to death of one, so I can't say if one would generally be better than the other.

Edit:Hurrah! 300 posts!

[Lucas]

Just so you know, this argument also supports suicide of many kinds. oh no! not an argument which proposes that people have full control over their own lives! run!

[Kikuichimonji]

Gee, thanks for the sarcasm.

Life is too valuable to waste. While I pity those who are put into a comatose state, dying is giving up. You can still learn from life without being able to communicate. Should people forsake life merely because it's not the one they wanted?

[Hatake Kakashi]

Tch. Seriously, the thread's a bit young for sarcasm to be in play already.

Full control over their lives? Suicide is a coward's way out. You might say it's having full control over your own life, I say it's giving up control completely. My mentor committed suicide in November, 2002. Those who believe he was hurting himself only are full of shit. When he took his life, he destroyed the faith that many had in him. He was a well-loved pharmacist in town. He and I had many dreams that we were going to help each other realize. One of which was the purchase of a hunting lodge/resort in Kenai, Alaska, where I would put my natural talents to use and run the place as the head Chef and manager. Working 3-4 months a year at that place would set us up to live for a whole year, if we decided to do nothing else, but we also planned to work side by side as a Pharmacist and A-tech for the other 7 months out of the year, then take the last 1-2 months and just go vacation somewhere... anywhere.. and live like kings. And it was within our reach.... Now, I will be the only one to live that dream, though it will take a total of 6 years of hell to get there. I just wish he had the courage to make it there with me. Suicide destroys many things... a life, of course, but possibly many more.

Back on topic. I pray that I will never, ever be given such a responsibility. I just don't think I could ever give up hope.

[Sky Warrior Bob]

That's not what braindead really means. Braindead means they've stopped thinking. You can lose the ability to eat and still be conscious.

Having had a Grandfather who went brain dead, thanks to a heart attack, I know you're entirely wrong on this one. At least as far as when a Dr. states a patient is braindead, he/she is implying that brain cells have actually died. And as you may or may not know, brain cells do not regrow at the same rate as other cells (especially the nerves, which don't grow or grow very slowly, I've heard both scenarios stated). Usually, doctors only pronounce a person brain dead once enough of the brain has died so that recovery is impossible.

Even if recovery were possible (thanks to say, stem cells), it is highly likely that the result would always be a blank slate. Which in a sense, is death.

SWK

[Krylo]

Should people forsake life merely because it's not the one they wanted?Should people continue living simply because you think their life is precious? Should people put up with pain that you can't even imagine just because you think they should? Should people live in their own waste waiting for a doctor or nurse to shove a tube into their bladder to empty it? Should people lay there without ever feeling happy or sad? Without ever laughing or crying? Should people live a life they hate just because someone else likes having them around? Should people continue to breathe even when there's no life left in them merely because YOU are too greedy to let them go?
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, the opressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, the pangs of despised love, the law's delay, the insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes, when he, himself, might his quietus make with a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear, to grunt and sweat under a weary life, but that the dread of something after death, the undiscover'd country from whose bourn no traveller returns, puzzles the will and makes us rather bear those ills we have than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, and thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought.There are those who disagree with your assessment that dying is giving up so strongly that they actually believe that not dying under such extreme circumstances is cowardly.

I think the only cowardly thing is standing here while we're perfectly healthy and telling people who are in pain that we do not, and can not, understand that they can't (or should) die because we don't think it's right.

Otherwise, I agree with what other people have said. I would have to look at it on a case by case. For instance, my mother was paralyzed from the neck down for quite some time and she told me, after recovering, in no uncertain terms, that if she ever ends up worse than that, and the attempts have been made to save her, I'm to pull the plug. She doesn't want to live like that, and after seeing her live like that I understand completely.

If it were my sister, I wouldn't know what to do. I don't know if she'd want to live or die.

If it were me I'd be doing my damnedest to live, because I know I'm going to die eventually, anyway, so I'm not in any big hurry to escape the pains (and pleasures) of this life... but my opinion on that could very easily change if I'm ever in that position.


note: I'm not arguing that people should kill themselves, but rather that it's not my decision to make, ESPECIALLY in cases wherein they will never recover.

[Kikuichimonji]

Meh. I should use dictionaries more often - I admit I was wrong about what braindead meant. But still, my point stands.

Even if recovery were possible (thanks to say, stem cells), it is highly likely that the result would always be a blank slate. Which in a sense, is death.

Which doesn't mean they aren't still thinking. It just means those functions are lost beyond repair.

Relevent Proverb thingy:What doesn't kill us makes us stronger.

My beliefs are not found in fear of death. They come from the belief that every moment of our lives should be devoted to making ourselves better people. As long as you can still think, you can still become a better person. That is why death isn't the best choice - you can still get more out of life. Even under the most intense and horrible conditions, you can still learn.

My beliefs are not focused on me - they are focused on others. We already had a debate on whether you really can do something for other people, but let's just ignore that for now - it's really semantics.

While I believe that noone should ever commit suicide to end their own pain, I agree that it is ultimately their choice. That suicide is wrong is my opinion, and it is the way I choose to live. I would still suggest life over death, but unless people are willing to continue living after becoming comatose, they've already died. If someone wanted to die in such a state where they would never recuperate, I would let them. I would still see it as giving up. This does not mean I am not sympathetic to those who don't share my beliefs, but rather that I can understand choices that I do not agree with. I know some of the reasons why your mother would want to die if she becomes paralyzed, and I would let her do it, but I would still believe that there's a better way.

[Dynamite220]

Just so you know, this argument also supports suicide of many kinds.
Damn straight, it does.

I believe in what I said, even in those instances, except in cases where the person in question is mentaly ill, and no, I don't believe that wanting to commit suicide makes someone mentaly ill by definition. Think of it as you will, but it realy is none of your business, or anyone elses, how someone chooses to die.

Having someone else choose for you, however, is an other matter entirely, and that is what is in question here. I say, air on the side of life unless you know for certain that the person wants to die and that is my final answer. Maybe it's not yours, but it's mine.

[Staizer]

Death really is a funny thing, it is for all intents and purposes the end all and be all of human existence. Without it we would not grow.

There are people out there who are living solely because we cannot let them go, attached to machines that make them live. The only thing I could imagine anyone in that situation learning is that machines are soulless slavemasters who will not let their slaves go, and that their children and family won't let them go either.

Death to me though is far too perminent a solution to consider for myself right at the moment, later in life my opinion might change, but I doubt it. I will die when I am meant to die, and my children will know that I will not be stopped from my death.

There is a difference between those who will recover and those who won't, being encouraged to live, or being forced to live . . . respectively.

For this little girl, since there is no chance of recovery, it would be acceptable, because, for some reason, it is her time. For others who will or can recover, ever option must be considered, every expense paid because human life overshadows all other costs, life is too valuable to end short.

[Dunxco]

Ahh, the tangled web of Euthanasia (hope I spelt that right...). My grandpa was suffering from a mentally degenerative disease, or so I understand (I was younh at the time, so euphanisms all around to me). Apparently, we had plenty of chances to pull the plug on him, but we never took it, despite the fact that he was a "vegetable" for the whole time I knew him. He died of a stroke in... I think it was 1994? Give or take a year, I can't recall clearly. My Dad's never really spoken about the death of his father, except that he believed, "The man who was my Dad died a long time ago".

I assume that given the chance, he wouldn't have pulled the plug, mainly because I don't think he could. It's like if you were to (hypothetically) encounter a zombie of a loved one or friend - could you kill them? Your brain's screaming at you that it's not the same person, but someone else with the face of a person close to you. Yet, you're feeling all these emotions for the person you had before they changed. I don't think I could, or if I did, it would take incredible courage to swallow all those feelings, and then do it.

[Inu-luvr]

I'd only pull the plug on a family member if they weren't 'living' in my terms. To me you aren't living if you: stay in bed all day, have vitamin supplements run through you because you can't eat regularly, can't sit up, are always connected to a machine to keep you alive, can't talk.. or if you're paralyzed. I could also pull the plug on someone, if they asked me to (after they thought it over and really considered it).

[Mental-Rectangle]

Brain-death, or a horrible physical disfiguration that would make life pointless, would compel me to pull the plug. If it's something that has a time limit, but doesn't affect life up until that point... might as well make use of that time.

50 years from now will be interesting, medically speaking, because the degree of physical trauma that people can survive will continue to increase as life-saving technology improves. We'll get live brains in jelly-jars and wonder what to do with them.

[kratos]

*shrug* it's entirely up to the person given the "right of plug pulling"

i reccomend having this conversation with anyone who could concievably give you this right. personally, i'd like my plug pulled if i'm not functioning on all cylinders. i'd just rather not be a mentally deficient person. that's how it is for me. now, something like massive burns? i could live through that.

so basically: massive physical damage: *shrug* "Meh". mental damage? kill me. i'll thank you in heaven later.

[Sithdarth]

The greatest problem with this debate is knowing the wishes of the person involved, even if that person is you. People are not perfect and there are many things that people do not know about themselves, that is until the situation comes up. Further complication comes in the form of medical ambiguity. Even with all we know today vegatative states are unpredictable. We can say there is little to no chance of survival but there are people alive today actually missing half their brain. (As in it's no longer in their head anymore.) Worse yet trying to explain what little a doctor does know to a patient or family is hard when they aren't stressed. Add in the stress that series injuries produce and it's pretty impossible. So for now it's a poke and hope situation, but isn't life that way anyways, with both sides being nearly equal in positive and negative impacts and effects with no real way to objectively compare them. That's the greatest problem of all, that being their is no outside viewpoint or absolute set of morals that can be applied to all people and all situations.

[Darth SS]

My opinion?

Don't wait for a miracle.

If it would take a miracle for a member of my family to live, I would have no qualms about pulling the plug. I'm okay with God stepping in, but I'm not going to rely on him.

[Psrdirector]

Atacking people who let there parents or child die cause they cant offord to keep them alive is sick. The person in question is barely alive, and may never be able to come out of the state they are in, but the people left with the bill will live in hell for the rest of there life, just so there child/parent could look blankly at the roof and droll for a few more days. Money is something that not all people have in plantly, many people have so little that normal life is hard, put on a few hundred thousend or more bill, you will never have a life again, you will spend the rest of yours paying for those three days of drool.

So dont say they did something wrong unless you are going to them and saying "ill pay all the bills, dont worry you dont have to pay a red cent"

So unless you do that, dont attack them.


*this is to no one in the thread really, just my opinion*

[TheSpacePope]

Euthanasia is a tricky subject. personally I would, but only if the family member asked me to. But for myself, i'd kind of like to be wheeled out of a top floor window when I am terminal....So I would do it but only if directed by a will or whatnot.

[da Noble Savage]

I think its selfish to keep somebody on this earth when it's clear that their quality of life is deterated, just to make yourself feel better. I guess this belief is mostly because of the fact that i belive that there is something after this life that we lead now. If you know they want to die then pull the plug. And why is someone considered a coward if they are giving up all they know to move on to something that is totally unknown. Isn't the brave man the one that face's the unknown rather then clinging to life simply because he is scared of that which he doesn't know.