I believe patients do have a right to futile treatment. Even if a doctor no longer has any reasonable hope that a patient will make it and it looks like they will definitely die, they don't have the right to take the hope away from the patient. They should tell the patient the diagnosis and what they believe is going to happen, but if the patient still has hope and wants to continue treatment just for that slim chance, I think they have the right to that treatment. This could help them in many ways, it could make them feel as if they tried everything they could, it could give them peace of mind and it could give them a fighting chance you never know, there are medical miracles. I think if a patient wants to continue treatment even if it is futile, they should have that right.
Is there a duty to die? Discuss.
I do not think that there is a duty to die, not at all. I think that a patient has the right to live as long as they please, and as long as they can. I understand it can be a burden on the family and a lot for the family to go through but I don't think the patient has a duty to die or end their life. I also don't think family would want a family member to die on behalf of them. I think that it is a patients duty to decide what they want, but they do not have a duty to live or die.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family?
I think the patient is the person who is ill. I think the family is the loved ones of the patient and who they have supporting them. I know that it can be hard for the family and they need help as well but I think there is only one patient. The reason being is at the end of the day the family can take a break from it all, they can get away from the illness for a while no matter how sad they are, and they still are healthy and have a life to look forward to. The patient can never get away from their illness, they cant just take a break, at least not until they get better or die. The patient doesn't know what is going to happen to them and they have to fight. So in that since I think there is only one patient and that is the one who is currently ill and needs the support of their family.
I completely agree with everything you said. Every patient should be able to receive futile treatment if they want it; its probably because they are hanging onto that last thread of hope. I don't think anyone has a duty to die. PAS could become a component that sparks this notions that you have a duty to die.
Briana, my opinions regarding futile treatment are the same as yours. I couldn't agree more that patients should have the right to futile treatment if they wish to have it. I think it does give patients hope, especially if that is the last thing they have to hold onto. Patients should be given the treatments they want, it is their choice.
I also agree that there is not a duty to die. I think that people do have the right to live as long as they can.
To me, patients are also the people who are ill, not the family. I also agree with you because the family can escape the illness and the patient can't, at the end of the day, it is the patient who has to physically deal with the illness.
I agree with a lot of what you said! It should be the patient's right to receive futile treatment if that is what they choose- even if it's because they are holding on to hope. I also think that we don't have a duty to die. I have a different opinion on what the 'patient' is however, I feel that the family/those close to the ill person are also the patient, they are a big part of the ill person's care and experience, they need just as much education on the subject.
I see what the both of you are saying but i also believe that there is a point that someone needs to take control a stop the treatment when there is no hope. I feel someone needs to make it clear that the hope is gone and nothing with change, that way the patient inst wasting their time and money.
I think that patient’s should have the right to futile treatment. Doctor’s should not be able to tell a patient that they will not treat them. I think it’s the patients right to decide when they want to stop treatment. I think allowing futile treatment gives the patient dignity as they see it fit. I am a firm believer in treating people how I would like to be treated. I think giving patients the option of treatment is necessary for them to come to terms with their illness and cope with their families. I do not think people have a duty to die. I understand that money and care can be a burdensome on a family, but dying for these reasons is an unfair burden to the patient. The role of the physician is to care for the patient, diagnosis and prognosis. It is not the responsibility of a physician to tell the patient they are not worth saving. I think the patient should be able to make decisions about his/her own life. The family should be informed about what is happening and should be able to suggest ideas to the patient but the overall decision should be left to the individual who is dying.
Laura I agree with your opinion of futile treatment. Patients defiantly should have the right to futile treatment; the doctor should not be able to not give them treatment just because they know it won’t help in the long run. It gives patients hope yes, but like you said the patient should be able to determine the point at which they no longer want to receive any care. I also agree with you in that I don’t think we have a duty to die. Becoming an emotional, physical, or financial burden on our families is not a reason for us to die and I think it is unfair and disrespectful to think that in the first place. It is the patient’s right to decide to live or die, not their duty to remove themselves as a burden to others.
I read the comments other students made about whom they believe the patient to be. I do understand the sentiment that the person who is ill/dying should ultimately be the decision maker about their own care if they are in a condition to do so. However, end-of-life care is different from maintaining-life care in so many ways. In hospice care, the dying person is the ultimate decision maker, but the family is also considered "the patient." Let's assume that the family of the dying person is generally nice and supportive. They don't even have to be agreeable, just not mean to the dying person. Whenever someone is given the news that they are definitely going to die within months or weeks, the family become intertwined with that diagnosis for the duration of the dying person's life and beyond. Whomever the individual feels close to and who will be supporting them in their dying process is their family, regardless of biological relationship. Friends, co-workers, or neighbors may be considered family by some people. From a clinical perspective, the family are now mental health patients at the point of diagnosis of the dying person. Many of them shortly become physical health patients as stress, sleep deprivation, major nutritional changes, and perhaps distinctly unhealthy coping behaviors (alcohol, drugs) take the place of their normal routine. Everyone spends weeks or months holding their breath to see what happens next with their loved one. When that person dies, it doesn't feel like they were prepared by the wait. Instead, it's like a brand new tragedy piled on top of all the anticipatory grief they were likely already feeling. Instead of just one person ill, there is now a group of people who have to try to regain strength and health after the ordeal. Their suffering continues, while the terminally ill person's suffering was relatively short in comparison. Considering how terminal illness affects the family, I think it is vitally important that whomever the dying person considers family also be considered as the patient. I agree treatment decisions should ultimately be up to the individual who is dying, but actions that help the family cope with their loved one's dying process should be considered. In my experience, terminally ill patients who have good relationships with their family want their loved ones to be supported during and after their dying process, too.
Michelle, I also agree with your view on what the patient is. I feel that in general, the patient is not only the person who is ill but also the family, even in cases outside of hospice. You are not only treating them but also their family, in my opinion they are just as much a part of the process as the sick individual. The family I would consider to be the people close to the patient that avidly involve themselves in the “patient’s” care and health process. You not only educate the ill person but also the family. In the event that the ill individual would die, you are then caring for the family and the aftermath of their death. In my opinion , they are one in the same-they are all the patient.
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/futhand.htm This article helps explain what medical futility is and how you can break it down. I believe that patients should have the option to futile treatment. I believe the patient should be the one making that decision though. If the patient is no longer able to coherently make decisions then futile treatment should not be an option for the one in charge of their decision making. If the patient has a will that states otherwise then their wishes should be respected because they made those decisions in a coherent state.
I do not think that there is a duty to die. Having lost a loved one only 4 months after his ALS diagnosis. The treatment he was receiving was futile and the disease progressed quickly and aggressively anyway. But that time allowed him to make his end of life decisions and say goodbye to the family. The monetary value of the care for the patient is outweighed by the value of the remaining time a patient has with their loved ones. A patient should not feel that they are a burden to their loved ones or their caretakers.
The patient is the individual who is ill. The family is a group of important people to the patient. The decision making process of the individual is often influenced by the family, who may or may not be blood related.
I agree with your opinion that patients should have the option to futile treatment, I also believe the patient should make the decision. I also don't believe there is a duty to die, and the patient should never have to feel they are a burden to their loved ones. It just isn't right to make people feel that way.
I like the article you attached here! Offered great insight on medical futility. I agree that any treatment being received by the patient is necessary in ensuring that they are able to fully carry out their lives with the time they are given on this earth. An ill individual should never have to feel that they are being a burden.
i do believe that patients/ families have the right to an extent with futile treatment. if the treatment prolongs the life of a dying patient long enough that crucial family members are able to come and say goodbye, that is what I feel is ok. Ultimately though it is the patient's right to seek these treatments if they so desire.
I do feel like there is a duty to die but it falls on the family's responsibility to let the person die if there is too much pain and suffering or not chance at life for that person aside from living off of machines. The patient is the person receiving treatment. family could be biological or not, that is determined by the patient. who they consider to be close enough to be family.
I completely agree that the patient is solely that person being treated. The family are people of concern, but I think everything should be focused on the person being treated and what they want, not what the family wants. Then if that patient happens to pass away the family should become more of a concern but they are still not the patient.
I do believe patients have a right for futile treatment, but there are some limitations. If someone is going to die but the futile treatment will prolong there life so their families get to say goodbye, then yes I do believe they should get it. I am on the fence though when a patient wants futile treatment so they can live longer, maybe waiting on a cure that isn't coming. I believe there should be a system that implicates how long a patient can be given futile treatment, if there death is inevitable.
I do not believe there is a "duty" to die. Duty isn't the correct term in defying if one should die or not. I believe people have the right to die if that is what they choose, but not a duty to die.
I think that patients should have a right to futile treatment. A doctor or healthcare provider denying someone treatment is not meeting a standard of care. Unbiased and unconditional care should be given to every patient regardless of illness or chance of recovery. It would be brutal for a doctor to sit a patient down and inform them that there is nothing that can help them at all. Yes, the patient might know and understand the fact that their illness is terminal and will only progress for the worse, but that does not mean that the patient wants to hear that there is nothing left to do. If they are going to hold on to their quality of life until they die, it would be nice to at least have the comfort of last resorts or treatments that could maybe, just maybe, work. As nice as it is to be realistic, I think that it could do emotional damage to the patient, hearing that not even the doctor believes in them and that they are fighting their illness with their back against the wall. At least with futile treatment, the patient can feel as though they have a fighting chance. It should not be forced and it should not be taken away.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?)
I would say that the patient is primarily the patient. The only reason I say this is because of the scenarios where the patient does not want to be on machines to keep them alive, but the family goes against their wishes and tells the doctor to keep the ventilator on. This is not fair for the patient’s wishes to be disregarded, especially at such a serious point in their life, like dying, where all the patient deserves is the humanity in the respecting of their wishes. I mean in most circumstances, I would like to assume that the family is extremely supportive of whatever the patient wants, but this is not always the case, especially if the patient and family were to have differing religious or cultural views about EOL. However, I do believe that the family is nearly just as effected by the illness as the patient. I think that the family and friends that are considered family should be kept in the loop of what is going on health wise with the patient and what decisions the patient would like made on their behalf (stressing the need and importance for EOL conversations). When my grandfather was dying of cancer, he chose to not tell us, even his wife, anything that was going on. It was so incredibly frustrating to not know what was entirely going on because this was someone I cared, and still care, about so much. I wanted to know the treatment options and the full diagnosis because I wanted to perhaps somehow influence or persuade my grandpa to try something that would be more successful than what he picked. But looking at it now, I know it was my own selfish needs to keep him around as long as possible, when that wasn’t going to happen, regardless of having cancer or not. My family had to bit our tongues and take what little he shared with respect and acceptance. He wanted to spare us the pain of knowing how bad it really was and how much he was really suffering, and for that I am grateful for his strength and compassion towards us, despite the fact that he was dying. However, I think we all would have had a little more peace of mind at least knowing just exactly he was going through. I do not ultimately think that we would have forced our opinions or influenced him to keep on trying treatments, but I do believe it would have helped us put ourselves in his shoes and understand where exactly he was coming from. It would've been nice to have been able to be there more for him, but I know by not having all the information, we were being there for him in a way that comforted him.
I absolutely do not think that people have a duty to die. Having a duty to die implies that if they didn’t die then it would be wrong. Also a duty means that someone is obligated to help you die. I don’t think that anyone should be obligated to help others die. I do believe that people have the right to seek futile treatment. I do not think that doctors should be allowed to refuse treatment to anyone. It is not ethically right and doesn’t meet the standard of care. Even if they have a terminal illness it is the patient’s right to seek treatment.
I feel patients have every right to futile treatment. I know if I were given a terminal diagnosis I would want to try some form of treatment either in hopes of some healing or just to prolong my time. If all else fails it at least provides the patient and his or her loved ones with some sense of hope and ease to cling to in such a hard time. I do not think anyone has a duty to die. All people should be able to live as long they want or can. Just because one is given a terminal diagnosis doesn't mean they should give up all hope of carrying out the rest of their life. I think the patient is just the individual. While the whole family or support system is in the process together when it comes down to it only one person is going through the treatment and only one person was diagnosed terminally ill. I think family is not only defined as blood but those who are there for you in any situation and only want to best for you and will love and support you unconditionally.
I agree that patients have every right to futile treatment if they wish to do so. I would also like to try some form of treatment if I was in that situation to have more time with my loved ones. I also agree that family just doesn't have to be defined as blood. Some people have better intentions for us than our own blood, it all comes down to the people who love and support you unconditionally, blood or not.
I believe that all patients have a right to futile treatment! All people deserve to continue to try to maintain their quality of life, regardless of whether their condition or disease has a cure. We watched a video at the beginning of the semester of a woman who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness and they had decided that her course of treatment was no longer working but they continued with futile treatment so that she could go on one last family vacation to Disney World. I think futile treatment is crucial for instances such as that, if futile treatment is able to give a family more memories with their family member before their passing then it is worth it. Futile treatment is definitely worth it if the patient has family members that need to fly in in order to see them before passing. I don’t feel like there is a duty to die, I feel as if a patient should be allowed to pass whenever they want naturally. I think more often than not when people are diagnosed with a terminal illness it becomes a burden for family members. I watched a documentary once about nurses and one woman was caring for an elderly person who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness and continued to code but remained alive and each time she would code her three children would come anticipating that this would be their final goodbye but she continued to make it through each time and you could tell that the kids were becoming agitated. I feel that the patient is the individual patient that is being treated, that is who the nurse has a direct duty to. The family and their feelings should also be included but I feel that it is the patients wants and needs that should always be honored.
Do patients have a right to futile treatment? Collectively, explain. Yes, patients have the right to futile treatment because it is the ultimate decision to keep doing what they are doing even though they know it its right. Even knowing that a person has a life threatening illness that is incurable the right for them to keep suffering is their decision. Sometimes it in a patients understanding that they don't want to face the reality of death so continuing with futile treatment is their best option with copping with the reality of death. Is there a duty to die? Discuss. I do not believe there is a duty to die. For people who are just old and beginning to age quicker and people with terminally ill diseases don't have the duty to die because maybe they see the quality of life has yet been fulfilled. Giving up is not the right thing to do so everyone should be given the right to live as long as possible no matter the circumstances. Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?) The patient is the individual suffering from the illness or disease. The individual is the patient making the decisions along with the family. In my beliefs, family is considered one so the word "individual" is non existent in a situation of someone who is terminally ill. The family is one unit who discusses the decisions together and able to talk about the end of life decisions no matter the circumstances.
Do patients have a right to futile treatment? Collectively, explain. - I think that all patients should have the right to futile treatment. I think that overall it is the patient's final decision to continue on with the treatment or not. The doctor shouldn't make the final decision no matter what he thinks. I also think that futile treatment can help patients give them hope knowing that they are trying everything that they can to help with their illness.
Is there a duty to die? Discuss. -I dont think that there is a duty to die no matter what the circumstance may be. Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?) - I think that the patient is anyone who is receiving help or treatment to get better. The family is anyone who is affected by what the patient is going through. The family is the support behind the patient.
Do patients have a right to futile treatment?
ReplyDeleteI believe patients do have a right to futile treatment. Even if a doctor no longer has any reasonable hope that a patient will make it and it looks like they will definitely die, they don't have the right to take the hope away from the patient. They should tell the patient the diagnosis and what they believe is going to happen, but if the patient still has hope and wants to continue treatment just for that slim chance, I think they have the right to that treatment. This could help them in many ways, it could make them feel as if they tried everything they could, it could give them peace of mind and it could give them a fighting chance you never know, there are medical miracles. I think if a patient wants to continue treatment even if it is futile, they should have that right.
Is there a duty to die? Discuss.
I do not think that there is a duty to die, not at all. I think that a patient has the right to live as long as they please, and as long as they can. I understand it can be a burden on the family and a lot for the family to go through but I don't think the patient has a duty to die or end their life. I also don't think family would want a family member to die on behalf of them. I think that it is a patients duty to decide what they want, but they do not have a duty to live or die.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family?
I think the patient is the person who is ill. I think the family is the loved ones of the patient and who they have supporting them. I know that it can be hard for the family and they need help as well but I think there is only one patient. The reason being is at the end of the day the family can take a break from it all, they can get away from the illness for a while no matter how sad they are, and they still are healthy and have a life to look forward to. The patient can never get away from their illness, they cant just take a break, at least not until they get better or die. The patient doesn't know what is going to happen to them and they have to fight. So in that since I think there is only one patient and that is the one who is currently ill and needs the support of their family.
I completely agree with everything you said. Every patient should be able to receive futile treatment if they want it; its probably because they are hanging onto that last thread of hope. I don't think anyone has a duty to die. PAS could become a component that sparks this notions that you have a duty to die.
DeleteBriana,
Deletemy opinions regarding futile treatment are the same as yours. I couldn't agree more that patients should have the right to futile treatment if they wish to have it. I think it does give patients hope, especially if that is the last thing they have to hold onto. Patients should be given the treatments they want, it is their choice.
I also agree that there is not a duty to die. I think that people do have the right to live as long as they can.
To me, patients are also the people who are ill, not the family. I also agree with you because the family can escape the illness and the patient can't, at the end of the day, it is the patient who has to physically deal with the illness.
I agree with a lot of what you said! It should be the patient's right to receive futile treatment if that is what they choose- even if it's because they are holding on to hope. I also think that we don't have a duty to die.
DeleteI have a different opinion on what the 'patient' is however, I feel that the family/those close to the ill person are also the patient, they are a big part of the ill person's care and experience, they need just as much education on the subject.
I see what the both of you are saying but i also believe that there is a point that someone needs to take control a stop the treatment when there is no hope. I feel someone needs to make it clear that the hope is gone and nothing with change, that way the patient inst wasting their time and money.
DeleteI think that patient’s should have the right to futile treatment. Doctor’s should not be able to tell a patient that they will not treat them. I think it’s the patients right to decide when they want to stop treatment. I think allowing futile treatment gives the patient dignity as they see it fit. I am a firm believer in treating people how I would like to be treated. I think giving patients the option of treatment is necessary for them to come to terms with their illness and cope with their families.
ReplyDeleteI do not think people have a duty to die. I understand that money and care can be a burdensome on a family, but dying for these reasons is an unfair burden to the patient. The role of the physician is to care for the patient, diagnosis and prognosis. It is not the responsibility of a physician to tell the patient they are not worth saving.
I think the patient should be able to make decisions about his/her own life. The family should be informed about what is happening and should be able to suggest ideas to the patient but the overall decision should be left to the individual who is dying.
Laura I agree with your opinion of futile treatment. Patients defiantly should have the right to futile treatment; the doctor should not be able to not give them treatment just because they know it won’t help in the long run. It gives patients hope yes, but like you said the patient should be able to determine the point at which they no longer want to receive any care. I also agree with you in that I don’t think we have a duty to die. Becoming an emotional, physical, or financial burden on our families is not a reason for us to die and I think it is unfair and disrespectful to think that in the first place. It is the patient’s right to decide to live or die, not their duty to remove themselves as a burden to others.
DeleteLaura i agree with everything you said here. I think that people have the right to futile treatment and i do not think that people have a duty to die.
DeleteI read the comments other students made about whom they believe the patient to be. I do understand the sentiment that the person who is ill/dying should ultimately be the decision maker about their own care if they are in a condition to do so. However, end-of-life care is different from maintaining-life care in so many ways. In hospice care, the dying person is the ultimate decision maker, but the family is also considered "the patient."
ReplyDeleteLet's assume that the family of the dying person is generally nice and supportive. They don't even have to be agreeable, just not mean to the dying person. Whenever someone is given the news that they are definitely going to die within months or weeks, the family become intertwined with that diagnosis for the duration of the dying person's life and beyond. Whomever the individual feels close to and who will be supporting them in their dying process is their family, regardless of biological relationship. Friends, co-workers, or neighbors may be considered family by some people. From a clinical perspective, the family are now mental health patients at the point of diagnosis of the dying person. Many of them shortly become physical health patients as stress, sleep deprivation, major nutritional changes, and perhaps distinctly unhealthy coping behaviors (alcohol, drugs) take the place of their normal routine. Everyone spends weeks or months holding their breath to see what happens next with their loved one. When that person dies, it doesn't feel like they were prepared by the wait. Instead, it's like a brand new tragedy piled on top of all the anticipatory grief they were likely already feeling. Instead of just one person ill, there is now a group of people who have to try to regain strength and health after the ordeal. Their suffering continues, while the terminally ill person's suffering was relatively short in comparison. Considering how terminal illness affects the family, I think it is vitally important that whomever the dying person considers family also be considered as the patient. I agree treatment decisions should ultimately be up to the individual who is dying, but actions that help the family cope with their loved one's dying process should be considered. In my experience, terminally ill patients who have good relationships with their family want their loved ones to be supported during and after their dying process, too.
Michelle, I also agree with your view on what the patient is. I feel that in general, the patient is not only the person who is ill but also the family, even in cases outside of hospice. You are not only treating them but also their family, in my opinion they are just as much a part of the process as the sick individual. The family I would consider to be the people close to the patient that avidly involve themselves in the “patient’s” care and health process. You not only educate the ill person but also the family. In the event that the ill individual would die, you are then caring for the family and the aftermath of their death. In my opinion , they are one in the same-they are all the patient.
Deletehttp://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/futhand.htm
ReplyDeleteThis article helps explain what medical futility is and how you can break it down. I believe that patients should have the option to futile treatment. I believe the patient should be the one making that decision though. If the patient is no longer able to coherently make decisions then futile treatment should not be an option for the one in charge of their decision making. If the patient has a will that states otherwise then their wishes should be respected because they made those decisions in a coherent state.
I do not think that there is a duty to die. Having lost a loved one only 4 months after his ALS diagnosis. The treatment he was receiving was futile and the disease progressed quickly and aggressively anyway. But that time allowed him to make his end of life decisions and say goodbye to the family. The monetary value of the care for the patient is outweighed by the value of the remaining time a patient has with their loved ones. A patient should not feel that they are a burden to their loved ones or their caretakers.
The patient is the individual who is ill. The family is a group of important people to the patient. The decision making process of the individual is often influenced by the family, who may or may not be blood related.
I agree with your opinion that patients should have the option to futile treatment, I also believe the patient should make the decision. I also don't believe there is a duty to die, and the patient should never have to feel they are a burden to their loved ones. It just isn't right to make people feel that way.
DeleteI like the article you attached here! Offered great insight on medical futility. I agree that any treatment being received by the patient is necessary in ensuring that they are able to fully carry out their lives with the time they are given on this earth. An ill individual should never have to feel that they are being a burden.
Deletei do believe that patients/ families have the right to an extent with futile treatment. if the treatment prolongs the life of a dying patient long enough that crucial family members are able to come and say goodbye, that is what I feel is ok. Ultimately though it is the patient's right to seek these treatments if they so desire.
ReplyDeleteI do feel like there is a duty to die but it falls on the family's responsibility to let the person die if there is too much pain and suffering or not chance at life for that person aside from living off of machines.
The patient is the person receiving treatment. family could be biological or not, that is determined by the patient. who they consider to be close enough to be family.
I completely agree that the patient is solely that person being treated. The family are people of concern, but I think everything should be focused on the person being treated and what they want, not what the family wants. Then if that patient happens to pass away the family should become more of a concern but they are still not the patient.
DeleteI do believe patients have a right for futile treatment, but there are some limitations. If someone is going to die but the futile treatment will prolong there life so their families get to say goodbye, then yes I do believe they should get it. I am on the fence though when a patient wants futile treatment so they can live longer, maybe waiting on a cure that isn't coming. I believe there should be a system that implicates how long a patient can be given futile treatment, if there death is inevitable.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe there is a "duty" to die. Duty isn't the correct term in defying if one should die or not. I believe people have the right to die if that is what they choose, but not a duty to die.
Do patients have a right to futile treatment?
ReplyDeleteI think that patients should have a right to futile treatment. A doctor or healthcare provider denying someone treatment is not meeting a standard of care. Unbiased and unconditional care should be given to every patient regardless of illness or chance of recovery. It would be brutal for a doctor to sit a patient down and inform them that there is nothing that can help them at all. Yes, the patient might know and understand the fact that their illness is terminal and will only progress for the worse, but that does not mean that the patient wants to hear that there is nothing left to do. If they are going to hold on to their quality of life until they die, it would be nice to at least have the comfort of last resorts or treatments that could maybe, just maybe, work. As nice as it is to be realistic, I think that it could do emotional damage to the patient, hearing that not even the doctor believes in them and that they are fighting their illness with their back against the wall. At least with futile treatment, the patient can feel as though they have a fighting chance. It should not be forced and it should not be taken away.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?)
I would say that the patient is primarily the patient. The only reason I say this is because of the scenarios where the patient does not want to be on machines to keep them alive, but the family goes against their wishes and tells the doctor to keep the ventilator on. This is not fair for the patient’s wishes to be disregarded, especially at such a serious point in their life, like dying, where all the patient deserves is the humanity in the respecting of their wishes. I mean in most circumstances, I would like to assume that the family is extremely supportive of whatever the patient wants, but this is not always the case, especially if the patient and family were to have differing religious or cultural views about EOL. However, I do believe that the family is nearly just as effected by the illness as the patient. I think that the family and friends that are considered family should be kept in the loop of what is going on health wise with the patient and what decisions the patient would like made on their behalf (stressing the need and importance for EOL conversations). When my grandfather was dying of cancer, he chose to not tell us, even his wife, anything that was going on. It was so incredibly frustrating to not know what was entirely going on because this was someone I cared, and still care, about so much. I wanted to know the treatment options and the full diagnosis because I wanted to perhaps somehow influence or persuade my grandpa to try something that would be more successful than what he picked. But looking at it now, I know it was my own selfish needs to keep him around as long as possible, when that wasn’t going to happen, regardless of having cancer or not. My family had to bit our tongues and take what little he shared with respect and acceptance. He wanted to spare us the pain of knowing how bad it really was and how much he was really suffering, and for that I am grateful for his strength and compassion towards us, despite the fact that he was dying. However, I think we all would have had a little more peace of mind at least knowing just exactly he was going through. I do not ultimately think that we would have forced our opinions or influenced him to keep on trying treatments, but I do believe it would have helped us put ourselves in his shoes and understand where exactly he was coming from. It would've been nice to have been able to be there more for him, but I know by not having all the information, we were being there for him in a way that comforted him.
I absolutely do not think that people have a duty to die. Having a duty to die implies that if they didn’t die then it would be wrong. Also a duty means that someone is obligated to help you die. I don’t think that anyone should be obligated to help others die.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that people have the right to seek futile treatment. I do not think that doctors should be allowed to refuse treatment to anyone. It is not ethically right and doesn’t meet the standard of care. Even if they have a terminal illness it is the patient’s right to seek treatment.
I feel patients have every right to futile treatment. I know if I were given a terminal diagnosis I would want to try some form of treatment either in hopes of some healing or just to prolong my time. If all else fails it at least provides the patient and his or her loved ones with some sense of hope and ease to cling to in such a hard time.
ReplyDeleteI do not think anyone has a duty to die. All people should be able to live as long they want or can. Just because one is given a terminal diagnosis doesn't mean they should give up all hope of carrying out the rest of their life.
I think the patient is just the individual. While the whole family or support system is in the process together when it comes down to it only one person is going through the treatment and only one person was diagnosed terminally ill. I think family is not only defined as blood but those who are there for you in any situation and only want to best for you and will love and support you unconditionally.
I agree that patients have every right to futile treatment if they wish to do so. I would also like to try some form of treatment if I was in that situation to have more time with my loved ones. I also agree that family just doesn't have to be defined as blood. Some people have better intentions for us than our own blood, it all comes down to the people who love and support you unconditionally, blood or not.
DeleteI believe that all patients have a right to futile treatment! All people deserve to continue to try to maintain their quality of life, regardless of whether their condition or disease has a cure. We watched a video at the beginning of the semester of a woman who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness and they had decided that her course of treatment was no longer working but they continued with futile treatment so that she could go on one last family vacation to Disney World. I think futile treatment is crucial for instances such as that, if futile treatment is able to give a family more memories with their family member before their passing then it is worth it. Futile treatment is definitely worth it if the patient has family members that need to fly in in order to see them before passing. I don’t feel like there is a duty to die, I feel as if a patient should be allowed to pass whenever they want naturally. I think more often than not when people are diagnosed with a terminal illness it becomes a burden for family members. I watched a documentary once about nurses and one woman was caring for an elderly person who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness and continued to code but remained alive and each time she would code her three children would come anticipating that this would be their final goodbye but she continued to make it through each time and you could tell that the kids were becoming agitated. I feel that the patient is the individual patient that is being treated, that is who the nurse has a direct duty to. The family and their feelings should also be included but I feel that it is the patients wants and needs that should always be honored.
ReplyDeleteDo patients have a right to futile treatment? Collectively, explain.
ReplyDeleteYes, patients have the right to futile treatment because it is the ultimate decision to keep doing what they are doing even though they know it its right. Even knowing that a person has a life threatening illness that is incurable the right for them to keep suffering is their decision. Sometimes it in a patients understanding that they don't want to face the reality of death so continuing with futile treatment is their best option with copping with the reality of death.
Is there a duty to die? Discuss.
I do not believe there is a duty to die. For people who are just old and beginning to age quicker and people with terminally ill diseases don't have the duty to die because maybe they see the quality of life has yet been fulfilled. Giving up is not the right thing to do so everyone should be given the right to live as long as possible no matter the circumstances.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?)
The patient is the individual suffering from the illness or disease. The individual is the patient making the decisions along with the family. In my beliefs, family is considered one so the word "individual" is non existent in a situation of someone who is terminally ill. The family is one unit who discusses the decisions together and able to talk about the end of life decisions no matter the circumstances.
Do patients have a right to futile treatment? Collectively, explain.
ReplyDelete- I think that all patients should have the right to futile treatment. I think that overall it is the patient's final decision to continue on with the treatment or not. The doctor shouldn't make the final decision no matter what he thinks. I also think that futile treatment can help patients give them hope knowing that they are trying everything that they can to help with their illness.
Is there a duty to die? Discuss.
-I dont think that there is a duty to die no matter what the circumstance may be.
Who is the patient? The individual, the family, ?? (How is family defined?)
- I think that the patient is anyone who is receiving help or treatment to get better. The family is anyone who is affected by what the patient is going through. The family is the support behind the patient.