Weigh in on tomorrow morning The Perfect Cup Question of The Day:

The Perfect Cup Question for Wednesday

Is medical advancement and extended lifespan a good thing? Should we keep people alive? What’s the limits?

Leave a comment.

#daily #podcast #question #questionoftheday #coffee #think

Check out today’s 5-10 min chat in The Perfect Cup Podcast.

https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theperfectcup/episodes/How-should-we-measure-our-lives--In-years--In-moments--In-accomplishments--Something-else-e2326em

https://void.cat/d/LcJ1m38KbWPHu3pv53Ssob.webp

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I have so many thoughts on this. My biggest thing is quality of life. At what point do the medical interventions just prolong the inevitable and leave the individual in a state they don't want to be in? Are we making medical choices selfishly because we are "not ready" to say goodbye?

I recently read a book called "Being Mortal," by Atul Gawande, that discusses this subject. He does a great job helping the reader learn HOW to approach these conversations with family members about their end of life wishes.

#deathpositivity #normalizedeath #qualityoflife #compassionindeath #endoflife

#[0]

“Should we keep people alive?”

The short answer, no.

But that depends on what you mean by “keep people alive.” If you mean “bridging the gap” between death and a return to function, I doubt anyone would argue that it is a great thing that we have the medical technology to do so.

Were it becomes problematic is when we “keep people alive” long after they would have died from natural processes. When a person's existence is torture, yet they do not have the means to refuse treatment. Death is as much a natural process as birth. We will never be able to stop it, only prolong life as long as possible. I imagine that is the question you are truly asking, At what point to we stop keeping people alive?

Some approach this from a religious experience, waiting for a miracle. I have seen plenty of this in my experience. Patient kept alive by mechanical means, while they slowly, and with much effort to the contrary, rot away.

Some approach this from a financial perspective, as a source of their ability to pay the bills (social security) lies in that bed, being kept alive artificially, as their wounds become necrotic and their body parts are cut off bit by bit by surgeons who will literally cut anything without a thought to the morality of it all. Unfortunately, I also have seen much of this. (Thank you government for creating this hell on earth for some).

Most family members, in my experience, when faced with making a decision to keep a dying family member alive, are not really presented with the facts of what that means. Often the only thing the medical profession is concerned with is IF we can keep them alive. The WHETHER to do it they defer to the family without giving them a truly informed reality of what that will mean for the patient.

Often when facing trying times for the hospital (like 2020 during the height of the Covid scare) they will bring in an Ethics consult, but in my experience the ethics committee has no authority or ability to truly help the family make appropriate decisions.

Add to all this the burden of maintaining the dying on the health care industry. Government assisted health care (Medicare/Medicaid) often pays out for these long term patients. Many nursing homes and long term care facilities function primarily off the money flowing from government to keep these people alive, long after their families have stopped taking any interest in them. This in turn increases the cost of healthcare as a whole, in turn increasing the tax burden on the people, and reduces the availability of healthcare workers and actual healthcare beds to help those that retain a decent quality of life.

And that is where I personally believe the line needs to be drawn, at quality of life. I am not saying that no one should provide care for these people, or that they should be treated poorly, but once you meet a certain medical standard for poor quality of life (and I mean that on a very extreme level) and are required to be sustained by artificial means, care of that individual should be through private insurance or private pay. So long as families are not held financially responsible for the care of these patients, they often opt to keep them alive and in absolutely horrible states long after they should have been allowed to die. I believe cutting the Gov funding of these cases would greatly reduce the suffering of these individuals, free up more financial assistance (if you believe in that sort of thing) for those who need quality medical help, and make available more trained healthcare workers for people who are suffering.