RE: What does the future hold for Ariel Sharon?

            I can see Peter's point, but it is a personal decision made by
individuals and their families, not by society. When society tries to make
the rules you end up with situations like Terry Schiavo at one extreme and
Soylent Green at the other. I used to be firmly in the camp that is was
kinder to put people out of their misery. After working in the ER for over
25 years, I've come to realize that these people may be old, but most don't
want to die and want you do as much as you can to keep them going. It may
seem like they are doing some extreme things to keep Sharon alive, but
surgically treating cerebral hemorrhages and medically induced comas are
more standard of care than cutting edge treatments, not to mention that the
guy is a world leader. I remember several years ago I was treating a 96 year
old man with a mild heart attack. This man had never been hospitalized
before and was on no medications and was active and alert. I told his wife
what happened and she fell apart, blaming herself. "What did I do wrong? I
feed him well and we exercise..." At first I thought it was funny, then I
realized that if you don't feel old and aren't sick, you are probably as
unready to die as the rest of us.

 

Oly

 

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Peter J Richardson
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 9:21 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CAT23-Achat] What does the future hold for Ariel Sharon?

 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William Highfield" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [CAT23-Achat] What does the future hold for Ariel Sharon?


> Peter,
>
> (1) Surely you're not comparing the medical treatment you would give a
> dog with what you would administer to a human, would you?

It depends on whether you are comparing the medical treatment on the grounds
of cost, or on the grounds of 
cruelty. Sometimes with a dog you might be able to afford to pay a vet to
give further treatment, but you decide 
not to because you care for your dog and do not want to be cruel to him.


> (2) Each person and family must make their own decisions on what kind of
> medical care should be given, and to what extent they try to preserve
> life.  If sharon's family wants to fight like hell to preserve his life,
> who are we to say they should not?  Now, if he left a living will IN
> WRITING that says he should not be given surgery to save his life in
> this situation, that's a different story, but whenever in doubt, the
> default treatment MUST be to preserve life.  A society that does not
> value life or fight to defend it isn't one worth having, in my opinion.

How much of the decisions concerning Sharon's treatment are with his family,
and how much is to do with the fact 
that he is the prime minister of Israel?


> What alternative are you putting forth?  Should the doctors and family
> have stood by and said "To hell with it, he's old, let him die"???

I am wondering whether that would have been kinder to him.

Regards
Peter