What are your thoughts on euthanasia in the medical field assisted suicide?

Another thing that I pondered -- the general "staff" cannot prescribe medications. Nurses can administer what the doctor prescribes. Haldol and Ativan operate on different neural pathways. Haldol is a neuroleptic medication that acts primarily on the dopamine pathway. It is used for psychotic behavior. Ativan is a sedative acting on GABA. It is used for anxiety and agitation. I am trying to piece together what may have been happening that the doctor would prescribe these things. Neuroleptics and sedatives are often prescribed together. I wouldn't consider them a cocktail -- just something to try to control psychotic behaviors with agitation.

Hospitals have a vested interest in having patients NOT die. Too many people dying in the hospital make their statistics look bad. There are sometimes "angels of mercy" that pop up in the hospital. These "angels" tend to do things like inject lidocaine into ventilators, since it is hard to discover. I've never heard of them using messy things like Haldol.

Now, a nurse can make a dosage error. This happens sometimes and is very scary to think about. There may have been people killed because of these errors, but I don't have any stats on how much it has happened. I have heard there are safety measures in check to try to prevent nurse math errors.

Oh, Flowgo. You make me despair.

JessieBelle asked what elective procedure it was that your mother went into hospital for. If that isn't a question you want to answer, fine; but it is a reasonable question and we are bound to wonder why you won't say. Clearly it is not because you don't want your mother's treatment discussed on the forum, since you do so yourself at length. Is it because you are aware that the elective procedure was, however, related to a serious medical problem that could in itself have contributed to your mother's very sad, shocking, steep decline? Is this again to do with your not wanting to allow anyone to consider anything that doesn't fully support your personal picture of events?

We are all experienced caregivers, so even if we haven't had to have emergency or elective surgery ourselves we are likely to know well someone who has and we know what the procedure involves. We know, for example, that in the case of elective surgery the patient will meet with her surgical team and a detailed history will be taken. That detailed medical history would include drug sensitivities, known allergies and, above all, it would most certainly include an existing DNR. In other words, the hospital, and any and all staff directly involved in your mother's treatment, must have known about the DNR well before the day when your mother set foot in the place to have her surgery. Whatever the reason things turned very bad indeed, that reason was not that the staff suddenly discovered after her surgery that there was a DNR in place and decided on those grounds to cut her life short. It can't have been. It is not possible that they were all previously ignorant of the DNR, and that they were all personally committed to euthanising any patient who was the subject of a voluntary DNR order. This is not credible.

I am truly sorry that what happened with your mother has hurt you so badly and so deeply. I would, truly, like to know what her story was. Clearly something went wrong, and it may well be something that we could all learn from. Would you like to start again from the beginning?

flowgo, you didn't answer my questions, but skipped around them. How old was she and what was the operation for? And what type of fungal infection. Your skirting of specifics makes it seem you're trying to hide facts to support your own conclusion. If we do not have the concrete facts, we don't know if what you are saying it true or not. No matter how many words you use, leaving out the relevant facts make them impossible to evaluate.

JessieBelle My mom was considered an elder, not that old.She went back to the hospital because of too many drug complications.Before that she was barely in the hospital, maybe once or twice like for tonsils etc. She did not go into delirium during surgery.The procedure went fine. Just after the procedure she was already improving so much and it really helped her, but when she was still in the hospital after the procedure and they found out about her DNR the druggings started and followed her. I can not think of absolutely ANY excuse to have put my mom into such terrible danger as they did, with the use of those deadly sedatives that she was not able to tolerate in the first place. It was amazing she did not die from the very first overdose. Most anyone would have no matter what their age. The investigators said that enough drugs were used to cause great bodily harm and death.

She could not take adivan due to a severe sensitivity. It was too strong for her. She always had a sensitivity to pain meds and sedatives are even worse. Since she could not take adivan they gave her haldol which is even more powerful then adivan. Someone who can't handle adivan is definitely not going to be able to handle haldol. Later she not only got haldol alone but they gave her adivan/haldol cocktails, knowing she could not tolerate either one of these.

I know that there are families on here and other sites that are having eerily similar experiences as mine with their loved ones. Some elders were more ill then others and some the only thing going on was simply their age only,like my mom.

I know a CNA who would go to clients or patient's homes to help elders.She said many of her clients or patients were just elder not sick but somehow when some of her clients would go to the hospital for a test or check (something minor ) they mysteriously passed away. I also talked to a RN that was working in our area in a nursing home, she also said that her residents would go into one of these hospitals and pass away, when there was no reason for it at all.She noticed that it was mostly elders without families. How can this be allowed to happen.This same nurse had worked in another nursing home out of state where that kind of thing did not happen.

Since sedative overdoses and manipulation by staff does take place in the medical field then legal euthanasia would put patients in much more danger than ever.The staff could just drug a patient into a coma and say they are in a vegetative state due to dementia or end stages of dementia or they are deteriorating due to their age or they are getting dementia.etc.etc. I would think anyone would be demented after being severely drugged.

The staff will blame anything but sedatives or morphine etc etc which is too often the culprit. It is so awful cause the symptoms that elders get from these sedatives are very similar to symptoms of diseases that elders are more likely to get. So because of these dangerous problems that medical staff can cause, I feel that euthanasia in the medical field done by medical staff, needs to stay completely out of the medical field so more tragic deaths do not occur, as if that is not happening already.

My mom was given a fungal skin infection during her original stay in the hospital just after the original procedure. It was even diagnosed in the beginning( I found out later), but never treated until it became severe. It was treated by a good doctor and his staff and the sores completely healed for the first time since she got it.

This fungal skin infection had caused sores on the top of her shins only.The staff was saying that they were severe bed sores on the top of her shins.They can fool the family so easily if the family is not able to tell what is going on.That is why I say the family should be there always in the hospital or nursing home and be extremely involved or have other family or friends that can be trusted to keep a good eye on things. It is good to NOT even leave for a second. Even if you are there they still can manage to do damage, but it is not as bad usually.They can take a perfectly healthy elder and make them look like a frail invalid a matter of hours.There are staff who are very good at this.

I would like to know why this is happening, is it big drug pharmacies pushing drugs and giving the staff incentives to use these drugs on their patients. Is it medical staff who just think patients are disposable, especially elders. Is it the insurances not wanting to pay so euthanasia is the best way to reduce insurance costs.Or a combination of all. Whatever it is, it all needs to be stopped.

Medical staff who continue to overdose patients and put them in so much danger and or cause death need life in prison, especially if the patient is damaged and or dies.We are in America or England or Canada here and we are able to change things that we are not ok with. First we must become aware and face these problems head on, without turning away and then only then can change begin to take place. I do believe that England has made progress and made changes with these kind of problems.

This is why I am so against euthanasia, just because of personal experience..
I would really like to help make our hospitals, nursing homes and hospices safer, change laws and enforce laws that we already have. If this could happen then at least my very dear mom would have not died completely in vain. I am more concerned about stopping the unwanted euthanasia then legalizing euthanasia of any kind.

I just need to correct an earlier error - while the Eugenics Movement started from USA the notion of eugenics was practised (albeit not under that name precisley) in Ancient times when they mated the fittest women and bravest warriors n the thinking that it would create a more effective warrior. Later used by various countries slave owners to breed the superior slaves in terms of strength. xxx keep the faith all whatever your faith may be

CM - brilliant post.....I am sure you will know that I absolutely respect your view..... wanted to say that up front....it is also is why I have posted - because I think it is unreasonable and if I am honest rather pretentiouos to garner only one point of view - we should all want need and strive to see the various viewpoints as it gives us chance to make up our own minds.

As I say it is totally my viewpoint on euthenasia for me, (NOT FOR OTHERS) and I know opposition is your stance and we both have come to our conclusions for our own reasons.

However
I am opposed to involuntary euthanasia;
I am opposed to euthenasia being made legal for cost efficiencies;
I am opposed to families being allowed to advocate euthenasia on a family members behalf (unless that is a directive of the person concerned);

I am not opposed to morphine being given to alleviate pain in such doses as may lead to an earlier but painfree death, but this should be the option decided by at least 2 doctors not one to protect them against charges of malpractice

I am not opposed to euthenasia if the person concerned is dying and has had enough and places no value on their life any more (as long as this is not through depression or mental ill health with the exception of but not limited to dementia where they may not be able to articulate and DO HAVE an advanced directive in place)

I am not opposed to a DNR as long as it is used in the context that they will not resuscitate someone, who is terminally ill and who has gone into respiratory arrest
I do not oppose abortion as long as it within the defined boundaries and for bona fide reasons
I don't opposed voluntary sterilisation but I do oppose involuntary sterilisation
I dont oppose the birth pill

I included those last three for they form part of the leftovers of the eugenics program as opposed to euthenasia but I know for some they form part of the euthenasia program and there are times when I would agree with them in respect of abortion.

I probably wont comment again but needed to make alternative viewpoints known

I make no apology for stating my beliefs. Once again CM thank you for recognising the importance of diversity of views that have allowed me to feel comfortable in putting forward my viewpoint xxxx appreciate that honey

Flowgo I haven't yet read any of the comments, I plan to, but what concerns me immediately is the caveat contained in your original post: "This is for people who don't believe in euthanasia."

That is, you are interested only in the thoughts of people who agree with you and you don't want to hear from anyone else. Well, I hope those thoughts provide you with some kind of consolation. But as a means of opening debate? Of improving people's understanding of the issues, and how to deal better with them? To achieve any of those things, you have to be willing to consider alternative points of view.

As it happens, I oppose euthanasia. But to reach that conclusion I have listened carefully and respectfully to the arguments of learned and well-intentioned people who lobby for it. Now I know why I disagree with them.

If you just stick your fingers in your ears and go la-la-la-can't-hear-you, if you loudly denounce them all as murderers with no reasoning to support your accusation, your point of view will be dismissed as ignorant and hysterical by the people who make and enforce the laws. It's not the clever way to go.

For myself - and it is for me only you understand so before you all go mad I don't actually care if noone else approves, I WANT to be euthanised when the time comes and I want to be able to CHOOSE when that time has come FOR ME. I have an end of life plan and a DNR to assist as far as I am able in law.

I actually want much more than euthenasia for myself than that which is often proposed for the terminally ill, but I want it to be MY choice not someone else's UNLESS an incident occurs which prevents me from making decisions (like a stroke) at which time I demand that my wishes be observed.

FOR ME, once I am incapable of living the life I want to live at that time, I no longer want to live at all. I sure as hell dont want anybody wiping my butt or washing me - all I am asking is to allow me to die within the realms of my set of dignity as I see it FOR ME.

My children know of my wishes and they don't really want me to die at all - luckily mortality isn't an option!!! but they understand and respect my wishes

Let me tackle the Nazi issue next, genocide was brought in under the banner of eugenics not euthenasia. I know they are similar but they are not the same. Euthenasia or assisted suicide is a voluntary concept where culturally the individual accepts their mortality and chooses to die assisted with hte assistance of another.
Eugenics is not - it is (very roughly speaking) the elimination of people with undesirable traits in order to create a 'perfect' race - involuntary suicide (ampongst other means).

I would personally argue that involuntary suicide is murder since there is mens rea (intent to kill by the person who kills) and there is a dead body (showing actus reus - that a killing did occur) and it is these two legal issues that muddy the waters for assisted suicide because the person who wants to die cannot legally ask another to do it for them hence the support being given in the form of these tablets (or whatever) will kill you but I cannot give them to you however you can take them (this assumes that the person has the physical capacity to take them)

Much as you may really hate this next bit and it is NOT a criticism, the eugenics movement was started in the USA back in the late 1800 about 1880 I think, in an attempt to create a perfect society devoid of human defects and was going up until the 1970s in some places. For the 'feeble minded' it involved sterilisation programs, abortions, gender segregation medical neglect.., and the eugenics programs were funded by really wealthy people like Carnegie and Rockefeller.

Realistically however the program was really too simplisitic in its nature, assuming initially that these defects could all be eliiminated which would indicate they are natured not nurtured. of course that doesn't take into account a whole host of other impacts on health like work conditions and emphysema for example.

What Hitler did was to take this program and manipulate it for his own hatred of whole groups of people and to use it NOT for cleansing society of illness but wiping swathes of society he saw as a threat from the face of the earth. This was not a eugenics program it was not involuntary suicide it was murder plain and simple. He did however drip feed it into society initially as a eugenics program and sterilised the disabled, the deaf, the blind etc; he instigated abortions and then not supporting life in disabled babies which moves it from prevention using eugenic philosophy to murder by medical neglect under nazi desires to eliminate specific groups which in turn led to the holocaust but always with the undercurrent of improving society which is (alongside fear) how he sold it to the masses

How old was your mother? Which voluntary procedure was done? Did she go into delirium or did something else happen during the operation? I was just wondering why the unusual choice of the old drug Haldol, which is normally use to help calm a person with psychosis. I am trying to put the story of your mother together so that it makes some sense. Taking her out of the hospital, then returning her makes it even more complicated to me.

The drugs of choice were haldol/adivan cocktails some morophine whatever helped her get into a coma.The reason? She did have a DNR and no drastic measures. She did not want to live in a vegetative state if there was no hope of recovery.

The real heavy duty druggings happened after they found out about her advanced directive. They would drug her then do the swallowing test. She would some how pass. After she would get drugged they would tell me she was declining. I would tell them to stop drugging her.They thought I would believe them when they would tell me that her heath was deteriorating from her age. It was just insane how much they manipulate situations. What they were doing was criminal.

There was a time that she was in the ICU for a drug overdose and I came in unexpectedly before they had her set up.The nurse was yelling out DNR and adivan. My mom was in ICU because of a haldol/adivan drug overdose already. When I looked at the nurse in shock, she then told me I could say no to the sedatives.

My mom originally had come in for an elective procedure. It went well at the very beginning until they found out that she had a DNR,Then that's when the severe druggings began and hardly ever stopped, no matter how much I explained that she had a terrible sensitivity to these drugs.Then she would get complications of course, especially with her sensitivity. I'm not even sure how she survived the first one leave alone the others. She would tell them she did not want the sedatives if she was not in a sedative induced coma.I would explain that she could not have them when she was in a drug induced coma. They would not listen.They did as they pleased.

JessieBelle My mom signed to have the procedure done. She was in charge of her own healthcare when she went in for the procedure.The staff made it quite difficult for her as they continued the drugging so much so that she was in a coma much of the time, like a nightmare.

Yeah, me too, Cwillie. I guess it refers to copying and pasting. Copying and pasting, with or without credit, isn't against the law unless someone is making money by its use. That certainly wouldn't be true here.

Sorry, but you've got me scratching my head with the comment about plagiarism???

Moondance, I am so sorry for the pain you and your daughters have endured, and for the sad memories that still dominate the memories of your daughters.

I most certainly don't disagree with your position that it's an individual choice.

As to the plagiarism, that's frequently rampant on forums, unfortunately. The DMCA is generally ignored by many people who copy without (a) confirming that the source isn't copyrighted or (b) quoting the source (but that's still a violation of the DMCA if permission isn't secured - as best as I understand that law). I doubt if anyone even thinks about contacting the source for permission to quote.

I tried once to confidentially notify a commercial source that its material was being randomly quoted on a particular forum. in a manner that constituted spam. That source sent me a form to complete, including identifiable information.

That would make it clear to anyone in that firm, any law enforcement authority or even the plagiarist who made the complaint. Under the circumstances and given the nature of the unauthorized copying, I decided it would be better not to reveal so much personal identifying information. I didn't want some lunatic spammer knowing how to reach me.
Data gathering on breaches isn't as easy as it may sound and people don't read the DMCA terms. I'm not excusing that breach; just explaining it.

I am wondering, however, why you feel so upset by it - it doesn't affect you personally, or does it?

As to leaving the site, that's an individual choice for anyone who participates. I won't deny that some of the posts are very emotional and depressing, but there are also very uplifting posts and a wealth of experience and advice. I think your continuing to post here is a function of your reason why you want to be here and whether or not it's benefiting you.

Perhaps it's time for a nice break and respite from the sad issues that caused you so much discomfort as you wrote your post about your daughters. Perhaps read an engrossing novel, read a magazine, go for a walk and let your mind find some peace if only for a little while.

I was going to remove myself from this forum due to too much Plagiarism.
If I am aware of it , others are too.

I wish to address the question....first as a mother who supported my daughter when she choose to end her life...I type in tears. She no longer is in the pain she lived in for 39 years. She was severely disabled physically, a MIRACLE TO ME.
Both she & I, with our Minister talked about this for a several years before SHE decided.
Now, as a R.N., I wish to say in my words, not another's, that I believe it is an individual choice.

I did not say much. I can not believe how difficult all this was to type out & how long it took me to do so & having to get up & walk around & stop crying. This was 2009 & 18 months after her body was gone, her sister joined her.
I believe I need to leave this site. I wonder if the tears will ever stop?

SendMe2Help, are you stating that the "protocols" actually discussed genocide, race extermination and what Hitler deemed the "Jewish problem" and his "Final Solution"?

And it wasn't just the Nazi doctors; it's my understanding that the genocide plan originated with Hilter. Doctors and the SS followed his orders.

That's quite a stretch in my opinion.

I suppose it's not anyone's right to decide who lives or who dies. However, with that said, the last 2 months of my mother's life was horrific. Dying from AZ isn't pretty. If my mother knew what would eventually happen to her, she'd sign to be euthanized in a hot second. Seeing what I have saw with my mother ... if I unfortunately acquire this disease I will have it stipulated somewhere that I be allowed to peacefully go to sleep before the horror starts. JMO

I hesitate to answer, but I was present at symposiums and conferences on issues of death and dying. Doctors, scientists, polititians (Senator Hart failed to show), clergy, etc. were discussing protocols to decide whether someone's quality of life should allow the patient to live or die using euthanasia.
THESE PROTOCOLS WERE THE SAME THE NAZI DOCTORS USED FOR MASS MURDERS.
That said, please don't shoot the messenger, resolve these issues in your own heart and mind. I personally would never want anyone to decide my quality of life
or whether I should live or die.

Because of modern medicine, gone are the days where many would find their love ones had died from a heart attack while taking a nap on the sofa. That is the way to leave this earth, without any warning. No one had to make any decisions.

In my case I think ultimately the right decision was made for my Mom. I just felt that we should of had the opportunity to discuss it more and not be rushed into the decision.

Debates about whether my Mom had a stroke or had an infection that turned into encephalitis went on and were never ever resolved. One doctor insisted that she had a stroke even though the C T scan indicated that she had not. The neurologist said otherwise.

I think my Mom would not have recovered to a point where she would have quality of life but I would of liked to have more time to make the decision without the pressure put on us by the doctor.

flowgo, what sedative was used that induced a coma? Did they give a reason why they were giving her so much? Why did she originally go to the hospital? Who was her healthcare proxy?

This is a very delicate subject so I will attempt to tread lightly here. Death of a loved one is a horrible experience to go through for anyone. I mean no disrespect to the writers here who feel their loved ones where hurried to the end by meds and medical personnel, but it would be interesting to hear the other side. No doubt this has happened, I'm sure lots of medical folks can get very callous about the end of life, but I feel very strongly We Have To Honestly Appraise The Quality Of Life our love ones have in those last weeks and days. Put yourself in their place. Do you want to go out like that? Is it really that important to squeeze another month, week, day, hour of life out of someone who in most cases has been suffering for a long time. I challenge anyone to walk around a skilled nursing home facility and tell me you want your life extended to the last possible minute and end up stacked up like so much cordwood waiting to die. Sorry. Maybe I didn't tread so lightly. Just trying to be honest.

Gershun Singingway Look how much pain is caused when the family's loved ones are are rushed in to death, even if they are no where near dying. There are too many people forced to die just because of there age. In other countries this would actually be a crime.I can only imagine how disastrous things would become if euthanasia does become legal. I think we need to worry more about how to stop euthanasia then trying to make it legal. Euthanasia already causes enough havoc with patients and family.

freqflyer and maggie I aggree to a point,but the thing that I disagree with is, that it has NO business being done in any MEDICAL FACILITY or done by MEDICAL STAFF.

My mom was actually put into a sedative induced coma several times, by the staff and they tried to tell us that she was in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery.They also said that this was her normal state. Actually it had been for about 2 weeks since she was put into a sedative induced coma. If I did not realize that she was having so much trouble from the sedatives, I may have actually thought that she was naturally getting worse had she been sick.I may have believed the staff and she could have been euthanized right away especially if that was what she wanted. If euthanasia was in place that would have made it so easy to have killed her the first time they put her into a sedative induced coma. That is not right at all.

She had a dnr in place and no end of life machines etc. in place. She also did not want to be in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery. However she also did not want the staff to put her in a vegetative state and then say oh look she is hopeless and time to euthanize.This is so dangerous for the people who want to live and want treatment and to be taken care of properly. Doctors should be concerned with the ones who want to live not the ones who want to kill themselves. They can find a way to do that on their own.It would also be very dangerous for doctors to have access to these kind of drugs.People who want to kill themselves will find a way like they always have before.

I agree with Maggie, I think one should have a choice on their final demise. I know if something happens to me and I am in a coma state or rack with terrible pain with no chance of improvement, believe me I want an out... I don't want family to stop their lives to watch me suffer for months if not years. What type of "quality of life" would that be not only for me, but for my loved ones?

I think people should be able to decide the timing of their final exit. Much as we execute living wills, we should have the right to execute a more comprehensive document that allowed us the same dignity and compassion we allow our beloved pets.

I also think people need to be educated about the process and become more comfortable with its realitty. Just because we have the medical know-how to extend the life of a 100-year-old does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean we should.

I used to be totally against euthanasia because I have no trust in the government and practitioners to get it right. A recent ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada that we have a constitutional right to doctor assisted suicide if that is our choice made headlines here and got us all here debating the topic yet again. I think under the circumstances covered by the court I would allow for a person with a terminal illness to chose the time of their death rather than force them to endure months (or years) of suffering. I am still totally against having the decision made on behalf of another person as would be the case in someone not mentally competent. Too often I have heard people say "I would rather be dead than have _______" (fill in the blank with whatever). Who are we to judge if that person finds their life valuable?

As for the nudge/wink solution available now of morphine and ativan to ease the transition for those in their final days, I think if it could be more openly discussed then we could all make more informed choices. I have spent years searching the internet and dealing with the healthcare system and feel I am pretty well informed, yet things still crop up in my mom's care that have me searching for answers yet again. People who have a sudden illness (like stroke for example) often have never been ill before, have no clue how the system works and aren't even aware of their options. Those within the system have become so used to the way things work they often seem to forget how totally ignorant outsiders can be and there is often no effort made to help us understand. THAT is what has to change.

I feel that the hospital rushed us into comfort care. Its the thing that haunts me the most about the whole experience.

The doctor in charge and the neurologist were at odds about the whole thing and even though my Mom is gone and at peace I still think about it and cry about it and wonder did we do right by my Mom.

Hospice will tell you pointedly that upping the oxygen saturation will stop the body's breathing, and which drugs given too close together will cause cardiac arrest. Although you'd think this was meant to be a caution, their attitude and demeanor clearly shows that it is meant instead to be an "out" for the person, if they want to speed up the dying, or for the family, if they want to speed up their loved one's dying process. Then they get so inured to it, they start to advocate speeding up the process even before "active dying" starts! So make sure before you go into homecare or Hospice, that you have found a doc who will be the primary care physician, and is one you can call for backup against the attitude some nurses have that the best death is drugged up and speeded up.

You can copy and paste the link into the address bar and go and vote against assisted suicide in the medical field. I think that if someone really wants to kill themselves then it is up to them but don't get the medical field involved. That should not be their job. That should have nothing to do with them. This will just put patients who want to live in danger and life will not be respected anymore.