Posted on 11/20/2006 1:49:59 PM PST by presidio9
A judge has rejected a family's plea that a 53-year-old woman in a vegetative state should be allowed to die.
He has ordered instead that she should be given a drug that could wake her up.
Theoretically the patient could then spend the rest of her life severely disabled and aware of her condition.
Sir Mark Potter, president of the High Court Family Division, says the woman should be given zolpidem, a common sleeping pill.
It has been used before on victims of severe brain damage who have then regained consciousness.
The woman, who cannot be named, suffered a massive brain haemorrhage on holiday in August 2003 and has been diagnosed as in a persistent vegetative state.
Sir Mark ruled that doctors should try giving her the drug before a final decision has to be made on whether to stop giving her food and water artificially, and let her die.
His decision was supported by the Official Solicitor Laurence Oates who represents PVS patients when their families seek permission to allow them to die.
A spokesman said Mr Oates, who has now retired, thought the woman should be given zolpidem to test if she could 'wake up.'
He said: "It was a very difficult case, but Mr Oates believed that before anyone is allowed to die every test possible should be carried out."
Sir Mark is believed to have also heard evidence from experts who look after severely brain-damaged patients.
It is the first time a ruling has been made to keep a PVS patient alive in order to use the drug. The case follows new Government guidelines, revealed by the Daily Mail on Saturday, which tell doctors they risk being put on trial for assault if they refuse to allow patients who have made 'living wills' to die.
The Lord Chancellor told the medical profession that those who do not follow the wills could face jail or big compensation claims in the court.
In a guide to Labour's Mental Capacity Act, which comes into operation next spring, Lord Falconer said living wills must be enforced. PVS patients are described as 'awake but not aware'. Unlike patients in a coma their eyes are open but they see nothing and are not conscious of their surroundings.
They breathe normally but have no swallowing reflex and have to be kept alive by artificial feeding and hydration.
In 1993 the courts sanctioned the withdrawal of feeding from Tony Bland, a 21-year-old brain-damaged survivor of the Hillsborough football ground disaster.
The case went to the House of Lords where law lords ruled it was in his best interests to be allowed to die and said doctors could lawfully stop artificial feeding because they would not be killing him, but withdrawing treatment.
Since then the High Court has sanctioned the withdrawal of food and drink from dozens of PVS patients when doctors, families and the Official Solicitor have agreed that death was in the patient's best interests.
The case of Terri Schiavo, whose husband fought a seven-year battle in Florida before she was allowed to die last year, heightened the debate in the U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE NEW LEASE OF LIFE DRUG Zolpidem has been used in South Africa with amazing results. One recipient is 32-year-old Miss X, who cannot be named for legal reasons. She suffered four cardiac arrests and hypoxia - a lack of oxygen to the brain - after contracting septicaemia four years ago.
Without the pill, she can barely stand, her arms are in spasm and she cannot speak, although her intelligence has not been affected. But after being given a dose of the drug she can stand up, stretch to her full height and clap her hands.
The left side of her face is no longer drooping and her eyes sparkle. She smiles broadly and can even use a keyboard to communicate with people, telling them how she now hopes to speak again.
I want all possible treatment to save my life if I'm injured. These damn doctors will kill you to clear the bed if you give them half a chance. They don't know everything. In a lot of cases they don't know sh!t.
Yes, it's a loaded word -- it's not even a very good metaphor.
Nobody KNOWs how cognitively disabled anyone is. That's what makes me so mad... The brain has astonishing abilities to reprogram itself. But, I'm pro-life, and I think euthanazia smacks of the third reich, so you can see where I'm coming from.
sarcasm, obviously
Shouldn't put anyone in that position. THat's one of the problems with living wills -- you're involving someone else in your own easy way out.
Why is it if a baby is "allowed to die" of starvation or dehydration, society is outraged (unless doctors help, of course - Baby Doe), but allow a comatose person to starve, you're a hero?
That's another thing -- I don't think these people are so expensive to care for, or at least they wouldn't HAVE to be if it weren't for the screwed up health care system.
LOL. I'd completely forgotten about that!
Food is not "treatment". Withholding of food is now "allowing" someone to die - it is killing them. Suppose I should lose both of my arms in an accident and need to be fed. Since I cannot feed myself, should then I be "allowed" to die?
I say give her the pill and let her make her own decision.
Life gets complicated.
My MIL could likely have gone on for a year or two more.
She still had what I considered a pretty good quality-of-life: she could read, watch TV, walk with the assistance of a walker, she was still mentally sharp, but she was going through a series of increasing frequent hospital stays to deal with acute episodes of CHF, and she HATED them - eventually, she elected to forgo supportive therapy.
I don't think she was clinically depressed, I don't think she was in intractable pain, and in her position I believe that probably would want to go on a while longer.
She chose not to, and essentially "euthanasized" herself.
My wife's cousin lives in Holland. Her MIL, dying of cancer, recently elected euthanasia.
The procedure to get approval took several weeks, and she was really testy about it - she was ready to go - she felt that life as the person she wished to be was over, she had no interest in sticking around for the last few weeks or months of discomfort, indignity and decline, she wanted to get on with it, and the "damn bureaucrats" were as usual making things difficult for her.
I've sat down to dinner and 15 min later been on a gurney being wheeled into the ER with a good chance of not making it back out. I was surprised to discover, watching the ceiling lights roll by, that what bothered me the most was "Damn - I'm leaving my wife with a half re-habbed house. Man, that's going to be a *bitch* for her to finish on her own... HATE to do that too her...". No big rush of fear, no life passing before my eyes, just regret for loose ends that were going to be big problem for the person I cared most for.
15 years later, I'm 60, and still here. I hope life lasts a good bit longer.
But if not, it's not that precious. 60 years? 70? 80? My father's 94? It's just a infinitesimal moment in the vast ocean of time.
Now, some other people feel differently. They are terrified of judgment day, or existential nonexistence, or maybe they just want to hang on just a bit longer, and hold their next grandchild.
But that's them, not me.
I don't tell other people how to value their lives, and in fact when they have delegated such responsibility to me I have always honored their wishes to the best of my ability - even when I believed that I might have made a different decision for myself.
In return, I'd appreciate it if other people refrained from telling me how I must value mine, especially when it comes to how and when to end it.
Actually respecting an individual's wishes!? Gee...what a concept!
thanks!!!
I already saw this on "House" last week. They woke up John Laroquette and went to Altantic City.
I already saw this on "House" last week. They woke up John Laroquette and went to Altantic City.
I know what you meant, gidge....sometimes the peroxide turns them into sour-pusses....
From Lewis, A Latin Dictionary:
fetus (foet- ), ûs
I. Abstr., a bringing forth, bearing, dropping, hatching of young (rare but class.)
B. Transf., of plants, a bearing, producing
II. Concr., young, offspring, progeny, brood
2. Transf., of plants, fruit, produce:
While there can be debate about whether it's better to live in that state or not (and that should be up to the individual), I think the main blessing of this drug is that it exposes the pro-death crowd for what they are. They will not like this drug.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Amazing things can happen when you make unruly parts of the brain sleepy. I recently spoke with the sister of former middleweight world champion Gerald McCalellan, whose brain was damaged in a fight back in '95. She says that in the last hour or so before he goes to sleep, it's like "talking with the old Gerald." She theorizes that as his brain winds down, there is less "static" for his mind to punch through.
If she is truly vegetative, this drug will not help her. But most importantly, you see a story that says theoretically a thing could happen, and you glom right onto it. Well, theoretically she could be in great shape to begin rehab if theis drug works, and regain most of her function. We just don't know, and the potential harm in withholding the treatment is far greater than the greatest possible downsides from administering it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.