Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Schadenberg explained that influencing an aging population to refuse medical treatment when it might be necessary and helpful is part of the concept of the "duty to die" which right-to-die advocates encourage.

This is EXACTLY what the culture of death is advocating.

1 posted on 11/08/2007 4:37:05 PM PST by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; 8mmMauser

Pro-Life Ping


2 posted on 11/08/2007 4:37:27 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 230FMJ; 49th; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; ..
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 11/08/2007 4:37:52 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BykrBayb; floriduh voter; Sun; Mr. Silverback; MHGinTN; bjs1779

Ping


4 posted on 11/08/2007 4:38:44 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

I’m afraid the generation that was too busy fulfilling itself to care much about its aging parents or even to reproduce (very much) will find it increasingly difficult to find anyone to a)care for it or b)to do so humanely.


5 posted on 11/08/2007 5:09:14 PM PST by Catmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GMMAC; fanfan

Canada Ping


6 posted on 11/08/2007 5:10:54 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: long hard slogger; FormerACLUmember; Harrius Magnus; Lynne; hocndoc; parousia; Hydroshock; ...
When government is providing "free" health care it will do whatever is necessary to keep costs down and it will argue that it has a moral obligation to do so..."for the children"



Socialized Medicine aka Universal Health Care PING LIST

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or removed from this ping list.
10 posted on 11/08/2007 6:37:39 PM PST by socialismisinsidious ( The socialist income tax system turns US citizens into beggars or quitters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GoLightly; wagglebee

This is a very slipper slope for both sides.

I think that economic considerations and or the mere convenience of family or the Government having to care for the elderly or the seriously ill should never, ever be considered when making end of life decisions. These decisions should never left up to government or the HMO/insurance bureaucrats or to selfish family members.

Euthanasia = Wrong! Assisted Suicide = Wrong!

With that being said however, medical science has developed to the point where “life” can be “physically” extended past the point where any reasonable person or ethical or moral medical professional recognizes that any sort of life or chance at a recovery is possible and sometimes the more merciful thing is to stop artificial life support.

I’ve been through this painful process more than once.

My mother-in-law, after many years of illness and well into her eighties became comatose and total unresponsive while in a nursing home. She had no more will or desire to live. She was racked with pain and had one serious illness after another and was finally diagnosed with a very slow moving but ultimately fatal cancer. This cancer was not treatable in that any treatment for it, given her fragile state, would kill her more quickly than the disease would. She had finally refused to eat anymore before she lapsed into a coma. Before she lost consciousness, she told us repeatedly how tired she was and how she just wanted to “go home” so she could be reunited with her parents and her brothers and sisters.

Of course my husband and I insisted that everything possible be done to make her comfortable and while we didn’t want to hasten her death, we insisted that no extraordinary measures be taken. But against her written express wishes and ours, the doctors in the nursing home sent her to a hospital/hospice and put her on a feeding tube and a respirator and threatened to take us to court if we objected. She died three long years later after her heart finally gave out and the DNR order was followed. By this time she was in a rigid fetal position and the funeral home had to literally break her bones in order that she could be laid out in a coffin for her funeral. There was nothing merciful or ethical or medically sound in the treatment she received.

FYI, my mother-in-law was on Medicare and Medicaid and rather than saving money, we think the primary motivation for keeping artificially alive for so long against her and our express wishes was based on the money the nursing home and hospital received from the Government to continue her care past what was medically and ethically reasonable. To me, that is as morally irresponsible as it is to hasten a person’s death by euthanasia.

Several years later, within two years, both my parents suffered medically untreatable diseases. My parents and our family were fortunate that that they were in prestigious hospitals and that everything medically possible was done for them and all sound medical measures were exhausted. Believe me when I say that the doctors were not willing to give up and did everything possible to save their lives, but when science failed; we, their doctors and our family, were all in agreement to end treatment and artificial life support and they were allowed to die with peace and dignity. This was not an economic decision or one born out of convenience, but one based on true mercy and on sound medical advice without any concern or interference by the Government.


11 posted on 11/08/2007 7:45:54 PM PST by Caramelgal (Rely on the spirit and meaning of the teachings, not on the words or superficial interpretations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

I have news for all: Socialist Euthanasia is the full-time standard practice in the USA right now. Oh, few hospitals will ever be honest about it.

But Medicare simply does not pay after a few weeks in the hospital. So the fragile, chronically ill old patient becomes a permanent financial loss at that point. And the hospital administrators begin to endlessly harass the doctors to pull the plug on “hopeless” cases or transfer the medical train wreck to a nursing home.


13 posted on 11/09/2007 3:06:15 AM PST by FormerACLUmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

There doesn’t need to be any formal starting of euthanasia, the health care system kinda has that effect on the elderly as it is.


16 posted on 11/09/2007 11:54:19 AM PST by Grig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson