--- Steve Sloan II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Deborah Harrell wrote: > > > True. Frex, would I advocate killing (lethal > injection, > > say) a comatose stroke victim who best medical > judgement > > and experience calls "essentially terminal?" No. > Would I > > advise withholding nutrition and drugs, except > what seemed > > needful for comfort? Yes. If on a ventilator, is > stopping > > mechanical breathing ethical from a medical POV? > Yes. > > Is starving that patient any more ethical than > administering > a comparatively quick and painless lethal injection? > I > honestly don't know, but the idea of slowly starving > that > patient -- even with drugs to prevent him from > feeling the > pain of starvation -- makes me feel pretty > squeamish.
One of the aspects of many (if not most) truly terminal conditions is the near-total lack of appetite, in what I think is one way that a person's body 'accepts the inevitable' (sort of like what happens to many prey animals, from what I've heard: as the lion clamps on its windpipe, a rush of endorphins floods the herbivore's brain, and it ceases to struggle, making the end a little faster). I would never withhold food or water from someone who seems (even if they are unable to communicate directly) hungry or thirsty; that is why even presumedly comatose terminal patients are given care to improve comfort, such as swabbing the mouth with a glycerin mixture (to alleviate dryness), putting a soothing lubricant in eyes which cannot close, or using a warming-blanket if they shiver. Debbi ~375 Posts To Go Maru __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
