Re: Interesting information on end of life issues

[Guest guest]

I have just read the article about " TS. " I question the interpretation

and motive for this article. I know, that were I in such a

situation...suffering through this end period of life...physically, or

cognitively, I would

welcome this procedure...one that would ease my pain and provide a feeling

of well-being. The opportunity to slip away from life without the agony

that CAN accompany the process, is a precious one.

Marcia

[Guest guest]

Would you please post a link to the article as I did not get it.

Thanks,

Pat

 

Wife and Caregiver of age 75 diagnosed with Parkinson's 2003, diagnosed

with dementia probably Lewy Body Dementia because of severe psychotic reaction

to Seroqueil April 2009.

Subject: Re: Interesting information on end of life issues

To: LBDcaregivers

Date: Friday, May 20, 2011, 7:26 AM

 

I have just read the article about " TS. " I question the interpretation

and motive for this article. I know, that were I in such a

situation...suffering through this end period of life...physically, or

cognitively, I would

welcome this procedure...one that would ease my pain and provide a feeling

of well-being. The opportunity to slip away from life without the agony

that CAN accompany the process, is a precious one.

Marcia

[Guest guest]

I agree, Marcia. I do not want to get into a discussion about religion, but

this was originally published in an ultra conservative " Christian " magazine. As

a part of their religion it is fine for them to make such choices for themselves

in accordance with their beliefs. It is not okay for them to suggest, as this

article does, that use of pain medication to control pain, even up to and

including death, is somehow a conspiracy to legalize euthanasia.

Two friends with family members in unbearable pain, have recently gone down this

road. It was heart wrenching for them, but the final days, where pain

medication was given to the point that the pain was relieved, were a release

from the 24/7 cries of pain their loved ones experienced. That death also was

hastened is not debated. It was, by perhaps days or at the most a few weeks.

Their bodies were already shutting down.

Perhaps another question that should be asked is, " Is it ethical to prolong pain

and suffering by medical means to extend life for a brief period of tiem? "

Just my thoughts. Nan

>

> I have just read the article about " TS. " I question the interpretation

> and motive for this article. I know, that were I in such a

> situation...suffering through this end period of life...physically, or

cognitively, I would

> welcome this procedure...one that would ease my pain and provide a feeling

> of well-being. The opportunity to slip away from life without the agony

> that CAN accompany the process, is a precious one.

>

> Marcia

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I clicked the link in this post because of the following " Of particular

interest in the article is the mention of dementia. " What came up was an article

by Valko on terminal sedation in a Pentecost magazine. The underline

message was that terminal sedation was a way of going around euthanasia.

She maintained that " those of us who have worked in hospice or with other dying

patients know (pain) can virtually always be controlled. As someone who has been

involved with hospice for 8 years, I know that not true either for physical or

psychological pain. I've been with patients who were allergic to drugs that

could have controlled their physical pain if the side effects weren't worse than

the pain reduction.

And with other patients, the pain was so intense that the only way of relieving

it was to increase the dosage to the point where it would be euthanasia, a

decision that both nurses and physicians would not make.

Also, psychological pain often is more intense than physical pain. Valko used

the example of someone who wanted terminal sedation when he learned he had a

brain tumor, an illness that could have continued for years. It's always easy to

create an example that fits one's position. But patients I served who thought

about terminal sedation were more typical of who thinks about it. For example, I

served someone in hospice whose guilt from being responsible for the death of

his son was more intense than the pain he was experiencing from his liver

cancer.

I understand the deep divisions between people who believe the decision to end

one's own life is right, and those who have ethical and moral concerns about it.

But to dismiss terminal sedation is a way around it, is disingenuous. Terminal

sedation allows the disease to take it's course until death occurs. The sedation

does not result in a person's death.

If anyone has witnessed a patient's and family's discussion of terminal

sedation, they understand the profound discussions of life and death that

results.

[Guest guest]

As part owner of this site, let me say, whenever an article is published, it is

not to say it is " right or wrong " to do anything. It is only provided

information and help people think about what they might be able to think about

now rather than later when it is hard.

I hope this only raises interest and not cause an argument. We have lots of

different opinions here and they are all valuable.

Hugs

Donna R

Cared for Mom 3 years in my home and the last year at a nh. She passed away

from LBD in 2002.

Re: Interesting information on end of life issues

I clicked the link in this post because of the following " Of particular

interest in the article is the mention of dementia. " What came up was an article

by Valko on terminal sedation in a Pentecost magazine. The underline

message was that terminal sedation was a way of going around euthanasia.

She maintained that " those of us who have worked in hospice or with other dying

patients know (pain) can virtually always be controlled. As someone who has been

involved with hospice for 8 years, I know that not true either for physical or

psychological pain. I've been with patients who were allergic to drugs that

could have controlled their physical pain if the side effects weren't worse than

the pain reduction.

And with other patients, the pain was so intense that the only way of relieving

it was to increase the dosage to the point where it would be euthanasia, a

decision that both nurses and physicians would not make.

Also, psychological pain often is more intense than physical pain. Valko used

the example of someone who wanted terminal sedation when he learned he had a

brain tumor, an illness that could have continued for years. It's always easy to

create an example that fits one's position. But patients I served who thought

about terminal sedation were more typical of who thinks about it. For example, I

served someone in hospice whose guilt from being responsible for the death of

his son was more intense than the pain he was experiencing from his liver

cancer.

I understand the deep divisions between people who believe the decision to end

one's own life is right, and those who have ethical and moral concerns about it.

But to dismiss terminal sedation is a way around it, is disingenuous. Terminal

sedation allows the disease to take it's course until death occurs. The sedation

does not result in a person's death.

If anyone has witnessed a patient's and family's discussion of terminal

sedation, they understand the profound discussions of life and death that

results.

[Guest guest]

http://www.wf-f.org/02-2-terminalsedation.html

>

>

>

> Subject: Re: Interesting information on end of life issues

> To: LBDcaregivers

> Date: Friday, May 20, 2011, 7:26 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> I have just read the article about " TS. " I question the interpretation

> and motive for this article. I know, that were I in such a

> situation...suffering through this end period of life...physically, or

cognitively, I would

> welcome this procedure...one that would ease my pain and provide a feeling

> of well-being. The opportunity to slip away from life without the agony

> that CAN accompany the process, is a precious one.

>

> Marcia

>

>

[Guest guest]

I am heartened and -maybe delighted isn't the right word-that something I wrote

about has caused such healthy debate.

I lost about 7 weeks ago under tragic and, in my mind, unnesecary

circumstances. If it weren't for hospital protocol could have climbed out

of the ambulance and entered the hospital under his own power. Not six days

later he was wheeled out of the hospital and into a hearse. Intial DX: walking

Pnuemonia and irregular heartbeat. As I try to come to grips with this tragedy I

have been exploring issues involving involuntary treatment with psychotropic

drugs and the Mad Pride Movement.

This article and the archived radio program I linked to don't discount the use

of drugs for pain, rather they discribe how treatment with sedating drugs to the

point of death can be a substitute for more humanistic-albeit time consuming and

more expensive ministering to the sick and dying.

I know I was taking a risk by linking to an article on a religous site, but you

don't have to be religous to understand the inhumanity of drugging someone into

submission for what ever reason, let alone doing it to the point that death

results from your actions.

>

> As part owner of this site, let me say, whenever an article is published, it

is not to say it is " right or wrong " to do anything. It is only provided

information and help people think about what they might be able to think about

now rather than later when it is hard.

>

> I hope this only raises interest and not cause an argument. We have lots of

different opinions here and they are all valuable.

>

> Hugs

>

> Donna R

>

>

> Cared for Mom 3 years in my home and the last year at a nh. She passed away

from LBD in 2002.

>

>

> Re: Interesting information on end of life issues

>

> I clicked the link in this post because of the following " Of particular

interest in the article is the mention of dementia. " What came up was an article

by Valko on terminal sedation in a Pentecost magazine. The underline

message was that terminal sedation was a way of going around euthanasia.

>

> She maintained that " those of us who have worked in hospice or with other

dying patients know (pain) can virtually always be controlled. As someone who

has been involved with hospice for 8 years, I know that not true either for

physical or psychological pain. I've been with patients who were allergic to

drugs that could have controlled their physical pain if the side effects weren't

worse than the pain reduction.

>

> And with other patients, the pain was so intense that the only way of

relieving it was to increase the dosage to the point where it would be

euthanasia, a decision that both nurses and physicians would not make.

>

> Also, psychological pain often is more intense than physical pain. Valko used

the example of someone who wanted terminal sedation when he learned he had a

brain tumor, an illness that could have continued for years. It's always easy to

create an example that fits one's position. But patients I served who thought

about terminal sedation were more typical of who thinks about it. For example, I

served someone in hospice whose guilt from being responsible for the death of

his son was more intense than the pain he was experiencing from his liver

cancer.

>

> I understand the deep divisions between people who believe the decision to end

one's own life is right, and those who have ethical and moral concerns about it.

But to dismiss terminal sedation is a way around it, is disingenuous. Terminal

sedation allows the disease to take it's course until death occurs. The sedation

does not result in a person's death.

>

> If anyone has witnessed a patient's and family's discussion of terminal

sedation, they understand the profound discussions of life and death that

results.

>

>

>

>

>