right to die

[Yllaria]

Regarding the books on tape - music might very well be better. I’m trying to remember the agency that encourages people to make playlists, especially of old nostalgic favorites. All I can remember was that it was in the UK. They had found that people remembered and enjoyed hearing their old music, long after they had forgotten most other things.

You mentioned the years of his childhood and his time in the military. Could you look for popular songs from those times?

Regarding not eating food - many people who are very elderly or who are very sick find that their digestion slowly shuts down. Eating, for them, creates discomfort, sometimes pain. Not eating, for them, does not cause distress, there is no sensation of hunger. I say that so that readers understand that for some people in hospice, not forcing them to eat is not at all the same as starving them.

Good thoughts to you and your family Cumberdale.

[mo50]

@Chefguy

Oregon has a ‘death with dignity’ law on the books, which is one reason we live here. The qualifier is that you are required by law to administer the cocktail to yourself and to be able to communicate to the person licensed to give it to you that you know exactly what the result will be.

I’m with you. Great documentary called “How to Die in Oregon” about how thats handled out there. If I’m ever lucky enough to retire I want to live in a right-to-die state. Hey, to each his own, and its a highly personal choice of course, but it’s staggering to me how much we spend on end of life care.

[Boyo_Jim]

@Cumberdale

For the last several years, we have been dealing with my father who has had several strokes and is in pretty bad shape these days. He can’t do anything anymore. Can’t get out of a chair, go to the bathroom, go to bed or get out of bed without assistance. We finally had to put him in an assisted living place because my mother just can’t do it by herself anymore.

My father is unable to do the things he used to enjoy. He can’t read a book which he would do all the time. We have been getting him books on tape but I don’t think he understands them and with his short term memory being shot, he can’t remember anything other than from his childhood or military service. After listening to a book for a while, he seemed to get annoyed with it and want to turn it off even if it was on a topic he’d normally love.

He does have a living will with a do not resuscitate order. I just wonder if there should be something else included. For me personally I would say if I was in his condition I would not want to go on anymore. Sure, I’d be alive but I wouldn’t be living. I’m sure if we asked him before all his problems he’d have said the same thing.

I’m reminded of the scene in Soylent Green where the old man goes to the suicide clinic is given some medication and watches scenes of nature with classical music as he drifts off. It has been a few years since I’ve seen the movie but I really think that is a very humane way to treat the end of life. Keeping people alive at all costs now seems rather cruel.

If I was in my fathers position I would definitely prefer to listen to Gustav Holst’s The Planets while watching space scenes on a big screen as I drift off into my eternal sleep. I’m sure my father would enjoy the same type of death. I do hope if I ever get into the same situation that my father is in, society will have progressed enough to realize that death is not a bad thing. In some cases it is preferable to the alternative.

So he has a living will. Did he sign a medical power of attorney (MPOA)? That’s the only “something else” I can think of.

Besides DNR, he can also decline treatment and drugs, which might hasten his death significantly.

Another concern is his present state of mental acuity. If he doesn’t have an MPOA, and he wrote one now, he might be judged incompetent to fully understand its meaning. If the staff decided to, they could bring in lawyers and maybe even cops to prevent he or his family acting in ways they might have moral objections to.

[SpoilerVirgin]

@WhyNot

I’m not sure who “no one” is, unless you mean friends and family, who I can’t answer for. But the default medical position is to save and prolong your life unless you’ve left instructions to the contrary. So in that sense, everyone agrees with you. Personally, I agree with you…for you. That’s why Advance Directives are so important. They’re not just for, “I don’t want a feeding tube,” they’re also for, “I definitely want a feeding tube, and a ventilator, and I don’t care if you have to drug me unconscious to tolerate it.” That’s my dad’s wishes, actually. My mom is ready to die if she gets a bad hangail. I, and their doctors, will treat each according to their individual wishes, because they’ve let me know what those wishes are.

Thanks. This is the kind of reasoned response that makes me feel differently about accepting a more lenient approach to assisted suicide and other right-to-die options. Unfortunately, many of the people who are advocating those options take the position that was taken earlier in this thread that no one should want extraordinary measures. I think there is room for compromise on this issue, but it has to come from a position of respect on both sides.

[Dinsdale]

@SpoilerVirgin

Unfortunately, many of the people who are advocating those options take the position that was taken earlier in this thread that no one should want extraordinary measures.

I think you might be setting up a strawman to bolster your preferences. I didn’t see anyone saying “no one should want extraordinary measures.” I did see you taking issue with a poster who said they “cannot understand anyone who thinks differently.” A whole mess of people think things I cannot understand. But that is a far cry from saying that I do not believe they should be allowed to think or act as they do.

One significant factor for me is - who foots the bill? If someone wants to spend their last dollar keeping themselves in little more than suspended animation, while imposing enormous emotional costs upon their loved ones, have at it. But when the question becomes how much should society pay, that is a different - and admittedly difficult - issue.

Would be wonderful if doctors could actually have intelligent conversations with their patients as to the quality of life they desire. But of course it would be horrible to have “death panels”, wouldn’t it! :rolleyes:

For the OP - and anyone else - be EXTREMELY WARY of medical requests to install a pacemaker to enable surgery or other procedures. Say your aged, infirm loved one has a stroke or heart attack, and doctors say they can try surgery, but will need to install a pacemaker first. Despite their best efforts, your loved one continues to decline. But the damn battery in that pacemaker will continue to beat for the full 10 year life of it’s battery. And just try to get that damn thing turned off once it is installed.

I told my kids, if I’m ever as bad off as my MIL, I hope one of them helps me out by putting a pillow over my face. To which my engineer son responded, “Actually, most pillows aren’t sufficiently dense, so enough air still gets through!”

[AnaMen]

@SpoilerVirgin

This is not some hypothetical. It is something that has happened to me not only IRL, but in this thread. How is a person who wants to be kept alive supposed to respond to someone who says, “I cannot understand anyone who thinks differently”? What if it is your family, telling you that they don’t accept the validity of your position. And why is no one (other than my mother) just willing to make the agreement with me – sure, if you will allow me the right to die, I will allow you the right to live?

Murder is already illegal, so no one will be legally taking away your “right to live.” You don’t need any special agreement with anyone to receive life support.

[Mama_Zappa]

@Chefguy

O…you are required by law to administer the cocktail to yourself and to be able to communicate to the person licensed to give it to you that you know exactly what the result will be.

One concern I have with this aspect of it is that, depending on the condition you are suffering from, it’s possible you will not physically be able to take the drug yourself.

So, the dilemma: take it today while you can (and cut your life short a little earlier than you might choose to), or wait a few weeks and risk no longer being able to get the pills out and into your own mouth.

Allowing someone else to give you the pills (or whatever form it takes) allows you to delay the point of no return - on the other hand, it puts someone else into the position of administering the lethal dose. However supportive that person might be, it’s tough (and opens up other cans of worms).

My mother had lung cancer. She had a lung removed, they thought they got it all, and the protocol was to NOT give chemo at the stage she was believed to be.

A year later, it came back. She went through chemo and radiation which basically did nothing. It ultimately killed her, just before Christmas. She was in the hospital, and was adamant about not wanting another bronchoscopy and some other procedures. Despite that, my one brother (asshole) wanted to fight to take her medical POA away from the other brothers, so he could force her to go through those procedures. Fortunately he never pursued this - despite his clearly loving Mom more than the rest of us murderous goons, he left town after 2 days, before her death. Had she lingered much longer, the battle might have gotten ugly.

The hospital gave her high doses of morphine to relieve her breathing distress - this may or may not have hastened her final moments (though not by much).

In the case of the OP’s father, at this point there’s little they can do. It sounds like he’s not “there” enough mentally to make a binding decision to end his life even in those states which permit it. it sounds like he’s got nothing urgent enough that would take him swiftly if left untreated, so a DNR order won’t do much at this stage. And you can’t exactly quit feeding him at this point.

Some things to consider, when updating your own POAs: I read an article years back from a person whose father had a pacemaker or internal defibrillator - then developed Alzheimer’s. Turning off the device would have allowed him to slip away faster, but the doctors weren’t exactly eager to do that. Ultimately they went before a judge and got permission to do so.

So, when I updated my own medical POA a couple years back, I made sure to document things like that. As in, if I’m mentally not there, things like that may be avoided (or turned off if in place). Routine screenings may be avoided - why put me through, say, a mammogram or colonoscopy, when there’s little reason to extend my life. I also put in a clause to the effect of if I’m mentally OK, but physically disabled (e.g. paralyzed, ALS or whatever), I may refuse food/water/etc., and this was to serve as documentation that I had put thought into that well before the issue arose.

[Honey]

@SpoilerVirgin

This is the part that scares me. I am one of those people who thinks differently. Every time I start to believe that this should be a personal choice, and that if people choose to be killed because they are old and sick, then that’s their right, someone comes along who presents the argument that everyone should want the same thing. I have said it before – I will support your right to choose to die if you can guarantee me that my right to live will be respected and upheld absolutely. But I can see how easily we go from “right to die” to “well, I can’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want to die” to “everyone should want to die” to “let’s just kill everyone who is old, in poor health and unable to protest.” How do we prevent families from pressuring the old and infirm to sign away their rights – especially when inheritance is involved? Or does it just not matter because you “can’t understand anyone who thinks differently”?

If you truly support a right to die, then you need to support a right to live as well. Because until you do, I can’t support your right at the risk of losing my own.

For the record, most of my family doesn’t agree with my choice, but I’ve made certain that they know what it is. My Mom and I have a deal: she will keep me alive, and I will pull the plug on her at the first opportunity.

I feel this way too. I’ve told my family to never give up on me, and to keep me alive no matter what.

[psychobunny]

Murder is already illegal, so no one will be legally taking away your “right to live.” You don’t need any special agreement with anyone to receive life support.

This is a little simplistic. In the absence of specific written instructions covering the exact current situation, the law provides for the next-of-kin to make a decision about things like DNR (or as they are now known AND (allow natural death)) orders. If somebody has terminal cancer and is in severe pain and unable to communicate their wishes, the family may choose, for example, not to resuscitate if the patient should have a heart attack or stop breathing or to not place a feeding tube if they are unable to eat and just provide comfort measures.

In SpoilerVirgin’s case, she has made it clear that all extraordinary measures are to be used to include keeping her alive on life support, installing feeding tubes, etc. and as her relative I have agreed to abide by those instructions (except, of course, if she has left me a lot of money in her will-in which case all bets are off ;)).

[Machine_Elf]

@Mama_Zappa

One concern I have with this aspect of it is that, depending on the condition you are suffering from, it’s possible you will not physically be able to take the drug yourself.

So, the dilemma: take it today while you can (and cut your life short a little earlier than you might choose to), or wait a few weeks and risk no longer being able to get the pills out and into your own mouth.

Terry Pratchett hosted a documentary a few years ago called “Choosing to Die.” I recommend watching it if you get the chance. The program followed the final days of Peter Smedley, an elderly man in the early stages of ALS who chose to visit a Dignitas clinic in Switzerland, where he voluntarily drank a fatal dose of Nembutal with Pratchett in attendance. Before this final event a clinic worker visited Smedley at his home to confirm that he would be physically capable of raising the cup of Nembutal to his own lips and drinking it without assistance. He was able, and throughout the program actually seemed very physically able - and this is an unfortunate problem with laws regarding assisted suicide, in that a terminally ill person who wishes to end their own life often must do so before their quality of life has deteriorated to a level that they themselves find unlivable.

[SpoilerVirgin]

@psychobunny

In SpoilerVirgin’s case, she has made it clear that all extraordinary measures are to be used to include keeping her alive on life support, installing feeding tubes, etc. and as her relative I have agreed to abide by those instructions (except, of course, if she has left me a lot of money in her will-in which case all bets are off ;)).

Well, that’s it, now you’re out of the will.

I think ultimately what is important here is that people have these discussions, that they be aware of the wishes of their family members, and that they respect those wishes, even when they strongly disagree. It’s hard to express a position that differs from that of your loved ones, whether they all believe in a right-to-die, or all want extraordinary measure taken. I think there needs to be compassion and understanding on both sides.