Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have discussed other cases on this forum where a hospital wanted to discontinue life support from patients who had been shown to be brain dead or in a permanent vegetative state, but I have never seen a case where the hospital intended to withdraw life support from a patient (in this case, a baby) due to an "irreversible condition". As far as I can tell from reading this article, the baby has severe congenital heart disease and is dependent upon mechanical ventilation, yet is not brain dead. That seems like a huge difference to me and I'm pleased that a judge has intervened to allow this family time to locate another facility.
I'm sure some could argue that the baby has no quality of life, but she does have a life and is not brain dead. Her parents should be compassionately counseled regarding her condition and future and allowed to make decisions on her behalf.
We never know the full story because usually the hospital can't talk. I'd like to know why they think she doesn't have a quality of life. I would be curious what her alertness is. If she is awake and aware and not in pain, then I think she should be kept on the machine. The hospitals always get blamed for it being about the money, but I'd like to know the full story because I think there is more to it than that.
I do agree that we don’t have the information we need to know the right answer here. But I would hate to think that a suffering child might continue to suffer.
This is a very sad case where nobody is a winner- not the family, not the hospital and its caregivers, and most of all, not the patient. She has a congenital condition which is fatal, and the hospital's position is that she is suffering and most of the actions where the infant appears to be responsive and aware are, in fact, a response to pain and other uncomfortable stimuli.
Cook Children's is a good facility, and they've already reached out to many other large children's hospitals seeking a transfer of this patient, but thus far, no institution is willing to do so. Also, if I'm not mistaken, this is not Cook's first time to invoke this law. I seem to recall a thread about another case a couple of years ago......but I could be wrong.
I certainly understand the family's desperation in this situation. I truly feel for all involved.
I do agree that we don’t have the information we need to know the right answer here. But I would hate to think that a suffering child might continue to suffer.
That does add another layer to things. In my view, however, I don't think this should be a hospital's call to make. Ever.
This is a very sad case where nobody is a winner- not the family, not the hospital and its caregivers, and most of all, not the patient. She has a congenital condition which is fatal, and the hospital's position is that she is suffering and most of the actions where the infant appears to be responsive and aware are, in fact, a response to pain and other uncomfortable stimuli.
I certainly understand the family's desperation in this situation. I truly feel for all involved.
I completely agree - what an impossibly sad situation for everyone. I wonder how a hospital would handle this if the patient were an adult who had signed an advanced directive stating that they wanted life supporting measures? Obviously a baby doesn't have an opinion and the parents who's responsibility it is to speak on behalf of their child do not wish to have life support discontinued, so it is very hard for me to think that a hospital can make that decision for a patient who is not brain dead.
I worked as a pediatric nurse and sadly, saw many children suffer, but I don't ever recall a situation where the hospital mandated death as a means of relieving suffering.
If I knew that a child of mine was suffering great pain and would continue to suffer great pain every day for the rest of her life, and that death would be the only way to end that suffering, I would allow it.
I imagine the family had fair warning that cessation of life support was being advised by the hospital and they've had some time to initiate a transfer to another institution. I'm not sure what delaying another 10 days for a hearing is going to accomplish. According to the linked article, the hospital itself has contacted 19 other hospitals (the ones listed are all major pediatric hospitals) who agreed with the original hospital's assessment and said they all "feel there is nothing more they can provide to help improve" her life. A sad situation for everyone.
We have discussed other cases on this forum where a hospital wanted to discontinue life support from patients who had been shown to be brain dead or in a permanent vegetative state, but I have never seen a case where the hospital intended to withdraw life support from a patient (in this case, a baby) due to an "irreversible condition". As far as I can tell from reading this article, the baby has severe congenital heart disease and is dependent upon mechanical ventilation, yet is not brain dead. That seems like a huge difference to me and I'm pleased that a judge has intervened to allow this family time to locate another facility.
I'm sure some could argue that the baby has no quality of life, but she does have a life and is not brain dead. Her parents should be compassionately counseled regarding her condition and future and allowed to make decisions on her behalf.
This is why I am always commenting on other forums talking about the brain death issues & am just 100% against removing life support. Nobody should dare be arguing about that child's quality of life.
This is why. It normalized withholding of medical treatment based on somebody's idea of what 'worth' is.
Yeah, when it comes to organ transplants; not many of us worth more living than we are dead.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
