<br>
<br>
<p>Fail.</p>
<p>BC, I just think you need to buddy up with some docs who are experienced in EOL, the emotional complexities. It’s easy to say, if I’m going to be a vegetable; or if Dad’s going to be a vegetable. Not so easy when your kid loves you, the docs say they can extend a functional life. </p>
<p>Just not so simple as what one envisions today. The docs looked at me and explained in the gentlest way. I had to say no. Let’s not make this so exclusively about money.</p>
<p>“If I thought that I’d be a burden financially to my family, I’d seriously think about just doing nothing. Everyone is going to die and most of the people here should have already given some thought about that process. It might not happen for a long time but it’s getting closer and closer.”</p>
<p>This sounds like a personal thought, not a commentary that everyone should react the same way. I don’t think there’s anything whatsoever wrong, or non-empathetic about that. In fact, one might consider that generous and caring towards ones family. If I thought I’d financially devastate my family and I was pretty miserable and incurable anyways, I might not do anything either.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It ultimately comes down to it though. If we had infinite resources we could do all kinds of things with prevention, education, training, cures, therapies, etc. Everyone here seems to be saying that we do have infinite resources that we’re importing from Saturn with the ACA and that we can cover everything and it will be painless to everyone.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Well, probabilities do play a factor. If you have a 5% chance of success with treatment and you bankrupt your family would you go with that? Maybe someone would. If you were the patient, would you go along with that? If someone else is paying, then the decisions might be easier but would an insurance company pay for an expensive fix with a pretty small chance of success?</p>
<p>DNR means do not resuscitate. That’s what you seem to want. Depending on the ethical standards in place, it means you will be subject to extreme life saving measures in a medical crisis. 1/5 is low. It says 4/5 either ignored the availability of the directive or WANT to be saved.</p>
<p>busdriver, I also think that refusing treatment can be the best decision in some cases, or certainly a rational decision. If the person is in unendurable pain, for example, or if they cannot bear the loss of their physical capabilities in the case of, say, MS. </p>
<p>I just don’t think we should accept the idea that, in this wealthiest of nations, anyone should ever have to make the choice between desperately needed medical treatment on the one hand, or financial ruin on the other.</p>
<p>BCEagle91, posters have gone thru this and you havent. It may not be as calculating as you think. Friends dying are one thing. Your spouse, your kid, is a whole different level. Emotions take over. Hopefully your kids will never get as sick as that young poster.</p>
<p>I am pretty confident you wont be sitting around with a calculator if it does.</p>
<p>I edited and it came out wrong- without a DNR, depending on the ethical standards in place, it means you will be subject to extreme life saving measures. No DNR = save me.</p>
<p>No one is saying there are infinite resources. Yes, in fact, there are circumstances when the quality of life won’t be good and it is time. I think most of us get that.</p>
<p>But it’s not as simple as you thinking you’ll be doing everyone a heroic favor.</p>
<p>I sometimes think people put too much faith in “preventative lifestyle”–it’s not failsafe. Helpful on a population level? Yes. Perfect? No.</p>
<p>Take, for example, a friend’s mother who had a triple (maybe quadrapule?) bypass last year in her mid fifties. You’re probably thinking overweight, sedentary, smoker who ate fried butter every day, right? Try long-time vegan/vegetarian, thin, nonsmoker yoga instructor “health nut.” No history of high blood pressure or cholesterol and no family history of heart disease, either.</p>
<p>People get sick. People die. And while we may want to believe in the “just world” hypothesis–that it was their fault and we’re better, so it’s can’t happen to us–that’s a fallacy, and a cruel and foolish one. Many times, perhaps most times, it’s no one’s fault at all.</p>
<p>@dstark I had Acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Twice actually. So I bet a certain poster would think I was a complete financial drain on my family, but hey, I’m happy to be alive and my family is happy as well. We can get by without vacations or expensive items if it means I don’t have to be under a tombstone.</p>
<p>You can live on the street and still be happy if you have loving people around you, but your live will really suck if you’re sitting pretty while your family is dead so you wouldn’t have to go bankrupt.</p>
<p>I don’t think the drain of $ comes from young ppl being treated for cancer. It comes from situations like we experienced w/ my dad. At 88 years old with advanced Parkinsonj’s, he could no longer walk and was using a rider. He could barely make it back and forth to the bathroom w/o help. He got pancreatic cancer. They did a minor surgery to open the bile duct. Fine so far. Once the cancer progressed the next step was chemo. Hello CHEMO? The doc just swept him in to the next phase of the medical recipe. I was the one who made the call to cancel that appointment. Let me tell you that was a hard call to make. Chemo would have been expensive for medicare to pay, for the insurer to pay, for the family to copay, and for me dad who would have had to endure the puking as he attempted to haul himself onto the rider to get to the bathroom. Talk about Fail. But I am sure most ppl do what the doc says is the next thing to do. /boggle</p>
<p>EOL care is the issue but we are not allowed to discuss it. It quickly turns to the government wants to kill you.</p>
<p>When one looks at recent events in the uk, it is not so farfetched. </p>
<p>However, I do think end of life is the missing piece. I have mentioned before my mother’s situation. She is 82 with emphysema (never a smoker) and diabetes (she is 5’4 and never weighed more than 115 pounds but everyone on her maternal line has had diabetes without weight issues). She is in a wheelchair and has oxygen. She is always at the doctor for various things and her medication regimen is nuts. She almost died two weeks ago and I love my mother, she was a remarkable woman, but this mean, irrational thing isn’t my mother and she would have never wanted to be the horrible burden that she has become. I can honestly say that I don’t know how this happened. In the same situation, I hope I have the presence of mind to commit suicide. I tell my one daughter, who is my soul mate, that I hope she loves me enough to help me do that. I believe with my whole heart that it is possible to live too long.</p>
<p>I agree with the last few posts.</p>
<p>I think what we really want is some ability to make the dignity choice ourselves, and that is where having too much government involvement in our lives can be unfortunate. I really don’t want to end up like my grandmother. I know my grandmother didn’t want to end up like she did. But, by the time her kids realized what was happening, it was really too late.</p>
<p>Fortunately she had a DNR and they were able to argue against a course of cancer treatment that was being “offered” at the end of her life based on the DNR… but it was a tough argument. </p>
<p>We need something stronger than a DNR. We need a “I don’t want to live anymore if my mind is gone” paper.</p>
<p>I’m not saying this for financial reasons. If there were a high quality of life available, after 85, I say go for it. But, if the quality of life is a zombie movie? Let me go, please.</p>
<p>ETA: Tom is right. End of life care is the elephant in the room when it comes to discussing health care costs. What percentage of health care costs in this country come at the end of life? You’d be surprised. It’s an industry in and of itself.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, can I choose the “I don’t want to live anymore because the pain will never go away and I can’t take care of myself, but my mind is still sharp and I am agonizingly aware of these things” option?</p>
<p>Yes, and I would want that option, as well. In fact, that option would seem to be available, or should be available, imho, at any time, given the “mind is still sharp” part of it all.</p>
<p>I want to emphasize, for me, this isn’t a financial thing, though it does turn out to be quite a bit of the cost of health care. It’s not the cost that is so unfortunate, imho.</p>
<p>Iluvbooks94,</p>
<p>I am glad you arent buried.
Your parents must have freaked out.
Have a great time at Harvard.</p>
<p>BC-</p>
<p>I often agree with your factual approach to issues and enjoy your posts.
As a scientist, I am on that wavelength.</p>
<p>Have you lost a parent to suicide?
I have. It doesn’t matter the if the “reason” for the suicide was noble and supposedly in the best interests of the remaining family. The trauma to those left in its wake can last a lifetime.</p>
<p>Musicmom, I lost a sibling to suicide and it was the defining point of my childhood, so I do understand, but I would understand and respect that if it were my mother’s choice. She is suffering like we wouldn’t let a dog and there is no hope of better days.</p>
<p>Zoosermom, sending huge hugs your way, wish I had more to offer.
Your post 658 above breaks my heart. It must be hell for you and your family.</p>
<p>My mother’s death was sudden and unrelated to longtime health problems.
Thus my very strong aversion to suicide as a reasonable solution.</p>
<p>I agree that our current “system” to address end of life in elderly and or never going to get better cases is seriously lacking.</p>