Euthanasia is a very touchy subject, especially within the medical field. As a healthcare advocate, it is our job as professionals to better the lives of our patients. What happens when there is nothing more you can do?
I understand, being a Home Health Aide that works a lot with Hospice, that comfort care is important. But truly, when a suffering patient looks to you to ease the pain what do you do? Should you apologize and say their is nothing more I can do?
I can hardly say no more treats to my cat when he gives puppy dog eyes, much less a patient dying alone of cancer. In my opinion, for what it is worth, Euthanasia is most certainly not murder and should never be referred to as such.
If Euthanasia was legal, but very strict in regulations and rules, it would be very beneficial to many terminally ill patients. This may be the only healthcare decision a patient makes within their life, and they should be allowed to make such a decision when conditions permit. We all have choices in this world, what gives you or I the right to take such choices away from someone in such a situation.
What is your opinion? Do you agree or disagree? Do you have a story, personal or not that pertains to this topic?
Additionally, mental illness is not illegal. I'm struggling to follow your thinking here. Suicidal ideation is not illegal. I don't understand what "gravely disabled" means, especially in the context of mental illness.
@ixchel - Just to clarify: In my state, "gravely disabled" is a legal determination made when someone is being involuntarily committed for psychiatric care; it goes beyond simply being a danger to oneself or others. Typically the individual is not able to take care of their ADLs, manage basic responsibilities, keep off the streets, etc. Ive seen this term applied to those who have permanent meth psychosis...they may not qualify for services if they don't have a separate DSM approved diagnosis, but still need round the clock care to keep them safe and somewhat functional. It is a very serious determination; some people with this legal determination end up hospitalized for years because they simply cannot function in a less restrictive environment such as a rehab facility or group home.
Based on that wording and a few other observations, I would be willing to bet a box of chocolates that our poster may have some personal or family experience with the mental health system.
Sunrise, I understand that you are frustrated with what you perceive as a double standard with health care providers, but please be assured that suicidal ideation and mental illness are not illegal. In order to be involuntarily committed to an acute care psychiatric facility for long term treatment, many criteria must be met; at my prior place of employment, we had a full service courtroom AT the facility for reviewing cases because our patients were too ill to leave, even for court.
These extensive requirements are necessary in part because there are simply not enough beds to treat all of those who desperately need it, whether voluntary or involuntary admissions. Additionally, medication cannot be given and restraints cannot be applied simply because we wish it to be so. There is an in-depth legal process involved for involuntary medication, and many, many criteria involved for restraint or seclusion use, whether you choose to believe that or not. It takes a lot more than one doctor or nurse to have someone involuntarily committed.
"Saving someone" with CPR isn't a given. It's not Grey's Anatomy or House where we shock people a few times and they come back to life. We are finite beings; our time here is limited. People have the right to autonomy and self determination, meaning we cannot force someone to have CPR when they're terminally ill. No one lives forever, and quality of life is a thing. In healthcare we attempt to do no harm. Sometimes that means withdrawal of care. I highly recommend an in-depth ethics course if you have these concerns. I attended a private Jesuit university, and have a full year of medical ethics under my belt (not to mention the year of pre-reqs). Not a single professor nor author studied (both sides of every issue were thoroughly researched) considers withdrawal of care to be passive euthanasia. I would be happy to recommend some texts if you're interested.
Sunrise, I saw at the end of one of your posts that you're interested in the OR or OB. I hope you don't feel that those areas are free from ethical dilemmas. They're most definitely not. Especially OB. I hope you research some of your concerns prior to moving forward in healthcare.
Nasty, nasty, nasty replies. Surprised somebody disagrees for once?
You all seem soooo interested in how and what I post, including who I am. Too bad Ron Ponzar left.
And it is illegal, courts, police, and legal process doesn't make it so? And they force restraints and medications without any courts. There is no "extensive legal process." A police officer or EMT/ambulance person can say to "go to a psych ward" and one goes. End of story. After medication and restraints, THEN they file paperwork. You can only not take medication 24 hrs before your court date, then re-forced to take medications. If you don't do it orally, then 5 or so people will force you to take a shot. You cannot say "no." And yes, if you say you have "suicidal ideations" then that can increase your medications, put you into a ward if you tell that to the police/dispatchers/EMT/ambulance people, others with authority to do so.
I'm saying euthanasia is a homicidal ideation (which can also send you to a ward), assisted suicide is both suicide and homicidal ideation (both which can send you there).
What difference does it make to you what I think about DNR and that I disagree with it? It goes hand-in-hand how I think about euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other ways of dying.
Nasty, nasty, nasty replies. Surprised somebody disagrees for once?
You all seem soooo interested in how and what I post, including who I am. Too bad Ron Ponzar left.
LOL, "for once," whatever. I am an outspoken advocate for life from conception to natural death on this site, and have participated in this thread quite a bit.
You bringing up Panzer just makes me think you're him.
What difference does it make to you what I think about DNR and that I disagree with it? It goes hand-in-hand how I think about euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other ways of dying.
You're spreading misinformation. Those of us who deal regularly with these issues see that there is already too much fear and false information out there. We react badly to its increase.
Specializes in Med nurse in med-surg., float, HH, and PDN.
Nasty, nasty, nasty replies. Surprised somebody disagrees for once?
You all seem soooo interested in how and what I post, including who I am. Too bad Ron Ponzar left.
And it is illegal, courts, police, and legal process doesn't make it so? And they force restraints and medications without any courts. There is no "extensive legal process." A police officer or EMT/ambulance person can say to "go to a psych ward" and one goes. End of story. After medication and restraints, THEN they file paperwork. You can only not take medication 24 hrs before your court date, then re-forced to take medications. If you don't do it orally, then 5 or so people will force you to take a shot. You cannot say "no." And yes, if you say you have "suicidal ideations" then that can increase your medications, put you into a ward if you tell that to the police/dispatchers/EMT/ambulance people, others with authority to do so.
I'm saying euthanasia is a homicidal ideation (which can also send you to a ward), assisted suicide is both suicide and homicidal ideation (both which can send you there).
What difference does it make to you what I think about DNR and that I disagree with it? It goes hand-in-hand how I think about euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other ways of dying.
What difference does it make to you what I think about DNR and that I disagree with it? It goes hand-in-hand how I think about euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other ways of dying.
What you think about DNR doesn't change it's definition. You clearly do not understand the basics here. Things are what they are. I can call a mailbox a lamp until the cows come home, won't make it true.
Specializes in Med nurse in med-surg., float, HH, and PDN.
There is or seems to be trait in the posts of SunriseDay that echo not unlike andi78 over on the 'antivaxx nurses?' thread.
I am not attacking either poster, just saying that it is hard to discuss or explain something when a viewpoint is cemented in such a conviction of absolute truth.
The scenario posted in post #292 sounds like a truly frightening experience, but I really don't think it could happen right out of the blue; there has to have been some reason or occurrence that would cause the police or EMT's to think that whatever provoked the request for their presence and response was something that needed professional evaluation beyond their scope/job description. They are not responsible for what a mental health professional decides, once they have turned over the person to the facility.
Actions and words can bring consequences and some people don't understand that until they are knee and hip deep in a situation they deem unnecessary.
HOW exactly this mixes in with the question /debate over euthanasia, well, I haven't quite untangled that part yet.
There is or seems to be trait in the posts of SunriseDay that echo not unlike andi78 over on the 'antivaxx nurses?' thread.
I am not attacking either poster, just saying that it is hard to discuss or explain something when a viewpoint is cemented in such a conviction of absolute truth.
The scenario posted in post #292 sounds like a truly frightening experience, but I really don't think it could happen right out of the blue; there has to have been some reason or occurrence that would cause the police or EMT's to think that whatever provoked the request for their presence and response was something that needed professional evaluation beyond their scope/job description. They are not responsible for what a mental health professional decides, once they have turned over the person to the facility.
Actions and words can bring consequences and some people don't understand that until they are knee and hip deep in a situation they deem unnecessary.
HOW exactly this mixes in with the question /debate over euthanasia, well, I haven't quite untangled that part yet.
Agree with all of this.
And in my state, involuntary requires authorization by two physicians, after a person has proven themselves to be a threat to themselves or others. If that person is taken into psych and they start punching the staff, then yes, they'll get themselves a syringe full of haldol or geodon and restraints.
But if you say to me now, "I'm going to kill myself, and this is how I plan to do it...." you will not be automatically restrained and injected while the police scurry to a courthouse to get a court order. That is not how it works, and the friend or family member who told you a different story about when they were involuntarily taken in left out some details.
No Stars In My Eyes
5,655 Posts
The only thing I can say to SunriseDay that would be acceptable to TOS is this:
It is etc, It is NOT 'ect.'
ETCETERA abbreviation is "etc.."
'​ect.' is defined as 'a defining form signifying without, upon the outer side, as in 'the exterior'.
I would appreciate if you would accept this respectfully submitted correction by using the proper form in future posts.