I think one of the cruelest things we do is let patients lay in nursing home beds without the legal ability to terminate their own lives. I'd be interest in what other nurses think of this.
If you ask active people who are in their 40s and alert and you say to them "when you get older and you lose the capacity to know your surroundings and you no longer recognize your family members, and if you reach a point where someone has to change your brief in a bed or feed you your meals, would you prefer to live your life like that or would you prefer someone terminate your life painlessly and peacefully?"
What do you think most people's response would be???
Mine would be termination of my life! But guess what that is against the law in most states.
I'd be interested in knowing what other nurses think about this. We get trained over and over again about abuse. Well to me, the biggest abuse we commit is we do not allow Voluntary Euthanasia over laying in a soiled brief in a nursing home bed where we can't even feed ourselves anymore. Voluntary Euthanasia is illegal in all states and PAD is allowed only in Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Vermont.
Physican assisted suicide isn't the same as euthanasia.
This is what kind of threw me on this thread too.
eu-tha-na-sia
:the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering
The term itself is generally associated with "the practice of killing someone". For many, myself included, "voluntary euthanasia" is an oxymoron.
I'm not saying my interpretation of the terminology is right or wrong, but I think the negative connotation associated with the term 'euthanasia' will generally hinder those in favor of allowing people to have it done to them voluntarily.
Yeah, but if they weren't dying, it wouldn't kill them.
Well drug overdose is common, so it's possible. Granted a terminal pts tends to get a buttload of narcs and sedatives so there's a difference in volume. But most people do OD off narcs and sedatives.
Well drug overdose is common, so it's possible. Granted a terminal pts tends to get a buttload of narcs and sedatives so there's a difference in volume. But most people do OD off narcs and sedatives.
You're saying the dosages ordered for terminal patients would kill a non-terminal patient?
You're saying the dosages ordered for terminal patients would kill a non-terminal patient?
The dosages ordered for non-terminal patients can kill non-terminal patients, that we have various monitoring protocols for patients receiving opiates, that's why we use narcan. Along with other potentially harmful CNS depressive effects, opiates reduce the drive to breath. In non-terminal patients we use dosages intended to limit this effect, in some terminal patients we're trying to reduce the drive to breath in treating dyspnea. The dosages required varies by patient and their condition, but in some instance such as a terminal wean, the dosages required can be quite large.
You're saying the dosages ordered for terminal patients would kill a non-terminal patient?
Possibly, but there are way too many variables in place. I've seen pt med lists that had enough narcs on there to kill me many times over, but because they had built up a tolerance, it didn't effect the pt the way it would me.
Just like with drunks. One can look/act stone cold sober at .300 when that would kill someone who never drinks.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
There is no way to make a terminal, suffering, cat comfortable. Just what they have to DO to them to get them to the place where they are getting "comfort" measures is horrendous and horrific for the animal.
Ever start an IV in a scared, confused cat who is in pain? They have to be around other animals who likely scare them, which makes it worse, and not to mention it's not exactly easy to medicate a healthy cat, never mind a sick one.
Euthanasia isn't cheap, neither is cremation or burial. Digging a hole isn't much fun either. It would actually be more convenient to leave the animal at home and wait for them to keel over, but someone who loves their animals couldn't care less about convenience, I assure you.
The last pet we euthanized died from "sudden lead poisoning"...pretty inexpensive. That probably wouldn't "work" for many folks.
Specializes in OR, Nursing Professional Development.
The last pet we euthanized died from "sudden lead poisoning"...pretty inexpensive. That probably wouldn't "work" for many folks.
It almost seems as though you are now out to intentionally antagonize. Many people view pets as family, and this is a sensitive issue for them. This type of comment reflects a lack of respect for that view.
The last pet we euthanized died from "sudden lead poisoning"...pretty inexpensive. That probably wouldn't "work" for many folks.
Well, I was responding to your comment that there are ways to keep animals comfortable. You're argument was that there were ways to prevent suffering...and euthanasia wasn't for the benefit of the pet, but the parent.
You clearly just like stirring up the pot, and frankly, you don't sound like a very compassionate or respectful person, which is a scary thought considering that this is a nursing forum.............
Possibly, but there are way too many variables in place. I've seen pt med lists that had enough narcs on there to kill me many times over, but because they had built up a tolerance, it didn't effect the pt the way it would me.
Just like with drunks. One can look/act stone cold sober at .300 when that would kill someone who never drinks.
I see what you're saying. I know for my Nana, the morphine certainly helped her slip away faster but it wouldn't have been enough of a dose to OD her had she not already been dying. I would think that is the case more often than not, no?
I was really just busting your chops, but you do make a valid point. :)
lifelearningrn, BSN, RN
2,622 Posts
This is what kind of threw me on this thread too.
eu-tha-na-sia
:the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering
The term itself is generally associated with "the practice of killing someone". For many, myself included, "voluntary euthanasia" is an oxymoron.
I'm not saying my interpretation of the terminology is right or wrong, but I think the negative connotation associated with the term 'euthanasia' will generally hinder those in favor of allowing people to have it done to them voluntarily.