Tartarus

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

The Underworld Of Lightly (& Logically) Moderated Discussion & Debate


4 posters

    Who is right?

    canterella
    canterella
    Nymph
    Nymph


    Who is right? Empty Who is right?

    Post  canterella Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:54 pm

    This situation can happen to any parent, what would you do?

    From the Times:


    Baby RB at risk of more painful death if cared for at home, says infant's doctor

    A severely disabled baby at the centre of a life or death battle between his parents would be at risk of a more painful death if his father was to have him cared for at home, the boy’s doctor told the High Court yesterday.

    Doctors, supported by the mother, want to withdraw life support from the one-year-old boy, known as Baby RB, who cannot breathe unaided. But the father, who is separated from the mother, opposes the move.

    Footage compiled by Baby RB’s father and played in court showed the boy reacting to a doll, tugging on a balloon string and pulling his mother’s hair, Martin Westgate, representing the father, said.

    But Dr F, the consultant in charge of the boy’s care, said that the footage was not evidence of deliberate movement.
    Related Links

    “I don’t think you can read that into them,” he said. “It is very difficult to know whether they are deliberate volitional movements”.

    Dr F said that the objects were always held near RB’s hand.

    Mr Westgate said: “He showed enjoyment, play, in exactly the same way on three occasions.”

    The doctor replied: “What I saw was the movements I have seen on a regular basis and the mother’s head near his hand. I don’t think that what we saw in the DVD was clear evidence of purpositive movement.”

    Dr F agreed with Mr Justice McFarlane that if Baby RB were capable of deliberate motions, it would make a difference to his quality of life. But he said: “For me this is about the physical, breath-by-breath dependence on a ventilator, and my heartfelt feeling is that his existence is impoverished.”

    Baby RB suffers from congenital myasthenic syndrome, a rare neuromuscular condition, with no hope of recovery. Baby RB is “completely dependent on getting a breath [from a ventilator] every three seconds. He is on a knife edge,” Dr F said. “I think that must be a terrifying existence when you are not able to cope with a breath delivered a second later than you are used to.”

    RB’s mother and father, described by Dr F as “very, very dedicated” have spent ten hours a day at his bedside.

    The father believes that a tracheostomy, which creates an opening in the neck to allow air to the lungs, would allow Baby RB to return home. The boy will be examined by another physician on Saturday.

    However, Dr F said that he was “not a candidate” for a tracheostomy and would still be reliant on a ventilator, and doctors believe that RB should die a “dignified death”, planned with palliative care. Also, the danger of home care with a tracheostomy, Dr F said, was that a blockage or infection could lead to a more distressing death.

    He said that RB was “at the most severe end of physical disability of all the children I have looked at” during his time working in paediatric intensive care.

    “To exist in this world you need to have a few basic fundamentals. You need to be able to cough, you need to have a gag reflex, to be able to breathe, to respond to painful stimuli, and in my view he hasn’t demonstrated any of these,” he said.

    “It troubles me that I am committing him to daily ventilation in an intensive care unit when his existence is distressing and when he doesn’t have these basic building blocks to live in the outside world.”

    For legal reasons the boy, his parents, the hospital trust and medical staff treating him cannot be named.

    The hearing continues.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6902057.ece

    It must be the hardest decision in the world for a parent, and I agree with the mother on this one.
    avatar
    Kosmick
    Giant
    Giant


    Who is right? Empty Re: Who is right?

    Post  Kosmick Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:20 pm

    The Mother seems to have her head screwed on, the Father is leading with his heart. Both are right, but a dignified death in my opinion would be best for the baby.
    relict
    relict
    River-God
    River-God


    Who is right? Empty Re: Who is right?

    Post  relict Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:14 pm

    I don't think there is a clear 'right' in this situation.

    I do think judging that someone with severe disabilities doesn't have sufficient quality of life is a very slippery slope.

    I don't think the mere possibility of someone dying a more unpleasant death is a good reason to withdraw life support.

    Whatever the final outcome, I think it best to take a cautious approach, listen to the opinion of the other doctor who is being consulted, and move without haste. Perhaps the father will change his mind after a bit of time, and after consulting further doctors. Doctors can certainly be wrong, after all. Things would be much nicer for everyone if the parents were in agreement, and in every situation like this, there's a good chance that parents deciding to withdraw life support will come to their decision at a different time from each other.
    avatar
    Diaz
    Nymph
    Nymph


    Who is right? Empty Re: Who is right?

    Post  Diaz Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:28 am

    Blank


    Last edited by Diaz on Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
    relict
    relict
    River-God
    River-God


    Who is right? Empty Re: Who is right?

    Post  relict Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:57 am

    Diaz wrote:Pallative care does not represent a slippery slope

    I agree, and I have no problem with this. I personally see a big difference between removing life support (so long as all reasonable avenues of hope have been investigated) and euthanasia.

    Diaz wrote:unfortunately and the situation can't go on forever

    Yeah, when I mentioned a cautious approach, I didn't mean to imply a long delay.

    I am not a medical practitioner, so I was more speaking in general than this specific case. I was thinking of cases where people have finally made progress after a long period without any, and beyond what doctors could anticipate.

    In this case, I'd like to think that the father was given every opportunity to come around to the professional advice, but I'm talking days, or weeks at the most, not months or years.

    Sponsored content


    Who is right? Empty Re: Who is right?

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu May 02, 2024 8:23 pm