The treatment of people with terminal illness. (Warning; not easy reading)

[Pete]

Triggered by Fly's comments about the man with locked-in syndrome, "'Your Right to die',  I have a major problem with the medical community's attitude to drugs and keeping dying people alive.

In the old days a person reached 70/80 years of age, they developed a complaint or two and when the next serious outbreak of flu appeared, they would probably die.

Same with terminal illness, especially in old age. Someone with inoperable cancer would be kept as comfortable as possible until they finally slipped away.

But nowadays, science can keep that person alive for an extra six months or maybe a year longer, but often in serious discomfort and even excruciating pain.

I have seen old folks on a ridiculous amount of medication, being incontinent, unable to stand or walk and wash themselves, even unable to just sit or lay down without being in pain. The various drugs they are given all have their own side effects which, when combined with other chemicals and their side effects produce a variety of problems with doctors increasing and decreasing doses but never really making much of a difference.

A few weeks ago I read an article by Dr Martin Scurr in the Sunday press who said, "Should I discover tomorrow that I have advanced, life-threatening cancer, I won’t go rushing to the doctors for a heavily invasive course of medical treatment. No, I will shut up my London surgery, head to my home in Norfolk, stock up on gin and tonic and have a jolly good time until I meet my end.

Like most doctors, I understand that much of the care we offer patients who have serious, life-threatening illnesses is ultimately futile.

Worse, it can involve many months of gruelling treatments that might possibly extend the length of one’s life, but do nothing for its quality."

He goes on to say, "With pancreatic cancer, for example, which is often diagnosed late, the average length of time between diagnosis and death is usually less than six months.
If I had the disease, I would not attempt any of the treatments for it, such as chemotherapy, because it can be gruelling and misery-making, and the success rate is extremely low. I would rather have painkilling palliative care, which can do great things in helping to make you feel comfortable while you are dying."

If you have the courage, read this article now - http://bit.ly/wYEV5l

The Daily Mail also did an excellent article on this story which raises some little thought about issues.

http://bit.ly/yj3i4V

I know old folks with serious illnesses can be very upsetting to the family, but do we do the right thing by subjecting them to a more miserable end that takes even longer to come?

I'm sorry if anyone finds this too distressing to contemplate, but if we can help we should, if, ultimately we can't, should we not allow nature to take it's course, instead of prolonging someone's life when all they get is a few more months in pain?

[Alsatian]

Pete, I agree with you 100% - it's all down to a QUALITY of life.

[Fly]

Tell me I've got six month's, the credit card gets a banging.
Tell me I can have, 'possibly' 2 years. but I might spend most of it in hospital,
see you in 6 months, at least we enjoyed it 

[k4blades]

Difficult one to discuss really, but ought to be.
I would amend your first sentence Pete, there are plenty in the medical community that have the opposite view, and many would say its the legal community that are more interested in keeping people alive.......but I think there are both views whatever the section of society you are from.

My own mum died of cancer a few years ago. She went from being a very strong and independent individual to someone who couldn't even take herself to the toilet over the course of a few weeks. It was heartbreaking to watch her demise but I would give anything to have another day with her.
Also I think your perception depends on your circumstances...I have 2 small kids, and I'm a relatively old dad, being in my 40s when they were born. My big worry is that something should happen to me before they grow up...I would want to see them big enough to understand, and to get on with their lives before I died so a few extra months may mean a lot.

However, I agree with the general point in that we spend too much time/money, etc, on keeping people alive when maybe it would be better to let them pass away. Personally I would not be in favour of a "coverall" rule and think each case should be seen in isolation...but if the person involved, and their family, have made that decision, and done so for the right reasons, after proper consideration, then I find it hard to justify why the law should prevent them taking the course of action that they choose.   

[Old Cruser]

As a family we went through the traumatic C word illness about 3 years ago when my father had bowel cancer - they couldn't do anything but offered some chemo/radio can't remember which and he accepted it and went into the sheffield hos.for a week. It didn't help and was a waste of time and money IMO. His care at home wasn't that brilliant. That's another story but my father was let down badly during the last two weeks of his life by the nurses who went in (not macmillan) and I was left to do the best I could not realising how close to death he was (that's another story as well!) His death at home was also traumatic.
As a youngster I remember when someone was dying at home in our village and near the end my mother would say - that's the dr going - it won't be long now. It was the impression back then that gp's would give an injection and help the dying person on their way?
I think it is right that help should be given to the patient to end their life when even the meds do very little. Just extending their life to more pain isn't helpful - but I suppose many as my father would choose this just get a few more months and I often wonder if my father regreted his choice.

[mycul]

If you are that way inclined set up a Living Will.
If I get a life threatening illness, I have a piece of paper that says let me die, no treatment, no medication, just let me go.
The only codicil is that my organs can and will be donated to anyone who needs them.
Anybody wants a liver that is f@@ked?

[Fly]

I'll look into that one.
If any one want's my brain after my death, good luck to them.

Yes, I'm on the donor register and the family know.
My choice, not theirs !!