To be or not to be

[masque12]

I've been hearing a lot about the Terri Schiavo case lately. I haven't read up on it that much, although what I have read makes me lean towards the "let her die" end of things, it is by no means a greatly informed decision. I definitely think that people should have the right to die if they so desire it, the Schiavo case just seems muddled.

That's all peripheral, though. What it's gotten me thinking about is what I would want done if I were in a similar situation. On the one hand, if I'm definitely brain dead, I don't see the point in sticking around as a rutabaga, but on the other, it would be really stupid if my life support was terminated only to have a cure discovered shortly afterwards. One of the things that bugs me about the whole idea is when people talk about the person being forced to live while suffering. If the person's brain function is gone, I don't see them as suffering, or feeling much of anything for that matter, they're just meat. So that's not a consideration in my view, at least, not as applies to me. I guess what I'll probably end up doing is agreeing to life support, but with a time limit. That way, I can stick around for a few years or so just in case science comes up with something that can fix me, but after a reasonable time, they can pull the plug, if nothing's happening.

I'll have to discuss this with my wife, and we'll have to work up some kind of living will thing. I'm definitely not a DNR kind of guy, I want to live for as long as possible, and resuscitation can work on occasion, but if I'm alive but not functioning cognitively, it may as well be ended.

Comments

[xi-o-teaz.livejournal.com]

We discussed this specific case (and many like it) at length in my University classes--most notably during my last term before graduation in my "Death, Dying, and Bereavement" class.

Obviously, this is a very personal Decision, and one of many reasons that I've since filled out a Living Will. This topic is also closely related to the topic of Euthanasia--a hot topic for years here in Oregon, as we have (the only state?) that allows for it. It's called the "Death with Dignity Act", and has been a hot political topic for several years here.

Of course, the whole "when is a person a person?" debate gets into Philosophy, my other major, and has ramifications on both end-of-life topics, but prenatal issues (notably, abortion) as well.

[masque12.livejournal.com]

I'm opposed to Euthanasia, but I support doctor-assisted suicide and the right of people to remove themselves from life support. The two are separate things. Euthanasia is where the doctors decide who to put down, that I disagree with. If however, the patient themselves decide to end it, I have no problem with that.

As for the whole "when is a person a person?" debate, I'm pretty empirical, I want to see brain activity, or in the case of fetuses, the ability to survive on their own outside the body. The death with dignity thing is a separate issue to me, though. If someone wants to remain on life-support as a vegetable, that's fine, they need to have a living will. Same with if they want to die. The biggest problem seems to be people who don't consider the possibility and therefore leave the decision to be determined by others. Fuck that, one is responsible for figuring that shit out ahead of time, or at least designating someone to make those decisions.