• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

60,000 patients put on death pathway without being told...

LOL Really? Isn't that like saying nobody survives a nursing home? Heck, lets just call them death traps since nobody gets out alive. meeeh

Speaking of which there seems to be a lot of elderly abuse in some "private" nursing homes. Does that bother you or is it just government funded hospice care?

You know there was a time when families took care of their own elderly folks and it was just part of life. Today, society has removed themselves from the painful ugliness of dying by shuttering the elderly and dying away so we don't have to see it. Gawd, I can't wait to get old.

The Liverpool Care Pathway isn't nursing home care. The whole purpose of it is to hasten death. Not that I object to that if that's what the patient wants.
 
Actually, that's a term I coined, and absolutely accurate, too. The LCP always ends up with the patient dying, which can be a good thing if it's done ethically.

About 450,000 people die every year in NHS hospitals. Approximately 130,000 of those dying people have been treated using the LCP, as their death was imminent, and their passing was eased. There are audits showing the high quality of clinical care given where the pathway is used. It's a valuable tool in improving end of life care.
It would be as foolish to deny that it may be badly followed or misused on occasion, as to decry an entire system because of that.
There is a review process built into the pathway. If a patient's condition changes or improves, they may be removed from it, Though all patients should be imminently dying to begin it, not all patients starting the pathway, die on it.
 
Last edited:
Appeal to probability fallacy. Just because doctors are wrong sometimes, does not mean they are wrong most of the time. In fact, if they weren't right MUCH more often then everyone else, then we wouldn't need them.

Obviously, you've completely missed the point.

Are you suggesting we don't need doctors?

:lamo Yes, that's what I'm suggesting.

Because it sounds like you are suggesting we only need doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

Good Lord. :roll:

This post is just so ridiculous and FULL of hyperbole, I don't even know where to begin. :lol:
 
Appeal to probability fallacy. Just because doctors are wrong sometimes, does not mean they are wrong most of the time. In fact, if they weren't right MUCH more often then everyone else, then we wouldn't need them. Are you suggesting we don't need doctors? Because it sounds like you are suggesting we only need doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

This is really bugging me. Do you actually think that if the doctor gives you X amount of months/years to live, that is it? All the doctors can do is make an educated guess - THAT IS ALL. There is nothing definitive in this type of situation. Like the Cancer Center commercial says, people do NOT have an expiration date!
 
This is really bugging me. Do you actually think that if the doctor gives you X amount of months/years to live, that is it? All the doctors can do is make an educated guess - THAT IS ALL. There is nothing definitive in this type of situation. Like the Cancer Center commercial says, people do NOT have an expiration date!

That educated guess is typically pretty right-on. There are a few exceptions to the rule, but there is ample statistical evidence to make a prediction, with a good degree of accuracy.
 
That educated guess is typically pretty right-on. There are a few exceptions to the rule, but there is ample statistical evidence to make a prediction, with a good degree of accuracy.

Oh so if a doctor says you have six months to live, just pull all treatment? Even against the patient's wishes so that people can save money?
 
Oh so if a doctor says you have six months to live, just pull all treatment? Even against the patient's wishes so that people can save money?

Who in the hell said that? You implied that doctors are making educated guesses, as if that carries no merit, but it does carry merit. Some diseases have pretty specific and real mortality rate/time frames, especially advanced cancers.
 
Who in the hell said that? You implied that doctors are making educated guesses, as if that carries no merit, but it does carry merit. Some diseases have pretty specific and real mortality rate/time frames, especially advanced cancers.

That's what the thread is about. :shrug:
 
That's what the thread is about. :shrug:

But the post you quoted, was one of mine, and I said nothing about pulling all treatment if a patient has an expected lifespan of 6 more months. It really depends on the status of the patient, and not the time he is expected to live. As an example, the people I've known with lung cancer, lead a relatively meaningful life up until shortly before their death, but people with brain tumors (depending on where the tumor is), have multiple life-altering complications such as seizures, loss of motor function, loss of speech, confusion, etc.
 
Oh so if a doctor says you have six months to live, just pull all treatment? Even against the patient's wishes so that people can save money?

Doctors should be honest. Many of them aren't. They take a Don't Ask Don't Tell approach to dying. We, all of us, deserve more than that. We deserve choice. We deserve facts, even when they are difficult to hear. We deserve to hear the wonderful things hospice can do for us and for our loved ones. We deserve to know that the chemotherapy they're giving us is not going to cure us.

We all need to face the fact that we are going to die. And our families need to face the fact that we're going to die. Every single adult should have a healthcare power of attorney. Every family should insist their loved ones get them. Every daughter: her mom, her dad, her spouse. Vice versa. Why don't we? Because we don't want to face the fact that we are going to die. And we don't want to answer the hard questions. Shame on us.

Families need to be more understanding and willing to step aside to let their loved ones make their own decisions -- while they are still lucid enough to do so. Dying people sometimes feel guilty not to keep fighting...they don't want to break their daughters', sons', spouses' hearts. Their last gift, if you will.

If patients aren't called to address their own mortality by their doctors, then these difficult decisions are left to family to make when the very end stages come. A terrible burden. Awful.

When I was in the hospital last year, a male nurse came into my room late at night, knowing I was awake, and let me know what "the racket" had been. "A 93-year-old woman coded a while ago. We performed CPR, used a defibrillator on her..." He was crying. "Her family wouldn't sign a DNR on her," he said. He was relieved they were unsuccessful, telling me that her ribs were broken, she was oxygen deprived... Said he prayed they'd be unsuccessful, as her family wanted to keep her as lucid as possible and her pain was under-medicated. *Shaking Head Here*

No thanks, Maggie says. That is just plain wrong.
 
Doctors should be honest. Many of them aren't. They take a Don't Ask Don't Tell approach to dying. We, all of us, deserve more than that. We deserve choice. We deserve facts, even when they are difficult to hear. We deserve to hear the wonderful things hospice can do for us and for our loved ones. We deserve to know that the chemotherapy they're giving us is not going to cure us.

We all need to face the fact that we are going to die. And our families need to face the fact that we're going to die. Every single adult should have a healthcare power of attorney. Every family should insist their loved ones get them. Every daughter: her mom, her dad, her spouse. Vice versa. Why don't we? Because we don't want to face the fact that we are going to die. And we don't want to answer the hard questions. Shame on us.

Families need to be more understanding and willing to step aside to let their loved ones make their own decisions -- while they are still lucid enough to do so. Dying people sometimes feel guilty not to keep fighting...they don't want to break their daughters', sons', spouses' hearts. Their last gift, if you will.

If patients aren't called to address their own mortality by their doctors, then these difficult decisions are left to family to make when the very end stages come. A terrible burden. Awful.

When I was in the hospital last year, a male nurse came into my room late at night, knowing I was awake, and let me know what "the racket" had been. "A 93-year-old woman coded a while ago. We performed CPR, used a defibrillator on her..." He was crying. "Her family wouldn't sign a DNR on her," he said. He was relieved they were unsuccessful, telling me that her ribs were broken, she was oxygen deprived... Said he prayed they'd be unsuccessful, as her family wanted to keep her as lucid as possible and her pain was under-medicated. *Shaking Head Here*

No thanks, Maggie says. That is just plain wrong.

The point you're missing is that there ARE people who WANT to fight for their lives.
 
But the post you quoted, was one of mine, and I said nothing about pulling all treatment if a patient has an expected lifespan of 6 more months. It really depends on the status of the patient, and not the time he is expected to live. As an example, the people I've known with lung cancer, lead a relatively meaningful life up until shortly before their death, but people with brain tumors (depending on where the tumor is), have multiple life-altering complications such as seizures, loss of motor function, loss of speech, confusion, etc.

Well sorry. I didn't realize you were just commenting on one issue.
 
The point you're missing is that there ARE people who WANT to fight for their lives.

Fight for their lives with what??? Apricot seeds? If a disease is incurable, it's incurable. If it's in the end stages of terminal, game over.

I am dying from liver cancer. My kidneys are failing. I am 98 years old. I want to keep living. I demand a kidney transplant. "Why won't Medicare pay for it???" Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? The scenarios being referred to by many in this thread are the very same thing.
 
Fight for their lives with what??? Apricot seeds? If a disease is incurable, it's incurable. If it's in the end stages of terminal, game over.

I am dying from liver cancer. My kidneys are failing. I am 98 years old. I want to keep living. I demand a kidney transplant. "Why won't Medicare pay for it???" Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? The scenarios being referred to by many in this thread are the very same thing.

It doesn't matter what YOU think about it. Take my word for it, I type about these people every day. People are not ready to just roll over and die because the doctor says they are going to. It is up to THEM when they decide to give in and no one else.
 
It doesn't matter what YOU think about it. Take my word for it, I type about these people every day. People are not ready to just roll over and die because the doctor says they are going to. It is up to THEM when they decide to give in and no one else.

I'm sorry, when did I say it wasn't?
 
It doesn't matter what YOU think about it. Take my word for it, I type about these people every day. People are not ready to just roll over and die because the doctor says they are going to. It is up to THEM when they decide to give in and no one else.

As much as you don't like it, there are times when society has to put prices on heads. This goes for both the saving or killing of an individual. If the individual can pay the price then, by all means, they are free to do so.
 
Wow. Just wow. Please cite Post #s where anyone has suggested "putting people down." Can't intelligent conversations about this important subject take place without over-the-top hyperbole?

Really? We're going to go back to you saying that nobody here suggested that?

I said:


If you didn't like it as much as I do, you would realize how preposterous it is. Of all the stupid **** we spend money on, you would have us start offing old people to save money? What the hell kind of society would we be running here?
I asked the question for verification: "You would have us start offing old people to save money?"

Here's a good one picked from the mix:

Not "old people", but "old people who are so sick, there is no purpose for continuing their life."

Medicare is going to be the largest budget item we have and we won't have enough to pay for it, plus everything else.
That's one of those reality things again.

You can't have all the medical care you want, especially for elderly people, the money just isn't there, without punitive taxation on everyone else.
So we won't be offing old people, just old ones whom we've determined have no purpose for continuing their lives.

You liked this post so I assumed you agreed with it.
 
Make assisted suicide legal and then allow each individual who wants to end his life, do so on his own terms. There are a lot of very sick people, mainly cancer victims, who are terrified of having to go through the horrible pains of their terminal cancer and who would much rather die in peace.

Don't put the government in charge of determining this, because they will just screw it up. Leave it up to each individual. What happens if you do put the government in charge of making such determinations is that you offer power to a group of a people who will basically order murders on senior citizens because they have "finished their job" in life. Man is not some animal that works and when he is done being able to work, he is put down. If you adopt that model of a society, or even that model of thinking... well... its all downhill from there.

EDIT1: The money-for-life exchange is an exchange that happens very often in the world. Healthcare is a commodity most of the times and people pay for it. Whether it is a doctors appointment to get a complete physical or getting expensive medicine for your illness... it is a trade that happens at a great frequency.

this is the sad reality of the situation. Life costs money. But it is not the job of other people to determine the value of each individual. It is the job of each individual to determine how much his life is worth to him and how much he values it. Why? Because thats just how it is. The moment you monetize people is the moment you take part of them being human away from them and people themselves become commodities. There are people who have nothing to live for and yet live on. There are people who have everything to live for and kill themselves. There are people who barely lived a quarter of their lives and kill themselves and there are old people who long passed their expected lifespan and make a lot of other people around them very happy and still make a difference in the world.

To make a bureaucratic machine that will collectively determine the fate of a group of people based on their age, is stupid. To make a bureaucratic machinery to determine for each individual within an age group their fate, is ineffective. How the hell can you do that. better give all options available to people and let them decide. A man is the best bureaucratic machine to himself. He make all his paperwork, all his decisions and all his judgements better than any group of people can make for him. And it costs the taxpayer little to nothing to maintain this "machinery".
 
Last edited:
So we won't be offing old people, just old ones whom we've determined have no purpose for continuing their lives.

You liked this post so I assumed you agreed with it.

What's the cost ceiling, for you, to keep someone alive, who has lived the most one can generally live in modern times?
What other programs should we cut, to continue to fund this?

Reality sucks, but in reality, when things become too expensive.
There will be cuts in services.
 
That was the whole topic of this thread, sedating people and withdrawing life sustaining care without them or their families consenting to it.

If I found anything disagreeable about what was written in that article, it was that people were not being told about the change in their conditions. If someone is going to be removed from treatment, they (or their family) should be told so that they can at least attempt to muster up the cash to pay for their own treatment. Of course, it's unlikely that most people can afford an average of $10,000 each day, but they should be given that opportunity.

It doesn't matter what YOU think about it. Take my word for it, I type about these people every day. People are not ready to just roll over and die because the doctor says they are going to. It is up to THEM when they decide to give in and no one else.

It's also up to them to pay for their own treatment. If they can do so, fine. Otherwise, society cannot be burdened with the cost of pointless treatments for people who will die anyhow just to please those who want to pretend that we somehow live in a eutopia.

As much as you don't like it, there are times when society has to put prices on heads. This goes for both the saving or killing of an individual. If the individual can pay the price then, by all means, they are free to do so.

Exactly. All healthcare is rationed. It always has been. And it always will be.
 
It's also up to them to pay for their own treatment. If they can do so, fine. Otherwise, society cannot be burdened with the cost of pointless treatments for people who will die anyhow just to please those who want to pretend that we somehow live in a eutopia.

You mean utopia? Good Lord! It is not utopic to expect less greed and more compassion, caring and understanding for the plight of others. I'll bet your ENTIRE outlook would change if it were you, one of your children or someone else that YOU loved. The only reason why YOU don't care is because it doesn't affect you, at least right now.
 
You mean utopia? Good Lord! It is not utopic to expect less greed and more compassion, caring and understanding for the plight of others. I'll bet your ENTIRE outlook would change if it were you, one of your children or someone else that YOU loved. The only reason why YOU don't care is because it doesn't affect you, at least right now.

Eutopia | Define Eutopia at Dictionary.com

No. That is simply untrue. If it was me, I would want to die, and get it over with. And even if I didn't, I wouldn't want to burden other people with the expense of keeping me alive when death is eminent. That's foolish and self centered. If it was my kids, I wouldn't want them to suffer needlessly. Remember, we are talking about terminal patients here. People that are dying and are being kept alive with feeding tubes and such. If recovery is likely, that is an entirely different discussion.
 
Eutopia | Define Eutopia at Dictionary.com

No. That is simply untrue. If it was me, I would want to die, and get it over with. And even if I didn't, I wouldn't want to burden other people with the expense of keeping me alive when death is eminent. That's foolish and self centered. If it was my kids, I wouldn't want them to suffer needlessly. Remember, we are talking about terminal patients here. People that are dying and are being kept alive with feeding tubes and such. If recovery is likely, that is an entirely different discussion.

Well there are two utopias/eutopias I guess. :lol:

Utopia
Utopia is a community or society possessing highly desirable or perfect qualities. The word was coined in Greek by Sir Thomas More for his 1516 book Utopia, describing a fictional island society in the Atlantic Ocean.

Okay, you are talking about YOURSELF and what YOUR wishes would be. That does not extend to everyone else. LIKE I said, I type everyday about people are WANT to fight for their lives and don't want to just roll over and give up. You can feel whatever you want and have any ideals that you want, but that doesn't mean other people have to share them. Get it?
 
If I found anything disagreeable about what was written in that article, it was that people were not being told about the change in their conditions. If someone is going to be removed from treatment, they (or their family) should be told so that they can at least attempt to muster up the cash to pay for their own treatment. Of course, it's unlikely that most people can afford an average of $10,000 each day, but they should be given that opportunity.



It's also up to them to pay for their own treatment. If they can do so, fine. Otherwise, society cannot be burdened with the cost of pointless treatments for people who will die anyhow just to please those who want to pretend that we somehow live in a eutopia.



Exactly. All healthcare is rationed. It always has been. And it always will be.

Well there are two utopias/eutopias I guess. :lol:

Utopia
Utopia is a community or society possessing highly desirable or perfect qualities. The word was coined in Greek by Sir Thomas More for his 1516 book Utopia, describing a fictional island society in the Atlantic Ocean.

Okay, you are talking about YOURSELF and what YOUR wishes would be. That does not extend to everyone else. LIKE I said, I type everyday about people are WANT to fight for their lives and don't want to just roll over and give up. You can feel whatever you want and have any ideals that you want, but that doesn't mean other people have to share them. Get it?

I never said they couldn't. Do you even read my posts? It's almost as if you have me on ignore. :lol: If people want to "fight" as you state it, fine. Let them pay to suffer. As pointless as it is, it's certainly their right to do so.
 
Back
Top Bottom