Tweet
I have a friend, a few years older than myself, who was diagnosed with Alzheimer's six years ago. He has now reached the stage where moments of lucidity are few and far between, he wanders but is unstable on his feet, he is incontinent, he cannot dress or feed himself. IOW, his quality of life is poor.
His wife, over 80 now, has been looking after him and she is exhausted with the need of 24/7 attention. Unfortunately, she is proud and considers that "in sickness and in health" means literally that. They are not rich and cannot afford paid professional care. The NHS and social security services where they live (Yorkshire, England) are very limited and offer little help. Even if she would let him go, there is no room in any local nursing home. There is a day care centre, but they can accept him for only one day per week. I feel she is now at the end of her tether.
The prognosis for my friend is probably inevitable death from nervous degeneration, as he has no other life-threatening condition, at least for the moment. The docs won't say how long he has, anything between 1 and 5 years. But they insist on his taking medication which slows down the progression of his degeneration. My question: is such treatment cruel? Why don't they let nature just takes its course and let him go as soon as possible, rather than slowing down the inevitable? Although I'm not pro-active euthanasia, neither am I pro-therapeutic fierceness which keeps patients alive for as long as possible at whatever cost and whatever loss of dignity. I am pro-therapy that conserves, as much as possible, dignity of life and the relief of pain (not that this applies in this case), even if it can accelerate the inevitable outcome of death by a little.
What are your thoughts?
His wife, over 80 now, has been looking after him and she is exhausted with the need of 24/7 attention. Unfortunately, she is proud and considers that "in sickness and in health" means literally that. They are not rich and cannot afford paid professional care. The NHS and social security services where they live (Yorkshire, England) are very limited and offer little help. Even if she would let him go, there is no room in any local nursing home. There is a day care centre, but they can accept him for only one day per week. I feel she is now at the end of her tether.
The prognosis for my friend is probably inevitable death from nervous degeneration, as he has no other life-threatening condition, at least for the moment. The docs won't say how long he has, anything between 1 and 5 years. But they insist on his taking medication which slows down the progression of his degeneration. My question: is such treatment cruel? Why don't they let nature just takes its course and let him go as soon as possible, rather than slowing down the inevitable? Although I'm not pro-active euthanasia, neither am I pro-therapeutic fierceness which keeps patients alive for as long as possible at whatever cost and whatever loss of dignity. I am pro-therapy that conserves, as much as possible, dignity of life and the relief of pain (not that this applies in this case), even if it can accelerate the inevitable outcome of death by a little.
What are your thoughts?
Comment