WWDC-Life VS Money-Spankbelly
I have worked in hospitals as security and as a mortician.
I have witnessed several acts of euthanasia. Though that act is technically illegal.
I have witnessed patients begging to die, but forced to live.
I have buried many bodies that were kept artificially alive, long after they should have died naturally.
Family members are not always the best judge of the value of a life. They are understandably biased.
They often convince themselves they are acting in the best interest of a loved one. They pretend they are acting to prevent suffering in the patient. When in reality, they are acting to delay their own suffering.
I don't know if the parents in this case are correct or not.
I do know that being the parents does not automatically make them more correct.
And what if it is just a matter of money? So what?
Should resources be wasted on a terminal patient, when others need those resources?
It's just a question. I don't know the answer. (I do have an opinion)
I do know that people don't like to make the hard decisions.
I do know that people often stand by and do nothing wrong. Rather than be responsible for doing something right.
I know it's easy to say she "deserves" treatment, or she has the "right" to live. That's because you can see her. You can see this one person. You don't see all the others those resources won't go to.
Why does she deserve those resources more than someone else?
What if you did see them? What if you were standing in the E.R. and you had to decide who gets the resources today?
Do you help the terminal patient who should be dead already, and will probably be dead tomorrow?
Or do you save the kid who will have a long life, if you give it to him?
Why does she deserve this continued life of futility? Maybe she has the right to stop.
Maybe the parents need to suck it up and deal with the inevitable.
We know murder is wrong.
So is forcing someone to live.
She is not being "saved" from death in the same way as a victim of accidental injury.
She is being forced to live.
The act of healing is to return the patient to their natural state.
She can't be made "normal" and viable. She can't be healed.
So why bring her to hospital and resuscitation to force her to live?
Her natural state is death.
Sometimes we do wrong. To save ourselves from the guilt of doing right.
I have worked in hospitals as security and as a mortician.
I have witnessed several acts of euthanasia. Though that act is technically illegal.
I have witnessed patients begging to die, but forced to live.
I have buried many bodies that were kept artificially alive, long after they should have died naturally.
Family members are not always the best judge of the value of a life. They are understandably biased.
They often convince themselves they are acting in the best interest of a loved one. They pretend they are acting to prevent suffering in the patient. When in reality, they are acting to delay their own suffering.
I don't know if the parents in this case are correct or not.
I do know that being the parents does not automatically make them more correct.
And what if it is just a matter of money? So what?
Should resources be wasted on a terminal patient, when others need those resources?
It's just a question. I don't know the answer. (I do have an opinion)
I do know that people don't like to make the hard decisions.
I do know that people often stand by and do nothing wrong. Rather than be responsible for doing something right.
I know it's easy to say she "deserves" treatment, or she has the "right" to live. That's because you can see her. You can see this one person. You don't see all the others those resources won't go to.
Why does she deserve those resources more than someone else?
What if you did see them? What if you were standing in the E.R. and you had to decide who gets the resources today?
Do you help the terminal patient who should be dead already, and will probably be dead tomorrow?
Or do you save the kid who will have a long life, if you give it to him?
Why does she deserve this continued life of futility? Maybe she has the right to stop.
Maybe the parents need to suck it up and deal with the inevitable.
We know murder is wrong.
So is forcing someone to live.
She is not being "saved" from death in the same way as a victim of accidental injury.
She is being forced to live.
The act of healing is to return the patient to their natural state.
She can't be made "normal" and viable. She can't be healed.
So why bring her to hospital and resuscitation to force her to live?
Her natural state is death.
Sometimes we do wrong. To save ourselves from the guilt of doing right.
