The Path to Euthanasia

A recent medical study cast doubt on whether antibiotics should be administered to patients in the advanced stages of dementia. The argument is that it doesn't improve the "quality of life" and that it increases the likelihood of creating super- resistant bacteria which the nursing home resident then brings to the hospital when they get admitted.
As a geriatrician with a practice in skilled nursing facilities, I am concerned about what message this study sends to physicians and the lay community. It is fairly clear to most physicians when a patient is dying and antibiotics are futile. It is not always clear if a patient develops a fever that this will be their terminal event. A dementia patient who spikes a temp is not necessarily moribund and a simple once a day parenteral antibiotic may help them turn the corner, if indeed it is not yet their time to go. By us witholding antibiotics are we "stacking the deck" in a way that will increase the likelihood of their dying? To me this is erring on the side of death and not life! If we are to err, let it be on the side of life, regardless of what someone determines is the "quality of life."
I see this as the tip of the iceberg and we are going to start seeing more "studies" that show the futility of medical treatments for patients with dementia and other "poor quality of life" diseases. We already have a small body of literature that suggests feeding tubes do not prolong the quality of life and as a result, ethics committees in hospitals cite these studies to deny PEG tubes to patients with advanced dementia. Now we will have ethics committees recommending the withdrawl of antibiotics if a patient with urosepsis and dementia presents to the ER with a change in mental status. Perhaps I am being an alarmist, but I don't think so. This is just another brick being layed down on the road to Euthanasia.

Holy Father: "Science Cannot Understand the Mystery of Man."

Pope Benedict XVI addressed academics gathered in Rome to study the human person.  The Holy Father told those in attendance:

"...the exact sciences, both natural and human, have made prodigious advances in their understanding of man and his universe". However at the same time "there is a strong temptation to circumscribe human identity and enclose it with the limits of what is known.”

“In order to avoid going down this path,” the Pontiff said, “it is important not to ignore anthropological, philosophical and theological research, which highlight and maintain the mystery of human beings, because no science can say who they are, where they come from and where they go. The knowledge of human beings is then, the most important of all forms of knowledge".

"Human beings always stand beyond what can be scientifically seen or perceived", the Pope affirmed. This failure manifests itself today in “an incapacity to recognize the foundation upon which human dignity rests, from the embryo until natural death," said the Pope.

"Starting from the question of the new being, who is produced by a fusion of cells and who bears a new and specific genetic heritage", the Holy Father told his audience, "you have highlighted certain essential elements in the mystery of man". Man, said the Pope is "characterized by his otherness. He is a being created by God, a being in the image of God, a being who is loved and is made to love. As a human he is never closed within himself. He is always a bearer of otherness and, from his origins, is in interaction with other human beings".

For those whose of you who read Italian (Paul), find the speech here (and for the rest of us an article about the speech here.)

Technorati Tags: Pope,Benedict,XVI,science,human,man,humanity

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Medical "Ethics"

A rather disappointing position from another professional organization. According to Renew America:

The political effort to protect so-called reproductive medicine has led ACOG to the conclusion, according to its Committee on Ethics, that even when healthcare providers have moral concerns about a decision a patient has made, they may not allow those concerns to translate into a refusal to provide a "service" or a prescription to that patient.

If one examines this premise and the committee's language, it becomes painfully clear that the target for the statement is the Christian medical community. For example, in the ACOG statement, we find the following:

When conscientious refusals conflict with moral obligations that are central to the ethical practice of medicine, ethical care requires either that the physician provide care despite reservations or that there be resources in place to allow the patient to gain access to care in the presence of conscientious refusal.

Unfortunately this is yet one more example of a professional organization
which has become so politicized and "PC" that it is but a shadow of its
historical self and mission. I would suggest that one would be hard pressed to
justify membership in the ACOG if one is serious about one's Catholic
faith.

Welcome to Sabin

Welcome to Sabin, our newest member. If you have a blog or web site, Sabin, send me the address and I will blogroll it. We're glad that you are with us and look forward to your posts.

Peace.

More on Being a Burdon

For some reason, the "comments" function is not working and I'd like to make a few comments on John's thoughtful post.

Many patients who voice this kind concern with being a "burden" are, in my view, suffering from depression and I am quick to recommend these patients for consultation for depression.
However many are really saying that they do not want to suffer. They do not want to suffer loneliness or suffer dependence on others for their needs. They may fear physical pain.

It may be difficult, but if I know a patient is Catholic (and I will inquire about my patients' faith when they voice such a comment) it is useful to remind them that they can unite their suffering with that of Christ and share in His redemptive suffering. Salvifici Doloris, JPII's wonderful encyclical on suffering, is helpful in this regard (and well worth re-reading occasionally.)

I will generally also discuss why it may be important for the patient to "allow" the family to care for them. How this submission to dependency may be an opportunity to teach love to one's children and grandchildren. My mother, with her own eight children, welcomed her father and her mother-in-law into our modest home and provided to us, her children, an example of what it means to love. I am much richer because my grandparents "allowed" themselves to "burden" my mother. They were able to temper pride in order to become dependant.

I once had an old nun tell me that the engine of the Church, the spiritual energy of the Church, was the millions of old people continuously praying--praying the rosary, praying the Divine Chaplet, praying the hours, praying the daily Mass. Remind your patients that they can use this station in their life to enrich the Body of Christ through their prayers.

On Being a Burden

"Doc, I just don't want to be a burden to my family." 

The patient was in his 80's and suffering from the usual mixture of heart disease, arthritis, prostate cancer, etc. He lives with his wife--both very proud, independent Yankees. Over the years, as I have served as his family physician, Tom (not his real name) has often expressed anxiety about growing old and being unable to care for himself. He is a nominal Christian with no firm faith in life after death, no hope in heaven or fear of hell--"A loving God could never send anyone to hell forever." 

As I listened to Tom talk, I thought to myself, "You are not a burden, but a blessing!" I tried to explain, but Tom replied, "I just sit around all day--I don't have the energy to do anything useful." How could I open a window to another perspective on his situation? 

This idea that the aged, the infirm, the disabled, the unborn could be a burden is so pernicious in our society. Tom is thoroughly convinced that as he becomes less and less productive, he becomes more and more ready for the rubbish pile. What effect could my few words have against such an onslaught from the Culture of Death? We all seem to judge our value by what we do, by our productivity. The notion that a person has inherent value as a human being has slipped away. We have become "human doings" rather than "human beings". 

Tom, "Do you have any children?"--I knew he had several children and grandchildren, but asked anyway. "What did you think about your newborn son, Samuel, when you first saw him?"  "Why, I thought he was the most wonderful thing I had ever laid eyes on!" replied Tom with enthusiasm.  Gently I asked, "That first day, could Samuel do anything useful?" Tom smiled and for an instant I think a window opened. I pray the Lord will hold that window open as the days and infirmity of age progresses. 

As Catholic physicians we've all heard someone say, "Doc, I just don't want to be a burden." What would you say? Have you found any useful ways to respond to this dark perspective on the life we have all been given?

"Catholic Church must withdraw from involvement in frontline healthcare here in the UK"

Catholic moral teaching is again butting heads with human secularist in the UK.  Cormac Cardinal Murphy O'Connor, head of the Catholic church in England and Wales, has insisted that Catholic hospitals (can you believe) abide by Catholic teaching in certain medical situations.  From LifeSite:

Two members of the board of directors of a London Catholic hospital have resigned in the face of the hospital's decision to adopt a Catholic code of ethics. After an investigation, instigated at the request of the Vatican, it was revealed that the hospital violated Catholic moral principles by referring for abortions, dispensing contraceptives and performing sterilizations. The hospital was also suspected of carrying out the surgical and chemical mutilations known popularly as "sex-change" operations.

And of course there is no tolerance from the left where the "right" to abortion and sexual license are stake.

Last month, Dr. Scurr reiterated his stand that, because of its dedication to classical medical ethics and refusal to adopt the utilitarian pro-abortion mentality, the Church should abandon its centuries-long dedication to health care in Britain.

"As I have said repeatedly," he said, "we are now in an era where the Catholic Church must withdraw from involvement in frontline healthcare here in the UK, as it appears to be unable to reach the degree of tolerance that has been reached elsewhere in the world."

Saying the adoption of the Catholic ethics code placed "Catholic values" above patient care, Scurr said, "In the matter of modern medical care the cardinal has chosen to listen to individuals who have no specific expertise in that arena. The damage to the church will be worse if the hospital closes, unless he chooses to withdraw his patronage."

Expect increasing pressure from secularists against Catholic social institutions that refuse to cooperate with the secularist agenda.  Case in point; the Boston Archdiocese has opted out of providing adoptive services because they refuse to place children in homes of homosexual couples.

The intolerance of the left is staggering.