1 / 15

What are they saying about

What are they saying about. Artificially Administered Nutrition and Hydration. A society will be judged on how it treats those in the dawn of life, those in the twilight of life, and those in the Shadow of life. Senator Hubert Humphrey source: http://prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae107.htm.

manju
Télécharger la présentation

What are they saying about

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What are they saying about Artificially Administered Nutrition and Hydration

  2. A society will be judged on how it treats those in the dawn of life, those in the twilight of life, and those in the Shadow of life. Senator Hubert Humphrey source: http://prolife.ath.cx:8000/plae107.htm They are dictating how medicine should be practiced. You know the court is dominated by religion …’Life is sanctity, this and that..’ The problem with medicine today is that it’s under the Dark Age mentality of mystical religion, which has permeated medicine to the core since Christianity took over Jack Kevorkian Conflicting Opinions

  3. Will look at the positions of Robert Barry, William May, and John Connery Catholic Moral Theologians All three look at thew idea of “quality of life” decisions and their morality. Also address the question of whether administration of food and water is treatment at all AANH

  4. Addresses the question of how to determine what treatments are obligatory and which are not proportionate vs. disproportionate Believes problems arise when we include patient’s quality of life Connery believes we must evaluate the quality of the means of treatment rather than the perceived quality of life The quality of treatment and the quality of life are not the same thing John Connery

  5. Uses case studies to illustrate Clarence Herbert- 55 year old man who stopped breathing after routine surgery, removed from respirator after two days, food and water removed two days later Claire Conroy - severe physical and mental disabilities- fed by means of NG tube Question of whether it was permissible to remove feeding these two cases Connery

  6. Life is a good of the person, not for the person Never instrumental to intentionally bring about death of an innocent person -even if in the name of “mercy” Nutrition and hydration required unless shown to be burdensome Again, must be sure we are evaluating means of treatment and not quality of life William May

  7. Cites statement of Penn. Bishops- those in PVS “not in the process of dying” If a person is not terminal, food and water are to be provided as they are beneficial Disagrees with statement of Texas Bishops believed it was basically a quality of life criteria which could also be applied to many conscious people May

  8. All decision, including those of a proxy, must be in line with Catholic Moral teaching Must consider three areas Patient’s intentions and values best interests of the patient patient’s wishes Life must not be easily ruled burdensome May

  9. Can at times be acceptable to remove feeding tube, but never with the intention of bringing about death Asks three main questions Is it acceptable to withdraw feeding so this is the main cause of death? Can those with low quality of life be allowed to starve? Should feeding be considered medical treatment? Robert Barry

  10. As food an nutrition is necessary for life, never acceptable to remove if this will be the main cause of death same as direct killing Principle of Double Effect Allowing starvation would seem to be a quality of life decision again, these criteria can also be applied to the non comatose Barry

  11. On the question of whether nutrition and hydration should be considered medical treatment, Barry appeals to teaching of past moral theologians Aquinas- draws distinction between treatment and food and water Francisco Vitoria- common food must be accepted, also sees difference between food and water and medical treatment Barry

  12. Believes it is quite straight forward If nutrition and hydration are medical treatments, what do they treat? Alternate definition of treatment “food and water are basic resources of the body and are not therapeutic measures. They are used by every cell, organ, and system in the body to sustain its natural functions” Barry

  13. The provision of food and water to those in need is not just a medical question; it is a matter of justice and those who are able to provide food for those who need it obligated to do so. Teri Schiavo video Terri Schivao video 2 Barry

  14. Some basic questions about AANH Moral Principles in end of life decisions Questions about Medically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration

  15. These are obviously difficult decisions To consider the quality of life seems a common inclination We don’t like to see others, especially those near to us suffering Conclusion

More Related