If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
the boy's brain is fully functioning and thus in respects he sleeps and is awake etc, it's just the rest of his body's muscles don't function to the point he cannot breathe anymore
the doctors shouldnt be forcing it through court however his parents should realise there isnt much hope
Everything about modern medicine is about NOT allowing nature to take it's course.
On euthanasia, I don't personally consider that anything to do with medicine, it's an execution, no matter what people call it, or who wants it.
It's also not legal in most countries in the world and it's definatly not legal here, where this court case was decided.
We're not talking about euthanasia here, this case is about withdrawing futile medical interventions.
You've given an incomplete example, parents may agree that life support should be terminated, but can you give the complete example of them requesting it?
so your saying if they decided to turn off life support, that they dont love their child or they're stupid?
I personally would find it difficult to believe that parents who genuinely love their child would allow them to die while that child were fully cognitive.
but won't the child be relying on its parents to look after them all the time? (I'm talking about when most children are old enough to do most things by themselves)
but alas, as is the case with many things in life, regardless of suffering, people dont always do something because its right or wrong, they do it because they can
No I'm not. I know someone (IRL) who has to rely on someone to look after her because she is unable to do anything (practically, anyway) for herself.
I would never blame parents who agree with their doctors, you're supposed to be able to trust your doctor to advise you on the best course of action, the one which will benefit you and the patient the most, and provide the best posible scenario. I would say that the doctors would be wrong for suggesting it.
While I was thinking, it occured to me that in almost every other situation where a person retains full congnitive (or even partial cognitive) ability the same doctors would be fighting for their life. In the case of a road accident, in the case of serious illness like a major case of flu or pnumonia, kidney or liver failure, heart disease and cancer.
The court has decided that the child's life is worth living and that is fair enough if we accept the case put forward by the parents, but not all parents would agree and so to pass the buck to the doctors and say that they shouldn't have suggested switching off the life support systems is just a lazy argument.