Just Hurry Up and Die, Will Ya?

[Don Corleone]

They (and you, apparently) are assuming an editorial bias never evidenced.

They're saying that if she had a living will in place, the daughter would have clear grounds to pull from (or never insert) a feeding tube from/into the mother. Yet nowhere do they ever state that was the mother's wish in the first place, and it's their scenario.

You and they assume that pulling the feeding tube is the correct and only reasonable course of action, all that is required is for people to put together living wills.

I don't want a feeding tube inserted, but I made that choice on my own. If you or anybody else wants one, I wouldn't dream of denying it to you. Well, maybe you, but not anybody else...

[HoreTore]

They (and you, apparently) are assuming an editorial bias never evidenced.

They're saying that if she had a living will in place, the daughter would have clear grounds to pull from (or never insert) a feeding tube from/into the mother. Yet nowhere do they ever state that was the mother's wish in the first place, and it's their scenario.

You and they assume that pulling the feeding tube is the correct and only reasonable course of action, all that is required is for people to put together living wills.

I don't want a feeding tube inserted, but I made that choice on my own. If you or anybody else wants one, I wouldn't dream of denying it to you. Well, maybe you, but not anybody else...

Uhm.

In the given scenario, where the mother doesn't have a living will, the daughter will have to make the choice on whether to insert the tubes or not. If she had a living will, the mother would've made the choice herself already. The section I highlighted in your post is just plain wrong. It's not about whether to tube or not to tube, it's about already having sorted the situation out or letting someone else make the hard choices for you while you yourself is incapable. You might want to live. Your daughter might think you wouldn't want to. Daughter makes the call, you die. With a living will, you live. That's the issue here.

Also, take a look at the question posed below the little story. The entire point of the story is to make you think. It's printed there to force you to think about hard choices. The story isn't about pulling some tubes or whatever, it's simply a story heavily biased to show that a living will is incredibly useful. And I have to say, such a bias is very acceptable.

You still haven't answered what the Bush administration's pamphlet was though...

[Don Corleone]

You still haven't answered what the Bush administration's pamphlet was though...

As far as I know, there wasn't one. Last time I checked, the Bush administration wasn't big on euthanasia and encouraging the elderly & disabled to follow the path of the noble eskimo and convincing them to go climb onto an ice flow, for the good of the tribe, so I'm not surprised.

[HoreTore]

As far as I know, there wasn't one. Last time I checked, the Bush administration wasn't big on euthanasia and encouraging the elderly & disabled to follow the path of the noble eskimo and convincing them to go climb onto an ice flow, for the good of the tribe, so I'm not surprised.

So.....

Basically, the Bush administration just closed their eyes and encouraged letting other people decide over whether you live or not? Yeah, that sounds just swell...

Look, Don. A living will isn't a document stating that you're to be killed when x happens. It's a document stating what you want to happen when x happens. The choice will be between living or dying. Someone will have to make that choice. Do you want to make it yourself, or do you want to place that burden on your relatives? If you want to live no matter what, and you want medical attention until you die, then you need that living will to make sure that nobody gets the wrong idea and thinks that ending treatment is the best thing to do.

X can happen. A choice will need to be made. No matter what. The only question, is who gets to make that choice. You. Or someone else.

[Tribesman]

As far as I know, there wasn't one. Last time I checked, the Bush administration wasn't big on euthanasia and encouraging the elderly & disabled to follow the path of the noble eskimo and convincing them to go climb onto an ice flow, for the good of the tribe, so I'm not surprised.

As far as I know during the Bush years they let such cases drag through the courts because people who didn't have power of attorney where challenging those that did by claiming that they knew the person better.
As far as I know the party said it was campaining on the morals of an individual case while its people were circulating memos about maximising the political capital that can be made out of other peoples problems.

[rory_20_uk]

In the land of Elves and Fairies where everyone lives perfect lives sure, infinite care for all!!!!!...

Should the fit have preference to care over those with end stage dementia? I think so. The body just hasn't realised the person is dead. Else you are denying the living treatment merely to prolong the death of those with no quality of life.