Read the article (link in blog title) and discuss the end of life in the context of self identity.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
About Me
- dsm
- Biostatistician, Biology and Philosophy Faculty, Lacrosse Addict
Posts
12 comments:
NABILAH KEYS
When hearing the phrase "The End Of Life" I think of the whole world. I think of darkness and non existing. Mostly all the things we come in contact with has life. Friends,family,plants, and animals. When one passes away there are signs to let us know they have done so. We have those that argue about psychological self or phsyical. with out one or the other we do not function and when u cannot properly function things come to an end. For example when your brain dead your heart can still beat however you will no longer be able to function. When a breathing machine is keeping you alive if they pull the plug you will not function. I believe that we do have a soul and our physical being is the shell. If we can believe that our bones protect the organs in our body than I most definetly believe what we are seeing are just shells and when that shell sheds off the phsyical being dies.
I also agree on the previous comment.
If one fails, as human, we need both to function. It is a personal reality in this case. Their religion causes them to believe that the reality of life is that the heart and lungs are functioning, therefore, he is alive.
In this case, being in America and having religious freedom, I believe that at their request, they should be able to do what the parents want.Just for the simple fact that it is not hurting anyone, and only allowing the family to hope and have faith in their young boy.
I understand that the hospital is being realistic here, but if their wishes were to keep him "alive" then allow them to do so.
The parents are the ones who will get the bill, not to sound rude or anything, but the reality is, is that it does cost to keep those machines running. And since they are not hurting anyone, let them be.
Zabrina Ybarra
Ryan Keene
I agree with the above comments, and still yet, I find it hard for me to believe that the boy is experiencing anything but a stage of limbo. I belive in having a soul, and I believe that the soul moves on to another life after this, however, I cannot imagine that a brain dead human being is comfortable, and able to pass on. The parents are being a bit selfish, and at the same time, they are fulfilling the religious practices. For me personally, life ends when one or the other or both die. When the body dies, the soul needs to move on, and vice versa. If this is not allowed, then the body and the soul are just sitting there. As I stated in the previous post, they are a symbiotic relation and depend on the other to survive appropriately. Yes the mind and body can survive separately, but in my opinion that does not constitute a proper life. A person's self indentity is attached to both the physical and the mental, so in order for life to carry on it's course you have to have both.
The meaning of end of life to me is when the heart has stopped beating on its own and when the lungs can no longer fill with air by themselves. I believe that when the heart and lungs cannot function anymore and one is considered dead then the soul leaves the body and the body just becomes a shell.
In the article it states that the Jewish Halakha principles defines death as "irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions." In my eyes the boys condition is just that if he was to be taken off of the machines his heat and lungs would stop working and would likely not be able to again on their own. So even though he is brain dead it is still the same person for his soul is still present until he is officially gone.
I think that the hospital needs to give the family a little more time and maybe they will realize that their son does not have the quality of life that he deserves. And that because his faith was so strong they will know that he will go to a much better place, and have eternal happiness.
S.Q.Hall
Liz Stern
It is an interesting thought that one might consider dead what another might consider alive. I never thought about it this way but now I see how everyone seeing things differently constitutes many ideas of life and death. I don’t believe that it is the hospitals choice to take the child off of life support; I always thought that was the parent’s decision when anything should affect a child’s life status.
Your Self Identity is crucial in all decisions made but this one is definitely imperative to follow your thoughts and beliefs. I believe that a person is alive as long as their body allows them to function. In this case his brain is dead and his other organs are functioning because a machine is allowing them to. Without your brain controlling your body, it is no longer able to be self sufficient and if you know your body will never be self sufficient you should know that you need to make a decision that will allow your soul to do its thing peacefully.
As a believer in God, I think the best thing to do for this child is to let him leave the world as peacefully as possible and allow his soul to go where it may and leave his body to rest here on earth. I know this is hard for the parents because they do not want to lose their son, but their son is never going to be able to survive on his own. The couple is Jewish and I am not familiar with Jewish views but I think they believe in the same merciful God as I do, if so I think they need to understand that God is calling for their son. I think that from a Christian like stand point the couple needs to take into consideration the God that they worship.
For any other being, one who doesn’t believe in God or one who believes in something as different as reincarnation; I think that they would take into consideration that the body is all that this child has left and they want to keep it around for as long as possible. They wont think of it as the child leaving peacefully, they will think of it as a child’s life ending so early that they need more time with the child. Self Identity in this case will make or break a case for a hospital because the hospital is doing what’s in their best interest and the family is doing what’s in their best interest. If the two are relatively similar there wouldn’t be a debate but when they are not the hospital needs to let the family decide what is best for them and their child.
Jessica Meza
In this article many unsolved and controversial issues are presented that make it difficult to decide when to stop medical intervention in hopes that a family’s loved one will regain consciousness and be given a second chance at life. In the presented situation I feel that I wouldn’t want to continue to see my child living artificially and accepted the medical advice of the qualified doctors. However, I don’t have children and have never been put in a position where it was up to me to end someone’s life indefinitely. This further complicates things because the person involved is only a child; consequently the parents are the only ones who exclusively get to carry the burden of the seemingly inevitable choice they will have to make sooner or later. Eventually, if the decision maker can not “pull the plug” such as in this case the being will be considered brain dead, then deceased in which the doctors already know and feel there are no vital signs to support future life. All of this ties into self identity and the lack of when considering anyone who is in a similar position. The body and mind need to coexist in order for the human to function. Everything that made little Motl him is no longer existent if his outer self is just laying in a bed capable of nothing. Also I don’t think the doctors at the Children’s National Medical Center in Washington advised that Motl be taken off life support out of lack of empathy or to be cruel to the parents who are involved emotionally out of clear love and devotion for their child. So it seems that it is not really about when someone’s life has ended or what religion tells you. In our society it is extremely difficult for us to cope with death especially for an innocent child that has not yet had the chance to fully experience life. Ultimately, I feel it is not living if you have to spend your days in a hospital hooked up to machines without any intellectual display of one’s self identity.
Susan McCliment
"The end of life" is different for everyone. I feel that life is over when there is no brain function. In order for all other organs to function without artificial means then the brain needs to be functioning.
While I agree that people need to butt out and mind their own business, I feel the Catholic Church made a huge statement when they went to the scientific community and asked them to define what "the end of life" really is.
If they take this child off of life support, the child will not be able to survive. I feel that these parents are using their child's want to have a full life to serve their own selfishness and are using that as an excuse, not to take their child off of life support. I understand what the religion preaches, that so long as the heart and lungs are still functioning, then there is still life, however, all they are doing is trapping the soul in an empty shell. They aren't allowing that soul to go where ever it is supposed to go. If that's not selfish, then what is? No parent wants to outlive their child, but at the same point, you need to let go and accept that you are doing the best thing.
I define “self” in this life as a combination of body, soul and mind. I believe that if any one of them stops functioning you have moved on to the self of the next life. Although that child is still physically alive, I don’t feel that his “self” is still present within his body. There is no sign of personality or interaction with anyone and doctors have determined that there never will be. I can understand the parents wanting to do the right thing by their religion. I can also understand the hospital not wanting to keep a child that will never respond to anyone again alive. From the hospital’s view it’s time, space and money for someone that they declare is deceased. They also stated that in their religion the heart and lungs must stop working. If they take him off the machines, his heart and lungs will stop. It’s all unnatural things that are keeping him alive. How much credit can you give technology when you are looking at someone’s death. That’s not saying that if you need a pacemaker put in that you don’t do it, but when you have someone that can’t recover, I think that should be taken into effect. It’s a very difficult decision for everyone involved.
It is really hard to determine the end of life, do to the fact that we all come to the conclusion that when you have no pulse you have moved on. But if somebody is declared brain dead technically you are dead you can not do anything,all you can do is lay in a bed and stare into space. I believe that if you are brain dead then, you are dead. Self identity is the ability to make your decisions about how you will live your life. Are identity is not what is on the outside, it is our experiences, the things that we learn through life that make up the person we are. I would have to agree that our body is just a shell to protect the vital ideas that are harbored within.
Jessica Southland
Peter Ngor
It is a very difficult thing to deal with when the doctors anounced a person brain death and leave the decision to the family to decide. recently i had friend whose uncle had involved in an accident and the doctors told the family that his brain is death and so that they family were to decide whether to keep him alive without functions or let him die altogether. I had seen the pain they went through in process of making this decision at which they end up letting him go. So i understand what this family was going through in this process. Many time the science say when somebody heart still beat the person is still alive, but at the same time we do known that brain is everythings a person is. However keeping a person who is not functioning any more is useless and worth nothing and so it is better to let him go anyway. therefopre this is where you play your faith in God if you believe in God knowing that his soul will live and you will see him again in eternity. so it is hard but brain is what make a person function in live and it is better to let him die and hope to see him again then keeping as picture.
Keep in mind that for these types of questions it is important to indicate whether we are physical or psychological beings, or both, and why. Why do so many find the body (and brain particularly) so important to who we are. And whatever decision you make, keep in mind that your decision regarding whether the boy is alive or not should not be altered by whether or not the boy's parents can pay for his care..... Although that may influence other decisions or opinions.
Nicole Hahlen
To me the title "the end of life" is the same as the beginning of life or before the world was ever here (b.c) this is a very strange thought to even think about and makes your ming boggle. Everything in this world pertains to life such as our house, plants, family, friends, animals, so on...i believe when the body dies that the soul goes to either heaven or hell depending on if you have or have not excepted Christ in your heart or for that matter whatever of however you believe than the body is no longer living but is a shell that either gets buried of burned. I do not believe in the limbo stage that the boys parents said he was experiencing. The parents are not being understanding and are trying to make themselves comfortable rather than the being of anybody else. I think if the parents really cared about there son they should let him leave this earth peacefully rather than prolonging his life because he is not truly alive and living a healthy happy life. I feel that the parents should except the fact that their son is suppose to be with God and God has a plan for them and their son and being that he can never live on his own they should let him leave this world in peace rather than suffering.
Post a Comment