woolybanana Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 That hospitals are paid to kill people and that thay are paid by the numbers or is that results. Isn't this the Eichmann route?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9644287/NHS-millions-for-controversial-care-pathway.htmlMaybe actions for manslaughter or even murder are appropriate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Actions for manslaughter or even murder are not appropriate. Eichmann route.........no! A fact of life, people get old and die, people get ill and die. Wooly, are you really getting that worried about your mortality? Live for now, and when it is your time, I can only wish for you, as I wish for us all, simply falling asleep and not waking up, and no suffering and terrible illness to contend with. Yesterday when I saw my Dad, he admitted that life was getting difficult. His mental faculties are probably better than mine, his body, which was, at even 83, fitter than most 40 year olds, but these five years later.........his body is not working very well and he is struggling doing some basic things. He said, quite happily, that if he gets much worse, he hopes he dies. He doesn't want to become dependant, on anyone. He went onto say that when he sees old people expecting others to dance to their tune, it disgusts him, and he believes there is no limit to how selfish and manipulative old people can be. This the man that nursed my mother who ended up in a truly terrible state. He has no illusions as to how much care some people end up getting. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jun/01/acutely-ill-prevented-dying-dignityAnd that is the other end of the problem, with over zealous doctors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted October 31, 2012 Author Share Posted October 31, 2012 What worries me Pauline is that it becomes a better financial option to kill people who might still have a reasonable life to live than to keep them alive and cure them. And that those decisions might be taken, not by doctors but by unfeeling, vicious little backroom administrators who see people as numbers. Which is what Eichmann did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chancer Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 My father went the same way physically in the final years of his life at around the same age, he found it very hard to come to terms with having been so active, what was/is ironic is that right up to his final week he was far more independant, healthy and un-needing (sorry losing my English) of care than 90% of the people half of his age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 [quote user="woolybanana"]That hospitals are paid to kill people and that thay are paid by the numbers or is that results. Isn't this the Eichmann route? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9644287/NHS-millions-for-controversial-care-pathway.html Maybe actions for manslaughter or even murder are appropriate?[/quote]I thought you had more brains than this Wooly, there is a well known rear end orifice on the green forum who is perpetuating this rumour, and the answer is; the system is for people who are in terminal decline not just because they are old. I can only hope that if I ever get to the stage that life is no longer bearable and that there is no hope for me, that I can get help to pass away peacefully. Stories like yours about murder and manslaughter are mischievous at least and downright disgustingly ignorant in the extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cendrillon Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 Chancer said " he was far more independant, healthy and un-needing of care than 90% of the people half of his age. I would agree, not all the oldies are infirm and doddery, sitting in a chair waiting to move on to the next world. I am fortunate enough to have a father of 90 who has a great positive outlook and I have to say he has far better brain power than me. He's becoming a little frail so has recently moved himself into an Abbeyfield home where has meals cooked for him, there are others (9) for company and someone to call on should the need arise. He still has his independence, can come and go as he pleases and is doing well.[:)] Long may it last! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormanH Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 [quote user="woolybanana"]What worries me Pauline is that it becomes a better financial option to kill people who might still have a reasonable life to live than to keep them alive and cure them. And that those decisions might be taken, not by doctors but by unfeeling, vicious little backroom administrators who see people as numbers. Which is what Eichmann did.[/quote]I agree. It seems a solution to the financial problem of exploding costs of care, rather than a real care option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clair Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 [quote user="NickP"]... the system is for people who are in terminal decline not just because they are old. I can only hope that if I ever get to the stage that life is no longer bearable and that there is no hope for me, that I can get help to pass away peacefully...[/quote]All well and good, as long as you, the patient, and/or your relatives are actually made aware of what this entails.In the cases discussed today in several newspapers, it appears that many relatives are not being made aware of the finality of the "pathway". Because of a lack of communication on the part of the medical teams, they accept this as a treatment.The principle seems good and noble, but the application is irrevocably tainted by the mention of targets and payments. This is back-door euthanasia and as much as I agree with the principle of euthanasia, this application of it is wrong, wrong, wrong. This cannot be a one-sided decision on the part of the medical team. There must be clear dialogue between all involved and all mentions of targets and payments must be gone. If anything, this has reinforced my long-held belief that I must start stock-piling.Barring a fatal accident, I do not want anyone but myself deciding when and how my life ends, and I will do whatever I can to ensure the decision to end it is mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted November 1, 2012 Author Share Posted November 1, 2012 Well said, Clair. By the way, is thre an equivalent of the Liverpool Care Pathway in France? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clair Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 I have no idea, and to be honest, it's not a discussion I wish to have with my French GP. He is on the board of an "institution for the elderly", which, in reality, is an end-of-life establishment, and I suspect that any mention of my beliefs might alert him to my eventual intentions, therefore preventing me from stock-piling the tablets I would require to achieve my aim...Isn't it a sad state of affairs that I cannot even begin to discuss this with my primary health provider? [:(] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 I too have started thinking about having a stock pile. The trouble is, and we certainly saw this with my mother who was, by the time she realised that life was no longer 'life', too ill to use that stock pile and then you get into 'murder' or 'manslaughter' under current laws if the family had helped. And frankly I just couldn't have done it, I know I couldn't. I will make out a living will. My Dad dreads ending up in a care home. For him it would be a cruel end to his life, any lack of independance is alien to him. And he is entitled to that point of view. He most certainly doesn't see 'just being alive and completely dependant' as living. His own younger sister expects her husband, who is unwell himself, to give her his complete devotion and time, no matter how his own health suffers. She cannot sleep, he has to be with her, then he has the house to run during the day when, well yes, she sleeps! he doesn't!The trouble with old age, and my am I feeling it now is that no matter what the doctors do, they cannot make us young again, and nor should they. I have enough ailments at the moment, some will go and others will be a plague for the rest of my days even though they are for the moment, tenable.And doctors can only do so much for the very ill and old, and this is exactly what this is about. But they can do worse than just letting someone slip away, they can do actual harm and much much distress in intrusive testing and reanimation which are un necessary and painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormanH Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 [quote user="Clair"]I have no idea, and to be honest, it's not a discussion I wish to have with my French GP. He is on the board of an "institution for the elderly", which, in reality, is an end-of-life establishment, and I suspect that any mention of my beliefs might alert him to my eventual intentions, therefore preventing me from stock-piling the tablets I would require to achieve my aim...Isn't it a sad state of affairs that I cannot even begin to discuss this with my primary health provider? [:(][/quote]I think it is starting to be considered here as I mentioned in another thread a few days agohttp://services.completefrance.com/forums/completefrance/cs/forums/2805382/ShowPost.aspxMy personal fear is of having 'locked-in syndrome' which is a possibility given that I have already had minor strokes and that cancer patients are at higher risk of further vascular problems.To be aware, able to think, but have no control over what happens to me is my real nightmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judith Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 [quote user="Cendrillon"] Chancer said " he was far more independant, healthy and un-needing of care than 90% of the people half of his age. I would agree, not all the oldies are infirm and doddery, sitting in a chair waiting to move on to the next world. I am fortunate enough to have a father of 90 who has a great positive outlook and I have to say he has far better brain power than me. He's becoming a little frail so has recently moved himself into an Abbeyfield home where has meals cooked for him, there are others (9) for company and someone to call on should the need arise. He still has his independence, can come and go as he pleases and is doing well.[:)] Long may it last![/quote]My aunt did this at about 87 - when she started to have problems with balance - up until a month before she died last year aged 95+ I'd phone her weekly and have the most incredibly interesting conversations about the state of the world ... etc ... she finally decided she'd had enough after a mild stroke left her unable to walk without a frame, and she was pretty deaf and had macular difficulties which they could do nothing about. She'd outlived both her younger sisters, and most of the people of her own age had gone ... she'd thoroughly enjoyed her independence in the Abbeyfield (you have to be pretty independent to go into one) and never looked her age ...always active, until her last year, it was always a pleasure to talk to her .. and when she decided it was time to go - she went. Until the stroke she was not on any medication at all .... after that it was jsut high blood pressure tablets - not bad at 94. I hope I can go like her when my time comes, but we do need to ensure that this option is left for us to enjoy as well as the current crop of elderlies .. after all, for most of us it might not be that long now....!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clair Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote user="NickP"]... the system is for people who are in terminal decline not just because they are old. I can only hope that if I ever get to the stage that life is no longer bearable and that there is no hope for me, that I can get help to pass away peacefully. Stories like yours about murder and manslaughter are mischievous at least and downright disgustingly ignorant in the extreme.[/quote]As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted: Liverpool Care Pathway: Relatives 'must be informed' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote user="Clair"][quote user="NickP"]... the system is for people who are in terminal decline not just because they are old. I can only hope that if I ever get to the stage that life is no longer bearable and that there is no hope for me, that I can get help to pass away peacefully. Stories like yours about murder and manslaughter are mischievous at least and downright disgustingly ignorant in the extreme.[/quote]As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted: Liverpool Care Pathway: Relatives 'must be informed'[/quote]So Clair if one of your relatives was in hospital you wouldn't want to know or care what was going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 Nick, what has happened is that there has been an abuse of what should be a clear and useful process; Relatives have not always been informed and the suspicion is that this may be either on purpose, out of convenience or wilful. And the second suspicion is that administrators might be having a say in the decision making process. Imagine something along the lines of "If we put that patient of the Liverpool Pathway we get an extra £1000 which will pay for three appendectomies or will have the bed free, and we will save X amount of drugs." So, what do doctors do if they want to keep their jobs?This is and remains my fear with a process that has financial incentives attached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbie Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Unfortunately, all healthcare has financial implications and unless there is an unlimited pot of money there has to be some control over who gets what treatment. In the UK politicians talk about both giving more local control to the NHS and also ending the post code lottery. IMO these are contradictory because if the the decisions are truly made locally they will vary from locality to locality and so you may suffer if you require a treatment not authorized in your area. As medical science has advanced it has also become much more expensive even without excessive profits being made by the drugs companies. Until people are prepared to pay more in tax or health insurance these issues will not go away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clair Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote user="NickP"][quote user="Clair"]As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted: Liverpool Care Pathway: Relatives 'must be informed'[/quote]So Clair if one of your relatives was in hospital you wouldn't want to know or care what was going on?[/quote]I don't follow... As you being facetious or provocative?My previous comment clearly stated where I stand and the BBC article supports my statement that "As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted.""Relatives of terminally-ill patients would have to be consulted before a decision to withdraw food or water is taken, under new government proposals.It comes after some patients were placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway - designed to relieve suffering - without their relatives' knowledge.The government wants to ensure families are told of life and death decisions. The instruction will be included in a number of proposed changes to the NHS Constitution to be unveiled on Monday." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 Hang on, hang on, this a sodin fraud. The text above says that relatives will be told of the decision, not consulted before it is taken. That is not good enough. It means effectively that there is no change!I have been wondering whether I might wanna go to this place called Youkay but this kind of thing definitely weighs heavily on the negative side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Double post, is there a problem with this forum this evening? Could someone please delete the two double posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote user="Clair"][quote user="NickP"][quote user="Clair"]As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted: Liverpool Care Pathway: Relatives 'must be informed'[/quote] So Clair if one of your relatives was in hospital you wouldn't want to know or care what was going on?[/quote]I don't follow... As you being facetious or provocative?My previous comment clearly stated where I stand and the BBC article supports my statement that "As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted."[/quote] Clair; you don't follow because you don't want to, it was a rhetorical question. As for being facetious or provocative? neither I was just intimating that if one of my relatives was in hospital and extremely ill, I would be in there finding out what was going on. I would also make sure that the patient concerned was treated with care and dignity. The comment from Mr Banana was outrageous and uncalled for, so if your looking for provocative have a word with him? I for one don't think the NHS stoops to murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Terminally ill patients, that means that people are actually dying and suffering.... a lot. Then there is patient confidentiality, whereby the patient's details must not be given to the family, because even when dying, the patient is still a patient. And the family, well, and what if they say no. People can be incredibly stupid, even clever people. And if they say no and say, 'save them', when they can not be saved, but the suffering will be prolonged, it becomes an act of supreme cruelty, selfishness and so removed from real love and caring that I cannot think of a suitable word to describe it. I am for this, I don't believe that the family needs consulting, maybe advising so that they can prepare themselves for the end of life, but that is all. No more.Yes, it is logical........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 [quote user="NickP"][quote user="Clair"][quote user="NickP"][quote user="Clair"]As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted: Liverpool Care Pathway: Relatives 'must be informed'[/quote] So Clair if one of your relatives was in hospital you wouldn't want to know or care what was going on?[/quote]I don't follow... As you being facetious or provocative?My previous comment clearly stated where I stand and the BBC article supports my statement that "As things stand at the moment, relatives are not required to be either being informed or consulted."[/quote] Clair; you don't follow because you don't want to, it was a rhetorical question. As for being facetious or provocative? neither I was just intimating that if one of my relatives was in hospital and extremely ill, I would be in there finding out what was going on. I would also make sure that the patient concerned was treated with care and dignity. The comment from Mr Banana was outrageous and uncalled for, so if your looking for provocative have a word with him? I for one don't think the NHS stoops to murder.[/quote]I fear that money speaks, and that number crunchers might indeed have the means to commit manslaughter. Though they are experts at slip sliding away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Alright woolly justify your comment; with proof that the NHS commits murder for financial gain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.