MichaelFilo Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 I mean to say, whatever isn't available to cure someone without some sort of human intervention is extraordinary. Basically, if it doesn't grow or doesn't walk, it's extraordinary. As far as I know, there has been no infalliable statement about the subject. Just an encylical (maybe?). I think it was Human Vitae (although, I maybe wrong). I'm not terribly knowledgable about the subject either. God bless, Mikey
Socrates Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Nov 13 2005, 09:34 PM']I mean to say, whatever isn't available to cure someone without some sort of human intervention is extraordinary. Basically, if it doesn't grow or doesn't walk, it's extraordinary. [right][snapback]787656[/snapback][/right] [/quote] ???? This post makes no sense!
Socrates Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 (edited) [double post] Edited November 14, 2005 by Socrates
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Nov 13 2005, 09:34 PM']I mean to say, whatever isn't available to cure someone without some sort of human intervention is extraordinary. Basically, if it doesn't grow or doesn't walk, it's extraordinary. [right][snapback]787656[/snapback][/right] [/quote] ??? but with that logic, feeding tubes would be extraordinary, since they require human intervention. Plus the stuff they use for tube feedings isn't like normal food. They don't just puree a cheeseburger and put it through a tube. It's pretty high-tech. I don't understand why it's OK for my friend's dad to abandon his wife and kids and stop dialysis, but it's bad to stop someone's tube feedings? To me, the difference was that Terri Sciavo didn't have a choice, but my friend's dad had a choice. Food and water are ordinary, but I'm not seeing how food delivered through a gastrostomy tube is not extraordinary.
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 13 2005, 09:44 PM']???? This post makes no sense! [right][snapback]787666[/snapback][/right] [/quote] yeah, it confused me too... glad to know I wasn't the only one
jasJis Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 photo, I think it's a gray area for this particualr case. Suicide, as defined by the Church, would be the intentional taking of one's life. On the otherhand, we are accorded the right and responsibility to make our own choice when deciding what 'extraodinary means' are used to keep us alive. Extraodinary would be what is beyond normal care and medical help. Food, water, basic care. It is the person recieving the treatments choice to evaluate the effects and demands on themselves and family and decide whether to continue or not. If the father solely was to choose to cease dialysis because of purely selfish reasons, then it's suicide. If it was a mixed bag or reasons (which it seems to have been), then leave it to Gods mercy and justice to know and judge correctly.
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 I suppose so... I don't like gray areas.
philothea Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 There might also be some detail in the effect. Avoiding a feeding tube means the patient starves to death. No one should starve to death. Same for removing an IV. No one should die of dehydration. Avoiding dialysis means dying of kidney failure. This is pretty common. Everyone will die of kidney failure eventually if they live long enough. (this is kind of a depressing topic)
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='philothea' date='Nov 13 2005, 10:33 PM']There might also be some detail in the effect. Avoiding a feeding tube means the patient starves to death. No one should starve to death. Same for removing an IV. No one should die of dehydration. Avoiding dialysis means dying of kidney failure. This is pretty common. Everyone will die of kidney failure eventually if they live long enough. (this is kind of a depressing topic) [right][snapback]787713[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Not everyone died of kidney failure. While eventually our bodies all will stop functioning, kidney failure isn't the cause of all death. I guess I've been kind of a depressing person lately.
philothea Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='photosynthesis' date='Nov 13 2005, 10:46 PM']Not everyone died of kidney failure. While eventually our bodies all will stop functioning, kidney failure isn't the cause of all death. I guess I've been kind of a depressing person lately. [right][snapback]787729[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Sorry, no, I mean that the kidneys (like any organ) fail eventually, if you're lucky enough to avoid being killed by anything else. Starvation shouldn't ever cause anyone's death. And you haven't been depressing at all.
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 [quote name='philothea' date='Nov 13 2005, 10:52 PM']Sorry, no, I mean that the kidneys (like any organ) fail eventually, if you're lucky enough to avoid being killed by anything else. Starvation shouldn't ever cause anyone's death. And you haven't been depressing at all. [right][snapback]787736[/snapback][/right] [/quote] thanks
MichaelFilo Posted November 14, 2005 Posted November 14, 2005 What I mean is that a feeding tube does not have to be accepted. Nor does an IV. When the human faculties ordinarly used to achieve an action are not sufficient in completing their task, then the natural course of death is a viable allowance. No one should be forced (against their will) to receive any treatment that would keep someone alive when they could not do it in an ordinary fashion. If Terry said she didn't want the tubes, she shouldn't of had to stay on them (although, she never said she didn't). If someone doesn't want dialysis, then they shouldn't be forced to receive it. If someone doesn't want to eat food, then they are committing suicide (unless you happen to be one of the more fasting-oriented saints who went on for long long periods of time without food). What I mean to say is, a feeding tube isn't natural to a human person. Neither is receiving a dialysis. I do not mean to say that we should reject medicine and treatment. No, thats also wrong. I am saying that no one should be forced to accept them. The body was given a number of ways to heal itself. Most people, however, choose to receive life-saving treatment. That is a good thing, because it shows the fruit of the labor of many doctors and scientist to achieve treatments. I'm just saying, any intervention from another human being is extraordinary (the body is sufficient in taking care of itself in most cases). God bless, Mikey
photosynthesis Posted November 14, 2005 Author Posted November 14, 2005 so if I become unable to feed myself, and I don't want a feeding tube, then it's totally cool if I choose to die of starvation? I don't know about that...
Guest Rick777 Posted November 15, 2005 Posted November 15, 2005 I think sadly it may be suicide, is dialysis such an extraordinary means? It may not be, but I sorta have an inkling it was suicide.
photosynthesis Posted November 15, 2005 Author Posted November 15, 2005 [quote name='Rick777' date='Nov 15 2005, 12:01 AM']I think sadly it may be suicide, is dialysis such an extraordinary means? It may not be, but I sorta have an inkling it was suicide. [right][snapback]789327[/snapback][/right] [/quote] my friend Peter (the son) would have agreed with you.
Guest Rick777 Posted November 15, 2005 Posted November 15, 2005 yah, you know you want to say no but its just that feeling is there like its wrong.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now