Feeding tubes

[stone]

Let's say your grandmother was unable to eat and would live longer if she was put on a feeding tube. Would you put her on a feeding tube or let her die?

 

[Gwendolyn]

Moral theology necessitates a feeding tube. Refusing the basics of life - sustenance - under any circumstance is considered gravely immoral.

 

[stone]

I feel angry that my aunts and uncle do not have my grandmother on a tube. They're just waiting for her to die. I know that she could live for years, possibly, or recover with a tube. Her body needs food to gain strength.

 

[Michie]

Feeding tube.

 

[Genersis]

Err, more information on the situation would be helpful.

It would be a decision for my gran to make, not me.

If she was, for whatever reason, unable to make the decision, then quality of life would likely be the deciding factor.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

To me, food is a necessity of life, withholding food and water is actively hastening death. One would not starve a pet or livestock, one should not starve a loved one.

Likewise, removing a feeding tube or a hydrating IV is also actively hastening death.

Removing a something like a respirator which is artificially maintain life is a different thing, but one would need to determine that not only is there no chance of the persons quality of life improving, but that there no chance of recovery.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

Feeding tube. When my grandfather was dying my family actually had to raise cain at the hospital for him to get a feeding tube. He died a couple of days later anyway, but he didn't die hungry.

 

[Antigone]

Depends. If someone is so far gone that their body will refuse food even through a feeding tube I wouldn't bother. It'd just increase their suffering and would probably shorten their lifespan even further.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Feeding tube.


Respirator should be removed if the brain is flat lined - then it is 'keeping someone alive' - but if they are conscious and aware and have brain function - then no. [IF AFTER testing them they cannot breathe without it]

Feeding tube is not extraordinary care - it is ordinary care.

IN the case of brain not functioning - respirator only keeps the body alive for so long - it becomes extraordinary care.

Needless to say in my own experience with my dad - even with the respirator - his bodily functions began to shut down. [His EEG was flat lined] So the respirator wasnt doing anything but giving some oxygen to the cells- however without the brain who is the 'center' of the bodily functions - not working at all - its not going to matter at all if the respirator is on- the body cannot function without the brain and begins death slowly.

 

[benedictaoo]

I had to agree to put my mom on one and they aren't as simple and nice as I'm sure those with no experience in this think they are, who will actually find the nerve to argue with me about it.

I did it because I had to give her the chance to recover which she didn't.

People aren't supposed to be on feeding tubes. That is not how God made us to work. We are not meant to lye in a bed either. The body breaks down, the organs give out. The nutrition a person receives is in no way the same as eating whole foods. a person can not live indefinitely on a feeding tube.

For me to do that again would depend on the reason they needed it and the outcome.

 

[Fantine]

When my father (the 'ironman') was in his mid-nineties, he developed the inability to swallow. He had always been physically and mentally strong, and, considering his age, was doing well in his mid-nineties.

Despite the Catholic hospital's trying to discourage him, he chose to have a feeding tube. At the time he had the surgery he had been in the hospital for several weeks--with IV's, etc.

I think part of the reason was that my sister, with whom he had lived and to whom she was so devoted, was so upset.

I felt it was his decision, and I wanted him to do what he wanted to do. After all, he was the ironman, and he was of sound mind, and he was a happy person with a happy life living at home with some help (until the hospitalization).

He did really well for about 5 days after the tube was inserted, but his arm began swelling with the IV. Concerned about a blood clot, they gave him a blood thinner. The blood thinner caused a small ulcer that had existed in his stomach to bleed. He died a few days later.

In retrospect, I think that it would have been better for him not to have had the surgery which just made his last days more difficult and uncomfortable.

He was the iron man. He had never been in a hospital until he was in his 70's (when he had an infected tear duct and had his tear sac removed.) He was never hospitalized again until he broke his shoulder at 92 and needed surgery, hospitalization, and rehab.

He had had a wonderful life, and was emotionally, physically, and spiritually ready to go.

BTW, if someone is really near death, they can receive nourishment through a naso-gastric tube--it's just not a long term solution. My father received that for a short time.

 

[MKJ]

There is not enough information in the OP.

In general, yes, food is basic. Sometimes however a feeding tube is not appropriate. It is invasive and if someone is actively dying, it can be an offense against dignity and charity.

 

[Michie]

To me, food is a necessity of life, withholding food and water is actively hastening death. One would not starve a pet or livestock, one should not starve a loved one.

Likewise, removing a feeding tube or a hydrating IV is also actively hastening death.

Removing a something like a respirator which is artificially maintain life is a different thing, but one would need to determine that not only is there no chance of the persons quality of life improving, but that there no chance of recovery.

Amen.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Food is not extraordinary care. Shoving a tube down someone's throat into their stomach to feed them might be, depending on the circumstances. It would depend on my grandmother's state and whether or not there was a chance that she would recover if she had a feeding tube. If it's only going to extend her life by a matter of hours or days, it might not be worth it to add that much extra discomfort.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

There are a lot of situations where putting an elderly person on a feeding tube, would be doing more harm than good.

My mother, who passed away last August, couldn't keep food down, and she stopped eating.

First off, there are two types of feeding tubes. One, is surgically implanted through the side of the abdomen. This type the person has to be strong enough to survive the surgery. The other, is through the nose and into the stomach, which is less invasive, but more uncomfortable to the person. Some people just don't handle it well, and there's the possibility of the person who can't keep food down, to aspirate into their lungs, everything that was put into their stomach. Should this happen, death isn't far.

So, the family has to weigh the situation like my family did. My mother couldn't speak for herself, and her health was so poor, her heart had stopped several times, we just told the doctor that we wanted to let
her go naturally, but keep her comfortable, which is what we did.

As I understand it, it was leaked that Pope John Paul II did not have a feeding tube, and this created controversy to the point that others now say he was fed with a feeding tube. Who knows.

For myself, if my health is so poor that using a feeding tube will done nothing other than delay my natural death, just let me go. After all, heaven is far better than being here in a nursing home having liquid food shoved down your throat.

Jim

 

[catholicbybirth]

My grandparents are all dead. My father is 85 yo. If for some reason he couldn't swallow, I would say to insert a feeding tube.

My mother died 20+ years ago. I would never have thought to have the doctor insert a feeding tube. She was dying with cancer that had started in her breast and had metastasized all over her insides. A few weeks before she died, I had cooked a modest supper. She couldn't even eat one pea. She said she wasn't hungry. My dad got mad and said she had to eat something. I'm thinking the cancer had eaten away her stomach. A feeding tube would have be stupid.

Janice

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

It's an issue for me

Once you put a feeding tube in you give up control of medical decisions for your loved ones.

If you attempt to remove it, for almost any reason, you get into several legal entanglements with government.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Yes, I would put her on a feeding tube.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Depends. If someone is so far gone that their body will refuse food even through a feeding tube I wouldn't bother. It'd just increase their suffering and would probably shorten their lifespan even further.

There is not enough information in the OP.

In general, yes, food is basic. Sometimes however a feeding tube is not appropriate. It is invasive and if someone is actively dying, it can be an offense against dignity and charity.

<snip> If it's only going to extend her life by a matter of hours or days, it might not be worth it to add that much extra discomfort.

There are a lot of situations where putting an elderly person on a feeding tube, would be doing more harm than good.

My mother, who passed away last August, couldn't keep food down, and she stopped eating.

First off, there are two types of feeding tubes. One, is surgically implanted through the side of the abdomen. This type the person has to be strong enough to survive the surgery. The other, is through the nose and into the stomach, which is less invasive, but more uncomfortable to the person. Some people just don't handle it well, and there's the possibility of the person who can't keep food down, to aspirate into their lungs, everything that was put into their stomach. Should this happen, death isn't far.

So, the family has to weigh the situation like my family did. My mother couldn't speak for herself, and her health was so poor, her heart had stopped several times, we just told the doctor that we wanted to let
her go naturally, but keep her comfortable, which is what we did.

As I understand it, it was leaked that Pope John Paul II did not have a feeding tube, and this created controversy to the point that others now say he was fed with a feeding tube. Who knows.

For myself, if my health is so poor that using a feeding tube will done nothing other than delay my natural death, just let me go. After all, heaven is far better than being here in a nursing home having liquid food shoved down your throat.

Jim

Very good points, one would have to rely on expert advice and weigh all the facts. If death is imminent, there is little point, but if it was days off...

 

[MKJ]

Very good points, one would have to rely on expert advice and weigh all the facts. If death is imminent, there is little point, but if it was days off...

Even days would be questionable in some cases I think. It can take a while for the body to shut down, it can take days. A surgery is not a neutral thing, it is invasive, it impacts quality of life, it can cause death itself, either immediately or through infection. A tube through the throat or nose is only a short term solution, it is not comfortable, it can prevent talking.

People who are dying are often not only unable to eat, they may not really want to eat. This may be something to fight against if there is some idea that there will be recovery of substantial quality time gained. But when it is part of an inevitable journey to death, maybe it is not something to fight against - it is the natural course of things.

I get the impression sometimes that people think a feeding tube is the same as spoon feeding someone, or even placing a meal in front of them. It isnt though, it is a much more active thing to do, it is an unnatural way for the body to work. That is not necessarily bad - it can be a blessing - but it is different.