Putting an old pet to sleep and putting grand dad to sleep?

[~Anastasia~]

My mother suffered multiple brain hemorrhages in an automobile accident in 2001 which put her into a coma. Initially, she was on a breathing machine, without which she would have died...rather, I'd say in hindsight, her body would have died.

I was the legal decision maker, but the doctors never actually put the matter into explicit terms of "there is nothing more to be done but to take her off life support, her sisters (my aunts) would have had nothing to do with that, and I don't think it was legal in Oklahoma anyway. At any rate, removing her from life support at what was then a week or so from the accident was not under consideration.

The body heals itself as best as it can. After a couple more weeks, her brain healed itself well enough to recover autonomic functions--she could be taken off life support, but was otherwise unresponsive and had no frontal lobe activity. According to the doctors, "Her frontal lobes are nothing but scar tissue."

My mother's body survived under the tender care of one of my aunts for another eight years. During that time, her care was essentially that of a newborn baby, although she continued to be completely unresponsive, except for autonomic activity--poke her with a needle, and her arm would finch.

Two of my aunts were convinced she was still conscious in there. But my mother had been an exceedingly vivacious, outgoing, evocative woman. She had run a barbershop, primarily because she liked talking to different people coming in. When I closed down her business affairs, different suppliers around town--simple business acquaintances--men and women-- literally broke into tears hearing of her accident. If if that woman were conscious in that unresponsive body, she was in hell.

But I didn't believe her brain was active. What I was not sure of then, and not sure of now: Where was her spirit? Paul wasn't contemplating such a situation when he said, "to live is Christ and to die is gain." In Paul's time, there was no medical life support, people in that situation merely died.

When her body began to shut down in 2009, it was as much from basic old age as anything else. When she finally died, I could come to a conclusion of where her spirit then was.

If I had the ability to do it again, I'd prefer to choose that she not have been put on life support in the first place or have taken her off quickly, if the extent of brain damage could have been determined soon enough. If God intended to save her, He would, and His glory would be that much brighter having done His miracle without the aid of machines.

Once, however, her body had healed enough to continue functioning on its own, when care was no more extreme than that of a newborn, we were not going to kill her.

Lord, I don't know. Maybe her body still enjoyed the sunlight, like a plant.

I am sorry that you had to go through that. I would never dream of criticizing such decisions either way, or trying to second-guess anyone.

I can see your dilemma.

We really don't know anything about the spirit of a person in such a condition. Who knows, God may have sent her some special comfort. Or she may have already been with him. She could have been aware of the care given her by others. Or she might have had a very long rest.

But really, I don't think we can second guess ourselves either. I know of cases where people did not think they did the right thing, seeing afterwards how it turned out. But every decision was made in love, at the time, and that's all we can expect of ourselves.

God be with you.

 

[SnowyMacie]

Personally, I've made it abundantly clear since I first learned about such things that I do not want to live as "vegetable" or just be living on life support with the only hope being a miracle. Not because I don't believe in miracles, but because I don't want to be that kind of burden on my family.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I would say that refusing life support is not the same thing as assisted suicide.

Using artificial means to prolong life is a personal decision. We are limited in how much we can affect anyway - when a person is dying, they may die despite all medical efforts to the contrary.

But when the body is living on its own, and we purposely kill it - that is another matter, and that is what I would say is wrong.

 

[Armoured]

Well what would be the point of trusting, having faith....etc in God if you just kill yourself/have someone kill you? To let this happen would tell God "Sorry God, I love you but I am going out on my own terms!".

Actually heres a better question.... what do you do with someone whos in a coma and has 0% chance of coming out of it? I seen someone who kept their spouse in a coma state for almost 10 years. Is it a sin to pull the plug or ok?

It's OK to stop active medical procedures to keep the person alive. Note also: no competent medical professional will ever say that anyone has "0% chance" of anything.

 

[Armoured]

A true story: A man fell, hit his head and was in a coma where they said he was brain dead. The family refused to pull the plug. A year later the man awakened and relearned how to walk and talk..... so what if?

God says, "It is appointed unto man once to die (and after that the judgment)"... who are we to shorten someone's life. And as for "assisted suicide" sorry... no way is that right. A person who is contemplating suicide is never in their right mind. Pain medications for unbearable pain? Yes indeed! Helping them end their life because it's so hard? No.

Been there.

I had a stroke 5 years ago, and the initial prognosis was that I'd be a vegetable. That was revised within hours, although I got to spend very scary day and a half "locked in". I'm roughly 98% recovered, hold down a full time job, the whole deal. That said, if I had been in a prolonged vegetative state, I wouldn't have wanted to be kept alive artificially, and if I had been "locked in" for an extended period, the option of euthanasia becomes seriously compelling, assuming my ability to communicate consent.

 

[Armoured]

My mother suffered multiple brain hemorrhages in an automobile accident in 2001 which put her into a coma. Initially, she was on a breathing machine, without which she would have died...rather, I'd say in hindsight, her body would have died.

I was the legal decision maker, but the doctors never actually put the matter into explicit terms of "there is nothing more to be done but to take her off life support, her sisters (my aunts) would have had nothing to do with that, and I don't think it was legal in Oklahoma anyway. At any rate, removing her from life support at what was then a week or so from the accident was not under consideration.

The body heals itself as best as it can. After a couple more weeks, her brain healed itself well enough to recover autonomic functions--she could be taken off life support, but was otherwise unresponsive and had no frontal lobe activity. According to the doctors, "Her frontal lobes are nothing but scar tissue."

My mother's body survived under the tender care of one of my aunts for another eight years. During that time, her care was essentially that of a newborn baby, although she continued to be completely unresponsive, except for autonomic activity--poke her with a needle, and her arm would finch.

Two of my aunts were convinced she was still conscious in there. But my mother had been an exceedingly vivacious, outgoing, evocative woman. She had run a barbershop, primarily because she liked talking to different people coming in. When I closed down her business affairs, different suppliers around town--simple business acquaintances--men and women-- literally broke into tears hearing of her accident. If if that woman were conscious in that unresponsive body, she was in hell.

But I didn't believe her brain was active. What I was not sure of then, and not sure of now: Where was her spirit? Paul wasn't contemplating such a situation when he said, "to live is Christ and to die is gain." In Paul's time, there was no medical life support, people in that situation merely died.

When her body began to shut down in 2009, it was as much from basic old age as anything else. When she finally died, I could come to a conclusion of where her spirit then was.

If I had the ability to do it again, I'd prefer to choose that she not have been put on life support in the first place or have taken her off quickly, if the extent of brain damage could have been determined soon enough. If God intended to save her, He would, and His glory would be that much brighter having done His miracle without the aid of machines.

Once, however, her body had healed enough to continue functioning on its own, when care was no more extreme than that of a newborn, we were not going to kill her.

Lord, I don't know. Maybe her body still enjoyed the sunlight, like a plant.

Thank you for sharing that.

 

[JoeP222w]

I would like to ask what people see is the difference if any between putting an aged pet cat to sleep before it suffers death and putting an advanced geriatric condition gran or gramps to sleep with ketamine?

Man is made in the image of God. Animals are not. Human life is sacred. No one has the right to end someone else's life.

God has granted the right of the State to perform capital punishment for crimes, but that is a judicial action.

 

[JoeP222w]

But if our elderly grandparents are suffering or are demented should they be euthanased like pets? Considering, having their consent, not having it or if they really don't want to leave this life?

We don't get the right to be God.

 

[AvgJoe]

I would like to ask what people see is the difference if any between putting an aged pet cat to sleep before it suffers death and putting an advanced geriatric condition gran or gramps to sleep with ketamine?

We all accept our power to kill animals properly, but does it apply to people too? We will put an animal out of misery if it is badly ill. A strong dose of ketamine and it passes from pain. But if our elderly grandparents are suffering or are demented should they be euthanased like pets? Considering, having their consent, not having it or if they really don't want to leave this life?

Do we express care for people as for animals?

Should even animals be treated better?

God gave humans dominion over the animals ( Genesis 1:26 ). God has dominion over us humans. God alone is sovereign over when and how a person’s death occurs. Job testifies in Job 30:23, “I know you will bring me down to death, to the place appointed for all the living.” Ecclesiastes 8:8 declares, “No man has power over the wind to contain it; so no one has power over the day of his death.” God has the final say over death (see 1 Corinthians 15:26, 54–56; Hebrews 2:9, 14–15; Revelation 21:4). Euthanasia and assisted suicide are man’s attempts to usurp that authority from God.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

In this video a 104 year old scientist in reasonable health is helped to euthanize himself by his grandson.

 

[Shaun Kennedy]

There's a lot to unpack in this question and I can't really do it justice. I've had to make decisions on end of life care for one child and I have another that is unlikely to outlive me, so this is a topic I wrestle with.

One of the first things to note is that we primarily euthanize animals because they reach a point where the cost of keeping them alive is more than what we are willing to give. We could deal with most of the other potential complaints other ways: we can usually remoove suffering through pain killers, etc. But we keep the animal for our benefit, the love and joy they bring us or job they do for us or whatever. Once that's gone, or once it will cost more to keep this one (financially, emotionally, time, whatever) than to replace it, the animal dies.

So when you euthanize someone, at some level you're saying, "You're not worth it any more." I don't think we should treat people like that. I don't think God treats us like that.

That said, we live in a paranoid culture. We are so afraid of addiction that we won't give our strongest pain killers to those that are dying. (Seriously, who cares if you are addicted to heroin for your last year of life?) Pain, uselessness, and idleness will kill your soul no matter if your body lives or not. There does seem to me a point where you are saying, "I want the pain to stop for you. There's only one way to do that."

I've heard suicide described as "a permanent solution to a temporary problem." But if the "temporary" is the same temporary as your life, what's the difference?

If you're in that boat, I don't think you should walk alone. That's what pastors are for. I would never argue with a pastor giving advice to someone in this boat.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Is it really murder though if the person wants to die?

The charge of murder applies to both suicide and the unjustified taking of life. Suffering is not a just cause according to the word of God. In other words, killing self is murder. Killing another without just cause is murder. Killing in self-defense and in war is not murder. Again we have God's word for that.

We don't refer to accidental killings or self-defense as murder, so what about consensual killing if we're just essentially postponing death with medicine?

Using terminology like "consensual" in relation to killing is still murder because the word of God makes no allowances for consent.

If a person goes to the doctor and finds out they have inoperable brain cancer, are they committing suicide if they decide they'd rather have a year of health and happiness instead of trying chemo therapy or some other non-guaranteed treatment that would just make them sicker with the time they have?

Refusing treatment that may or may not work, and that is known to sometimes make things worse, that really is not a question that in any way legitimizes the treatment course as a requirement in order to avoid the charge of suicide. That's about the only real answer to the wrong question.

My personal opinion is that euthanasia is ethical if the person and consents to it is in a healthy and coherent mental state, and there are no other options available other than to just ease their pain and suffering.

When we speak of our personal opinions about something, that mostly is an injection of subjectivity into a topic that has absolutes over which none of us has any control, which therefore tends to be seen as more of an attempt at introducing a battering ram against discussion/debate. Morals/ethics are absolute regardless of personal opinion. Nobody else will have to answer to the Lord for what you hold as your personal opinion. What DOES matter in the end is being right about morals and ethics in relation to God's established absolutes. So, what really is important to you personally....aligning with God's absolutes, or holding to what you personally choose to believe? Just wondering.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I would say that refusing life support is not the same thing as assisted suicide.

Using artificial means to prolong life is a personal decision. We are limited in how much we can affect anyway - when a person is dying, they may die despite all medical efforts to the contrary.

But when the body is living on its own, and we purposely kill it - that is another matter, and that is what I would say is wrong.

It is actually not assisted suicide refers to a doctor giving you a lethal dose of usually pain medicine and you taking it on your own with no assistance other than it being prescribed withholding of life support is simply letting someone die naturally and allowing nature to take its course as opposed to taking any steps to actively cause death.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It is actually not assisted suicide refers to a doctor giving you a lethal dose of usually pain medicine and you taking it on your own with no assistance other than it being prescribed withholding of life support is simply letting someone die naturally and allowing nature to take its course as opposed to taking any steps to actively cause death.

I think we are agreeing.

I think someone asked if it was considered assisted suicide to refuse treatment. And no, we are not morally bound to accept or apply heroic measures to prolong life when the person is dying and does not wish it.

Assisted suicide, by whatever means, is actively ending life. Even if by prescribing medicine and allowing the person to take enough to cause death. (Though personally I think such methods as withholding nourishment and hydration when that is all the body requires to live is also terminating life.)

So I think we are saying the same thing?

 

[SnowyMacie]

The charge of murder applies to both suicide and the unjustified taking of life. Suffering is not a just cause according to the word of God. In other words, killing self is murder. Killing another without just cause is murder. Killing in self-defense and in war is not murder. Again we have God's word for that.



Using terminology like "consensual" in relation to killing is still murder because the word of God makes no allowances for consent.



Refusing treatment that may or may not work, and that is known to sometimes make things worse, that really is not a question that in any way legitimizes the treatment course as a requirement in order to avoid the charge of suicide. That's about the only real answer to the wrong question.



When we speak of our personal opinions about something, that mostly is an injection of subjectivity into a topic that has absolutes over which none of us has any control, which therefore tends to be seen as more of an attempt at introducing a battering ram against discussion/debate. Morals/ethics are absolute regardless of personal opinion. Nobody else will have to answer to the Lord for what you hold as your personal opinion. What DOES matter in the end is being right about morals and ethics in relation to God's established absolutes. So, what really is important to you personally....aligning with God's absolutes, or holding to what you personally choose to believe? Just wondering.

 

[stevevw]

I would like to ask what people see is the difference if any between putting an aged pet cat to sleep before it suffers death and putting an advanced geriatric condition gran or gramps to sleep with ketamine?

We all accept our power to kill animals properly, but does it apply to people too? We will put an animal out of misery if it is badly ill. A strong dose of ketamine and it passes from pain. But if our elderly grandparents are suffering or are demented should they be euthanased like pets? Considering, having their consent, not having it or if they really don't want to leave this life?

Do we express care for people as for animals?

Should even animals be treated better?

I think this is not an easy situation to answer when we consider the many situations where we currently accept that allowing a person to die is OK. Many doctors withhold life-saving support and allow people to die. Are we guilty of not doing everything to preserve life? In war, we justify killing people to stop a dictator from committing evil on other humans. There may be many situations where we allow a person to risk their life for saving others.

When a person volunteers to go into a dangerous situation to avert something bad happening and everyone involved agrees and accept this. What if we decide that the person volunteering to risk their life is determined by whoever is oldest or does not have long to live becuase of some medical problem which may be a fair way to decide compared to a young person who has their whole life ahead of them.

Are they compliant in sending that person to their death? Are we setting a precedent in deciding who should die and who should live. What is the difference between sending a person to their death to save others and switching off a machine to save a person from more suffering? What would Christ do? I somehow could not see him standing in the hospital ward turning a blind eye to the suffering of people with their organs being eaten away through cancer. I think this is not classed as murder but compassion.

This is a hard ethical dilemma as allowing people to dies because of their suffering can be the thin edge of the wedge to allowing people to die for all sorts of reasons such as just being too old and feeling unwanted which may be a temporary state that can be addressed or society no bothering with severely disabled people and feeling it would be better to terminate them.