General Chat

i know this is a very sensitive subject but feel we have to have some comments about what was on the news today.as we have all heard about the little girl in st.marys who is ill and has no chance of survival.the hospital has taken this to court to try and stop her parents from prolonging her life.now alderhay have a case where they are doing the same.i feel that the parents should have their say as the child is theirs.but i really cannot answer whether the doctors are right.like anything in life sometimes actions are wrong and like the mother on todays programme said the little boy was at another hospital and transferred to alderhay because he was making good progress.my argument is if a member of the public took someones life whatever way(euthenasia) they would be tried for murder.or manslaughter which could see them in prison for a long time.but if the courts decide then thats fine.give the parents a say as the children are theirsxxx):

Hi Lisa, It's a difficult moral and ethical issue. But failing to intervene to save a life isn't the same as taking a life so I don't think it could be classed as manslaughter. If the quality of anyone's life is very poor, never likely to get better, and they are in constant pain is it right to keep them alive when nature is saying they should go? I've never been in that position but I would say that parents are not always the best judges of what is right for their children. Doctors have to make difficult life and death decisions every day. Keeping one person alive in a special care unit may mean others die because there is no bed. I wouldn't want to make those decisions. Gwynne

I do agree Gwyneth, It is a difficult decision for anyone to make and I think the essential point here is the quality of life for the little one. She is reputed to be in constant pain and blind and deaf. I think the question is, what is kindest for her? Should this suffering continue? I am just so glad that I am not faced with such a dilema and my heart goes out to all who have this dreadful decision to make. Rose

Lisa I agree with Gwynneth's remarks, but i think the whole issue needs to be put into context. The language of the media does nothing but dramatise these cases and make out that Doctors are murderers. what actually happens is that all active treatment, ie antibiotics, painkillers, fluids etc. continue, no one is asking to withdraw Treatment. All the hospital are saying that when the heart stops (as it inevitably will) that CPR/resusitation does not take place. This decision is only come to when a medical team (that includes Drs, Nurses, Therapists ) all agree that either a) it would be futile and/or b) it would not be in the Pts best interest ie quality of life is poor. This decision is discussed with relatives and sometimes the Patients themselves. It is only when the Dr feels that the Parents/relatives do not have the patients best interest at heart that such a monumentous step of taking it to court happens. Bev

I made a dession three years ago to have my mother's life support turned off she had no quality of life and i know that this is what she would have wanted. Margaret

When my husband went in for heart surgery he actually said to the Dr he did not want to be resusitated, the Dr gently pointed out that during surgery he would be on bypass and his heart effectively stopped, if he (the dr) complied with my hubbys wishes it would mean he could not restart it at the end of the operation! Needless to say hubby saw his point of view, but he still insisted that he not be put on life support should the worse happen and they could not resusitate him Bev

Our son was cared for in NeoNatal Intensive Care and the staff were marvellous - we trusted their decisions completely because they knew so much more than us. When he was born, there was only one ventilator at the hospital. He was put on it temporarily but then moved miles away to another hospital which had a vacant one. We really felt for any doctor who was faced with two sick babies and only one ventilator - how on earth would you 'choose' between equally sick babies? And how would you live with your decision? I admire medical staff immensely and most definitely wouldn't want to make the decisions they are faced with daily. Mandy :) PS, we were very, very lucky and our son recovered.

Sadly, there's no right and wrong here. As people have already said, this is an incredibly difficult decision for the doctors, and certainly not one that would be taken lightly. Equally though, you can understand the parents clinging onto hope. Having had a child in SCBU for the first 10 weeks of his life, I've been through some scary moment, but thankfully never anything so extreme as having to make a decision as to whether or not to resuscitate. I don't know how I'd be able to make that decision - I don't think anyone can until they're put in that position. But I like to think that my top priority would be my childs wellbeing, and being in constant pain with no chance of improvement is no life at all. Like others have said, I cannot speak highly enough of the staff that we worked with, especially those at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Treliske.

I do agree with you Lisa, but I dont know whether you are talking about the little 11 month girl that went to court last week. I felt it was the parents right to keep her alive, but after reading about her it probably would be for the best. She is blind death and apparently in a lot of pain and have been like this for 11 months. I know it is very very sad but she has a lot of problems and if she is suffering perhaps it is her time to go. I dont know what to think I keep saying yes it is right that the doctors should not resussitate, and then I think no those poor parents.

Hello Lisa, I think the others have covered this very difficult ethical issue extremely well. Having worked in the NHS, I can sympathise with the doctors as well as the parents. As someone has said, part of the problem in today's modern communications climate is that the media always want to hike a personal crisis into a national melodrama with goodies and baddies. I do wish they'd back off and simply report the actual news, rather than their interpretation of it! The phrase comes to mind from the doctors' Hippocratic oath, "shall not strive officiously to keep alive". In plain English this means not trying to prolong life artificially & indefinitely when it's clearly not in the ultimate best interests of the patient, and can often prolong suffering as well, both for the patient and their relatives. Still not easy to resolve, I'm sure must be reviewed on an individual basis (ie no blanket regulation can apply), and our hearts go out to the parents, whatever the outcome. Philip

Do we ask too much of our National Health Service? Medical Science has progressed so far that there is not much that they are incapable of doing, even to the extent of ripping out ones innards and replacing them. It seems to me a pity that due to this progress and research there is little money left to carry out the simpler operations. My heart goes out to the THOUSANDS who are waiting years for something like a Hip Replacement, while Specialists are spending millions on new treatments for relatively rare conditions which weren't even recognised when I was a lad. And then, when the treatment fails, we are asking solicitors if we have a case to sue.

Just read this and although difficult, want to reply with my thoughts. My daughter Ellie was in NICU at St Mary's where baby Charlotte is now. She was born at about the same gestation and was only a little bigger (1lb 4oz). Ellie also had Down Syndrome (we knew she probably would). Ellie didnt need ventilating, she just had help on and off with a cpap and was out of her incubator aged 7 days for a cuddle without any breathing assistance. She was remarkably well until 25 days old when she developed NEC, a bowel condition common in tiny prem babies. She could have been transferred to another hospital for an operation, but she might not have survived the journey let alone the operation. We were dreading making that decision, but it was taken out of our hands when Ellie deteriorated rapidly and we lost her 2 days later. We do not know how badly Ellie was affected by Downs, we do not know what other problems she would have had as a result of her early arrival, but we do know that the hospital and doctors did everything they could for her. We will be eternally grateful for the short time we had with our daughter, and are fully aware that even a few years ago she probably would not have survived. I agree with previous comments that decisions like the ones in the press lately are not taken lightly, they are only reached when there will be no quality of life should the baby survive. Although parents should be consulted at every stage, and kept informed, I feel that they should accept the medical advice which is given in the best interests of the baby. They are not talking about withdrawing treatment, just of not resuccitating. It is a horrible thing, and I would not wish anybody to have to go through it, but sadly it is something that has to be faced. Both of these parents know they have done the best they can for their children, and that they have fought for them all the way. I've lost my way with this message, but Im sure you will get my drift......sometimes it is kinder to let them go, surrounded by the love of their families, to another life free of pain. Sue

The ethical and emotional aspects of this case have been discused at length on here. Could I add a more detatched comment, for discusion rather than as an opinion. As this case has gone to court the descition MAY have been taken out of others hands. If the judge descides that the medical staff must continue treatment then every subsequent case will now where they stand. If the descision is that the doctors can withdraw treatment then in efect nothing will have changed. Each case will have to be handled as those involved think best. But at least they know they have the choise. Bob

i agree the parent do have a right.but there again so does the child.to live a normal and happy life with no painxxxx(:

Very sensitive issue. Apart from the brilliant comments that everyone has made so far, I've had 2 miscarriages and sometimes wonder what quality of life our two would have had should the pregnancies have continued (though I don't dwell on this, thankfully). If, presented with the same scenario as on the news, would I be able to let them go? Equally, I would probably feel extremely selfish about wanting them to live, albeit a poor quality life. What a difficult issue. Glenys.