It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Coma patient allowed to die after 17 years

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Coma patient allowed to die after 17 years


www.all.linenews.com

Rome, Italy (AHN) - An Italian woman in coma for 17 years died Monday from starvation and dehydration at a clinic in the northeastern Italian city of Udine after doctors disconnected her feeding tube.

Eluana Englaro, 38, died as senators debated on a bill outlawing food deprivation on a patient in a bid to prevent her mercy killing. Health Minister Maurizio Sacconi announced Englaro's death to senators attending an emergency session in parliament in front of national TV cameras.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
There are so many issues with this case. It raises the euthenasia debate again, but it also leads me to ask how long is too long for a coma patient. 17 years is a long time, and with the way we are making medical advancements, it is quite possible to cure most ailments given enough time, but really what quality of life would it be not only for the patients and thier family while they wait but also for the patient should they ever recover?

www.all.linenews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   
The girl told her father at the age of 14 after witnessing a horrible death of someone else, that she did not want to ever be kept on life support.
She got in a horrible accident, went into a comma and was in a vegative state for 17years - only kept alive by life support.

The father fought with the Vatican and PM for years and they would not allow the plug to be pulled.



Englaro's father had caused a stir in Italy as pro-life advocates, the Vatican and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi opposed his bid to euthanize her daughter.


Horrible situation for him and now maybe he can be at peace. Well as much peace as one can be after loosing their child. Bless him


Some additional sources: www.usatoday.com...

[edit on 2/9/2009 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
So after 17 years of what may or may not have been a hellish time for this woman they have finally allowed her to die?


This is exactly the reason I want the right to have a living will that says if I am about to die and only medical care will save my life I'd rather die. But apparently I'm nuts for wanting a natural end to my life rather than being preserved forever in a pickle jar.



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
I think that this poor woman suffered way to long and if it were me, I'd want an overdose of something 17 yrs ago that would have put me out of my misery.

[edit on 9-2-2009 by Clark W. Griswold]



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
That is exactly what I am thinking. They say there is brain function and the coma patient is 'aware' but that would just make it so much worse for me.

For the first weeks or even months your loved ones may offer some stimulation but after 17 years it would get a little tired for them.

You would go insane if you knew what was going on around and not be able to interact, or have something to focus on and think about.

On the other hand if there is no brain function, any capacity you had would deteriorate after time.

If I knew there was some kind of treatment being worked on and was close to trial I would want to wait, but to wait indefinately "just in case" is not for me.



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 02:18 AM
link   
she is out of sight but not out of mind



posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 04:45 AM
link   
There is something very important to clarify about this case: Eluana was NOT just in coma, but in a state that in italian is called Stato vegetativo (vegetative state), which is an evolution of coma. What they call to be "aware" is some brain activity, but this doesn't mean that the patient feels pain, emotions and so on: on the contrary, when the brain cells which are in charge to transmit the signals of pain are dead, there is no way to feel pain, according to science: it's basically some veggie that you have to give water and food every now and then, being aware that she won't never wake up.
What raised the issue in Italy is that there is a law that warrants to everyone the right to refuse a medical treatment [more infos here ] (for example a month ago a woman refused to get her leg amputated, she died because of that but nothing has happened with media), another example are Jehovah witnesses, who have the right to refuse even blood transfusion, no matter if this brings them to die.
The case of Eluana was different, because what was being debated was whether to continue to feed her or not: since many think that to feed artificially someone is not a medical procedure, and since she expressed the will (in case she would find herself in such conditions) to refuse every possible medical assistance, her father had to aim to tribunals the issue, and a judge, the highest in degree, decided that he was right (unappealable verdict): basically he knew that his daughter would have preferred to die rather than "living" that way, he knew that there was a law warranting that right, but at the same time a political side of Italy (the majority, endorsed, supported and put under the pressure by the Vatican) started claming that it would have been a murder, euthanasia and stuff like that.
In Italy there are 2600 people in the same (more or less) conditions of Eluana, and now the government is going to issue a law that will force the artificial feeding, regardless the will of the patient: the president of the republic already refused to sign the first version of the law, because first was not urgent (since involving at least 2600 cases), second it was in breach of the previous mentioned law which warrants the right to refuse a specific type of medical assistance. BUt the next version of the law won't need his signature so it will be approved for sure.
The biggest issue is that who is deciding on this matter have no clue about technical, scientific, politic, moral and emotive facets of the problem: they are just riding the horse sent to them by the Vatican, hoping to get the votes of those who believe that to live like a veggie can be called human life. I don't think it's human life and anyway law is law, but i respect who think different from me.


[edit on 11/2/2009 by internos]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join