|
|
||||||||
Having faced the situation described in "Questions Concerning the Goodness of Hastening Death" (May 2006: 312314) the very weekend I read the article, I had a vehement reaction to it. The author seemed to assume that patients, families, and health-care providers function at a level of ignorance that can be overcome only by research and advanced degrees. True, many people are unable to talk about death before theyre confronted with a life-threatening illness. But many patients and their families incorporate religious beliefs, cultural mores, knowledge about their disease process, and personal values into decisions about how death should be approached.
As a patient advocate I strive to develop relationships with patients and their families that will make me privy to the process by which decision making occurs, without imposing my own beliefs. As I have become more experienced at the bedside, I have rethought calling certain actions "withdrawing care" and identified actions as interventions in the face of redirection of the plan of care. In end-of-life circumstances, I reassure families that the intensity of care will not change, even if the goals of care do.
The minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour family experience of death cannot be dissected by a cerebral dialogue like Pascals Gamble. After 30 years of nursing, mostly in critical care, I feel that no death has ever been the same. The tone of this article devalues knowledge gained from experience, and the rhetoric certainly depersonalizes this basic human event.
Garland, Tex
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |