 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you think parents should be allowed to file DNR on a child under the age of 16 |
| YES |
|
18% |
[ 7 ] |
| NO |
|
81% |
[ 31 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 38 |
|
| Author |
Message |
lucy1
Toucan
Joined: Aug 17, 2007
Posts: 294
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
If she has the cognizance to decide for herself - she should have the right of autonomy, the choice should be hers, no one elses.
there are occasions when parents do need to decide when to stop life resuscitating interventions - so - in my mind it is not a yes and no answer - for this reason I can't vote in your poll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Strapples
Strapplius, God of straps!
Joined: Dec 01, 2007
Age: 17
Posts: 12379
Location: Chicago Area IL
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lucy1 wrote: | If she has the cognizance to decide for herself - she should have the right of autonomy, the choice should be hers, no one elses.
there are occasions when parents do need to decide when to stop life resuscitating interventions - so - in my mind it is not a yes and no answer - for this reason I can't vote in your poll. |
i respect your abstainence from the voting procedures...
it is unknown if she has severe cognitive problems, although just knowing from the news record it does not seem like that due to the fact that cerebral palsy its self does not cause cognitive problems...
_________________
check out my website at http://www.alinssite.info and my forum at http://www.disabledplanet.net my WP threads by clicking below
http://alinssite.iguido.com/Thread_List/Thread_List.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
Gamester
Buracrate in the Making
Joined: Nov 23, 2006
Age: 21
Posts: 2874
Location: Newberg, OR
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Strapples wrote: | | lucy1 wrote: | If she has the cognizance to decide for herself - she should have the right of autonomy, the choice should be hers, no one elses.
there are occasions when parents do need to decide when to stop life resuscitating interventions - so - in my mind it is not a yes and no answer - for this reason I can't vote in your poll. |
i respect your abstainence from the voting procedures...
it is unknown if she has severe cognitive problems, although just knowing from the news record it does not seem like that due to the fact that cerebral palsy its self does not cause cognitive problems... |
The one thing I actually wanted to know, which the article didn't seem to state, if it did and I didn't remember, was how hard hitting the cerebal palsy plus other issues was.
_________________
I don't believe in mercy without it being reciprocated.
I don't judge unless it's necessary.
I believe in the golden rule, except in the case of those who have no standing in my opinion.
I'm all for a world where those with disabilities are viewed as |
|
| Back to top |
|
Strapples
Strapplius, God of straps!
Joined: Dec 01, 2007
Age: 17
Posts: 12379
Location: Chicago Area IL
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gamester wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | lucy1 wrote: | If she has the cognizance to decide for herself - she should have the right of autonomy, the choice should be hers, no one elses.
there are occasions when parents do need to decide when to stop life resuscitating interventions - so - in my mind it is not a yes and no answer - for this reason I can't vote in your poll. |
i respect your abstainence from the voting procedures...
it is unknown if she has severe cognitive problems, although just knowing from the news record it does not seem like that due to the fact that cerebral palsy its self does not cause cognitive problems... |
The one thing I actually wanted to know, which the article didn't seem to state, if it did and I didn't remember, was how hard hitting the cerebal palsy plus other issues was. |
however my decision still stands as no DNR at this point... with what limited data we have there does not appear to be any terminal sub condition along with the cerebral palsy... cerebral palsy its self is not a terminal condition although we do not know if she has some sort of acquired sub disorder along with the cerebral palsy... even then i wouldnt have this kind of DNR on her since it prevents basic medical intervention (CPR/Defibbrilator) i could see a DNR like the kind i have on myself that if my CRS (coma recovery scale) score is very low and i am in a coma for more than 6 months to do a full analysis and if results come that it is not likely i will come out of the coma to pull the plug... my DNR is a more sensible one...
i have this girl in my google news alerts so if any more news comes in i will make sure to post an alert here...
_________________
check out my website at http://www.alinssite.info and my forum at http://www.disabledplanet.net my WP threads by clicking below
http://alinssite.iguido.com/Thread_List/Thread_List.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
AussieBoy
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 05, 2007
Posts: 669
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
YES
_________________
I am my avatar! |
|
| Back to top |
|
LostInSpace
Queen of the Gargoyles
Joined: Apr 17, 2007
Age: 24
Posts: 1785
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Strapples wrote: | | lucy1 wrote: | If she has the cognizance to decide for herself - she should have the right of autonomy, the choice should be hers, no one elses.
there are occasions when parents do need to decide when to stop life resuscitating interventions - so - in my mind it is not a yes and no answer - for this reason I can't vote in your poll. |
i respect your abstainence from the voting procedures...
it is unknown if she has severe cognitive problems, although just knowing from the news record it does not seem like that due to the fact that cerebral palsy its self does not cause cognitive problems... |
Well, in one of the captions on the pictures, it says that the therapist is teaching her to recognize shapes. If a second grader is still learning shapes, she is probably pretty cognitively impaired. Even a cognitively intact second grader probably couldn't understand the implications of a DNR, and I really doubt this kid would, unfortunately. It's all on the parents.
I do disagree with their decision by the way. By signing the DNR, they're basically saying that there is no point to resucitating her. If she can still enjoy life, why allow her to die? I can understand signing a DNR if she had deteriorated to a certain point where she was being resucitated constantly and was never really conscious, but clearly that is not the case. My mom has a kid in her school district (she is a school psychologist) who is anencephalic, meaning the only part of his brain he has is the brainstem. He is on a feeding tube and is obviously unable to communicate, and it's unknown if he understands any of what happens around him, but his family loves him and cares for him very well, despite his frequent, life-threatening seizures (when they go on vacation, they always have to take into account how long it would take to airlift him to a hospital during a seizure). I just don't get why these girl's parents are so ready to give up (apparently- obviously it's not possible to know too much about the situation just from one article).
Last edited by LostInSpace on Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:06 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 57
Posts: 7023
Location: The Emerald Forest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Strapples wrote: | | Spokane_Girl wrote: | | I had troubles following what your post was about. What exactly did Katie's parents do? |
if you read the news story the parents filed for a DNR order... and the DNR got passed in a court of law making it valid!!!  |
I have a DNR order, why? is there something wrong with that?
Merle |
|
| Back to top |
|
LostInSpace
Queen of the Gargoyles
Joined: Apr 17, 2007
Age: 24
Posts: 1785
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | Spokane_Girl wrote: | | I had troubles following what your post was about. What exactly did Katie's parents do? |
if you read the news story the parents filed for a DNR order... and the DNR got passed in a court of law making it valid!!! |
I have a DNR order, why? is there something wrong with that?
Merle |
Only if your parents filed it for you while you were a minor (and assuming they decided it *for* you). That's the issue for this thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 57
Posts: 7023
Location: The Emerald Forest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LostInSpace wrote: | | sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | Spokane_Girl wrote: | | I had troubles following what your post was about. What exactly did Katie's parents do? |
if you read the news story the parents filed for a DNR order... and the DNR got passed in a court of law making it valid!!! |
I have a DNR order, why? is there something wrong with that?
Merle |
Only if your parents filed it for you while you were a minor (and assuming they decided it *for* you). That's the issue for this thread. |
oh, well, no then. My parents committed me to a State Institution that applied electroshock "therapy," so I don't qualify. They didn't have 'DNR' back then.
Merle |
|
| Back to top |
|
skahthic
Phoenix
Joined: May 11, 2007
Posts: 836
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Strapples
Strapplius, God of straps!
Joined: Dec 01, 2007
Age: 17
Posts: 12379
Location: Chicago Area IL
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| skahthic wrote: | I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
i find this to be a pretty absurd DNR too... the fact its being done on someone so young and viable is not acceptable
_________________
check out my website at http://www.alinssite.info and my forum at http://www.disabledplanet.net my WP threads by clicking below
http://alinssite.iguido.com/Thread_List/Thread_List.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 57
Posts: 7023
Location: The Emerald Forest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Strapples wrote: | | skahthic wrote: | I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
i find this to be a pretty absurd DNR too... the fact its being done on someone so young and viable is not acceptable |
Why? Are you of the opinion that a soul only lives one lifetime in a body? Don't you think that colors your response here? If you had another opinion of life and death of the body, don't you think your response might be different?
Merle |
|
| Back to top |
|
Strapples
Strapplius, God of straps!
Joined: Dec 01, 2007
Age: 17
Posts: 12379
Location: Chicago Area IL
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | skahthic wrote: | I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
i find this to be a pretty absurd DNR too... the fact its being done on someone so young and viable is not acceptable |
Why? Are you of the opinion that a soul only lives one lifetime in a body? Don't you think that colors your response here? If you had another opinion of life and death of the body, don't you think your response might be different?
Merle |
i want you to look at that picture... look at it like she is YOUR daughter... i dont know but every time i look at it that way i say i want her to receive any medical care that is necessary provided it does not produce long term bad effects...
she does NOT have a terminal disorder...
terminally ill children DNR ok fine... but when your not terminal and your a child this young a DNR is pretty much unacceptable to me
_________________
check out my website at http://www.alinssite.info and my forum at http://www.disabledplanet.net my WP threads by clicking below
http://alinssite.iguido.com/Thread_List/Thread_List.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 57
Posts: 7023
Location: The Emerald Forest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Strapples wrote: | | sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | skahthic wrote: | I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
i find this to be a pretty absurd DNR too... the fact its being done on someone so young and viable is not acceptable |
Why? Are you of the opinion that a soul only lives one lifetime in a body? Don't you think that colors your response here? If you had another opinion of life and death of the body, don't you think your response might be different?
Merle |
i want you to look at that picture... look at it like she is YOUR daughter... i dont know but every time i look at it that way i say i want her to receive any medical care that is necessary provided it does not produce long term bad effects...
she does NOT have a terminal disorder...
terminally ill children DNR ok fine... but when your not terminal and your a child this young a DNR is pretty much unacceptable to me |
Yes, you have made your own opinions on the girl in the picture very clear, Strapples. However I asked a question about your life view (i.e. one life in one body per soul vs more than one life in another body per soul) and how it drives your current opinion. If you do not care to address my question that is, of course, perfectly OK.
However to answer my question by offering a response calculated to emotionally manipulate the same conclusion that you arrive at will not actually happen with me because I have a different opinion about life (and death) than you do. And to that difference I was offering the question.
thank you,
Merle |
|
| Back to top |
|
Strapples
Strapplius, God of straps!
Joined: Dec 01, 2007
Age: 17
Posts: 12379
Location: Chicago Area IL
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | sinsboldly wrote: | | Strapples wrote: | | skahthic wrote: | I've worked with mentally/physically challenged kids ( and adults). I've worked with the terminally ill, as well.
I do believe in DNR's where appropriate. But not when they are not appropriate.
Katie looks like a smiling, happy girl in the picture. Even I can see that. She does not appear to be suffering in the picture. She may be handicapped, but so are many people. There are many issues here.
If Katie were suffering to the point that resuscitation would only prolong pain/suffering and delay the inevitable ( a death in the near future), I'd say a DNR would be ok. And I HAVE seen kids who have been allowed to die--- but these were kids with terminal cancers/ conditions and such where it would be inhumane to prolong their suffering when death is inevitable. The same goes for adults, too.
Elderly people who "give up" and stop eating ( usually Alzheimer's disease or something similar) and those elderly/not elderly with progressive fatal disorders should also be allowed the right to die if they should wish--- they should also be made aware of the risks involved. CPR done on the ribs of a 97 year old will likely cause multiple fractures of the ribcage and will likely result in hospitalization until death anyway--- reality must be taken into consideration here.
But these are specific instances where CPR/ Resuscitation would have little/no bearing on the outcome and would only prolong pain/suffering.
Katie looks to be happy. She does not appear to be suffering. She has young bones. She does not have a progressive fatal disorder. Why the DNR? |
i find this to be a pretty absurd DNR too... the fact its being done on someone so young and viable is not acceptable |
Why? Are you of the opinion that a soul only lives one lifetime in a body? Don't you think that colors your response here? If you had another opinion of life and death of the body, don't you think your response might be different?
Merle |
i want you to look at that picture... look at it like she is YOUR daughter... i dont know but every time i look at it that way i say i want her to receive any medical care that is necessary provided it does not produce long term bad effects...
she does NOT have a terminal disorder...
terminally ill children DNR ok fine... but when your not terminal and your a child this young a DNR is pretty much unacceptable to me |
Yes, you have made your own opinions on the girl in the picture very clear, Strapples. However I asked a question about your life view (i.e. one life in one body per soul vs more than one life in another body per soul) and how it drives your current opinion. If you do not care to address my question that is, of course, perfectly OK.
However to answer my question by offering a response calculated to emotionally manipulate the same conclusion that you arrive at will not actually happen with me because I have a different opinion about life (and death) than you do. And to that difference I was offering the question.
thank you,
Merle |
sorry... im not much of a spiritualist... so i cant really answer the question...
_________________
check out my website at http://www.alinssite.info and my forum at http://www.disabledplanet.net my WP threads by clicking below
http://alinssite.iguido.com/Thread_List/Thread_List.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
