Is removing life support against your faith?

Source CTV.CA

Quote:

The case of a family's fight to keep their 84-year-old father on life support against the wishes of a Winnipeg hospital will go to trial, after a judge ruled that doctors should not have "the final say."

In the meantime, Samuel Golubchuk, an Orthodox Jew, will remain on life support at Grace Hospital, connected to a feeding tube and ventilator.

"We are grateful for the decision the judge made -- not only for my father, but for all the elderly people and disabled people," son Percy Golubchuk told reporters.

Doctors at the facility have claimed that Golubchuk has minimal brain function and that his chances for recovery are slim.

But Golubchuk's adult children argue that taking their father off of life support goes against their faith. They say hastening their father's death is a sin under their Orthodox Jewish faith.

"Doctors don't know everything," said Percy Golubchuk. "God is the major doctor."

Justice Perry Schulman granted an injunction almost three months ago -- allowing Golubchuk's ventilator connection and feeding tube to remain.

Schulman ruled Wednesday that the hospital has no avenues to mediate the dispute, so the case must now go to trial, for which he will make himself available as soon as possible. Until the outcome, Golubchuk will remain on life support.

"...it is not settled in law that ... the physician has the final say," said Schulman.

Under guidelines established by the College of Physicians two weeks ago, doctors in Manitoba were given new rules about how to decide to take someone off of life support. The new rules say that doctors must consult family members if they can't communicate with the patient, but the ultimate decision is up to doctors about when to take someone off life support. The family, however, must be given a four-day notice before treatment is ended.

Lawyer Neil Kravetsky, who represents the Golubchuk family, said the College should revise their guidelines.

"I think the College was irresponsible in issuing their directive to doctors before this decision was made," he said.

Kravetsky also said the patient's children understand that their father's chances for recovery are not good. But he noted late last year that the family strongly believes that as long as his heart is beating and he has brain activity he should be kept alive.

Golubchuk has been in hospital since Oct. 26. He had a pre-existing brain injury from a fall in 2003 that resulted in the removal of part of his brain. The hospital has said in the past that the decision to remove Golubchuk from the ventilator has nothing to do with freeing up resources, but was made strictly on medical grounds.

But Prof. Arthur Schafer, a medical ethicist, said such an issue should be addressed.

"If we fill the intensive care unit with patients for whom there will be no benefit, then there wouldn't be places for those who need it," he said.

This man has little brain activity and has little chance of recovery, he's just laying there oblivious of the world around him.

If this family thinks that God is the one to decide your time, then the life support should be removed, after all it is not God that's keeping him alive now, it's machines created by humans.

So what do you think?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Acacia

I theoretically wouldn't want to "kill" my vegetative mother on the desperate hope that she might recover. It wouldn't sit right with me, especially knowing that there was technology to prevent the death.

I would not either, but it would depend on what the patient would want, this is why living will are so important.

I am not sure if the government is paying for the life support now because of the fact he's not getting better, even though the doctors recommended removing the life support they cannot do it with out the family's permission.

So we have a old guy who has already lived his life, he is in bed as a vegetable because his kids are too selfish to let god take him, they said that only god can decide when it is a person's time to go, by keeping him on man-made life-support in a way deifying their god isn't it? That is the only logic that is confusing me, but what they do is still none of my business, they seem to be able to pay for it, but their money can only last for so long.

The only thing that I am concerned about is this guy is taking up a ICU bed, what if there is an emergency and that bed is needed for someone who can recover?

There's nowhere I can't reach.