a 5 year old boy drowns in his home swiming pool but is rescued by the father in 6 minuits but is brain dead. he calls the ambulance and the paramedic has 2 choices in his mind. CPR can make the kid live but he will be a vegitable for the rest of his life. failing to give him CPR means he will die quickly.
if you were the father what would you decide, because this really happened to a friend of mine. (the father wanted the kid to live but now after 4 years he is still a vegitable)
does a human life has any meaning if it has lost all its quality, or does it mean quantity?
2006-07-19 02:39:46 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
As a Reincarnationist I'm very much aware that we are not our bodies, that the body is distinct from the essence of who we really are. The body has intelligence on its own and an amazing survival system, and it can function "without" us, especially when medical science keeps it alive. Your friend's son is not in that physical body.
The dilemma with the question you ask is that we can't always know, at first, if the body has outlived its reason for being alive.
2006-07-19 02:47:30 · answer #1 · answered by Sweetchild Danielle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Part of me would rather see the poor little guy die than live as a vegetable. The other part remembers a similar story, where the parents were told the child would be brain dead, but she's not. Not even any sign of brain damage. So, this little girl got a miracle. Its just a shame all children can't have a miracle, but that's life. So, while I'd have the miracle story in my head, I'd probably do the CPR, but if they child turned out to be totally brain dead, I wouldn't let years go by being kept alive by machines. It would be time to pull the plug. Guantity means nothing without guality.
2006-07-19 03:07:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not think it makes any difference. If the father would have let the child die it would not have been a sin because it would have been a natural death. The child will be saved into the kingdom of heaven due to his age when he lost his ability to chose no matter how old he lives in a vegetative state. The Father is sure to get blessings from the Lord for trying to save his son in the long run. I do not know what I would do in that case for sure but I think I would have also tried to save the child and hoped for the lord to provide a miracle. Once in a while we have to make fast choices that impact our lives for ever. That is the best reason I know to live a worthy life, so as to have the Holy Ghost's influence when we need it.
2006-07-19 02:56:46 · answer #3 · answered by saintrose 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How is this a religous question? It is a humane question. I would not think base on anyones beliefs rather or not they have need to decide. It comes down to same decision a love one must make to turn off life support. I believe in God. I do not think I would be punished by God if I chose to not continue CPR. This happens everyday in the medical field. That is why people have DNR's . It is hard chose for a parent to make and I hope that I personally do not have to make the decision. So to answer your question I would be for the quanity of life. The child had five years of memories for his parents. The child will forever be five years old to the parents. I am not saying the lost of the child is a easy thing and does take healing. Just think what kind of memories do they have with the child now. He is alive yes! I am sure the memories before the accident is greater.
2006-07-19 02:56:20 · answer #4 · answered by bobbiericky 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Technology is so advanced today.
From what you have written--IF he is a TRUE "vegetable," the boy is dead; he died 4 years ago.
There IS a difference between purposefully taking a life and artificially prolonging a life.
Let's compare the child in your story with another child, but let's take one that died a few hours ago. If you take a body that has been dead for a few hours, you can "bring it to life."
We can use a pacemaker to make the heart beat. You can give IV drugs to make a person have a blood pressure. We can make the person "breathe" using a ventilator. We can give them nutrition via a feeding tube. We can create a set of vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, respiration rate, etc) for this non-living thing.
That's really no different from the child who is brain dead in your story. In reality, the measures I wrote would not sustained the body for very long. But the child in your story is not going to live forever - none of us are. It's best to give to God what is God's.
Other medical cases may be different. Each has to be considered separately, and I am just going only on what you have told me.
(Note, this does not justify abortion, which is an entirely separate issue. "Heroic and excessive" measures to prolong a life that has died naturally is wrong and unnatural. Abortion is also an unnatural process, one that takes a life.)
2006-07-19 03:25:05 · answer #5 · answered by bwjordan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sweety, that's a very hard one. And one that only you can answer for yourself. If my answer will help you find your own, then here it is: life will always have meaning, regardless of the "quality." But so will death. Our karmic destiny leads us on a path. We choose how we will live to learn the lessons of soul and to pay off debts of past lives. It may have been accident, it may have been "grand design" that this child drowned. Whatever the cause, to keep the shell alive past the point where the soul is no longer there is cruel. It's time to let go. If the doctors are convinced that the body is in a permanent vegatative state, it's time to let go. There is no son; there is only the shell.
2006-07-19 02:49:42 · answer #6 · answered by maggiemaechase 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One of those questions that despite attempts to answer is so individual and situationally based that their will never be resolution. Unfortunately in these situations emotion takes over and common sense goes out the window. I am not in that situation so I can't say specifically how I'd react. I am a believer in at least trying to run my life using common sense, but again, emotion often over rules it.
I have to be harsh now...The father's burden is less than that to society by his choosing to keep his kid alive. His choice has not only emotionally bankrupted the family it's probably impacted them negatively in the financial realm. His decision has effected the cost of Medicine for everyone. Now the family has had 4 agonizing years to say good bye...have the kid euthanized and be done with it. PEACE!
2006-07-19 02:55:43 · answer #7 · answered by thebigm57 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This isn't really a religious question. It's a personal decision made by the parent, but to me, brain dead is dead. I would have chosen CPR but I would not keep the child on life support for 4 years.
2006-07-19 02:44:41 · answer #8 · answered by Justsyd 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well I am not a parent, but if I was I would want my son alive, cause what if he was ok, and the EMS guys was wrong. I am sure that might have been his thoughts. But after so long and the boy was on life support I would pull him off. Not because I didnt love the child but because I do love him. Once a child or even an adult is in a state like that, there is nothing left in them. I am not sure if they can hear you or not, but there life would be spent in bed, and who would want that.
2006-07-19 02:46:23 · answer #9 · answered by passme_not 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What happened to the person who let a 5 year old be unattended at a pool?
You can agrue for and against should you try to resusitate, but I'll say yes try. You don't know if or how much brain damage occured. But I'm not in favor of extended life support.
2006-07-19 03:02:28 · answer #10 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋