And wanted to hang around for a while as their last wish would you honor it, even if it ate your house and savings?
2006-11-25 16:23:07 · 21 answers · asked by . 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
semi-colon too.
2006-11-25 16:28:10 · update #1
As an Islamic rule, if the doctors rule that the person is in a vegetative state or brain dead, the nearest relative can allow the plug to be pulled.
Personally, I think I'm religious and I wouldn't want anyone to sacrifice their time, house and savings to keep me alive for a few more days, weeks or months. But then again, that's my personal wish.
May Allah never put anyone in this situation and help those who are facing it now. Ameen.
2006-11-26 14:24:51 · answer #1 · answered by wolverine_unreal 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I Would Unplug If they were Braindead, Had No Chance of Coming back, If the Person Was Religious and Saved it would make the Decision very much Easier because you would feel they were right with God..Every Case is Different..You would have to be in That situation to know
2006-11-25 16:31:42 · answer #2 · answered by roxie_29812 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a very difficult question. If my loved one was in a coma it would depend, on a few things. What type of machines is she/he hooked up to. If the machine is keeping the heart going and he/she has been on it for a while I would order the plug to be pulled with a tear in my eye.
Now if the machine he/she was hooked up to was delivering food and water, and (s)he didn't need anything to stay breathing, or the heart pumping I would not pull the plug.
My statement is all nice and fine, but I do not know what I would do if this situation occurred.
Also I think my stance is a moral one, but I'm not sure.
2006-11-25 16:32:56 · answer #3 · answered by Just Wondering 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Money is not a object to be considered in someones life, I would give down to a crumb from a cracker.I would honor a persons wish, My self i have instructed My family If I had brain damage or needed a transplant, pull the plug.I do not like doctors playing God
I do not consider that suicide.
2006-11-25 16:32:16 · answer #4 · answered by gwhiz1052 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's a tough call all over... one friend of mine had a mother who was terminally ill, but wanted to live.. the family honored her wishes but when the money and insurance ran out, the hospital refused to give her any treatment other than morphine. Another friend of mine's brother fell off scaffolding and fractured his skull and broke his neck... he was in a coma and the Drs said there was no chance he would ever wake up. It took a long time for the family to decide to take him off life support. But that wasnt because they worried about the money but because they didnt feel he would want to live that way. I think if someone wants to live, usually their family will respect that regardless of the money. I know I would.
2006-11-25 16:37:52 · answer #5 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow thats a really tough question you ask! Probably the toughest one you asked today :). I would say if even there was a very minute chance of recovery then let don't pull the plug. But if chance for a recovery was 0% for sure and the family could not afford to have the person on life support as it would put bank balance in red ink then i say pull the plug. But to be honest i am not sure of my answer! Like i said it is a tough one. :)
2006-11-25 16:30:44 · answer #6 · answered by A fan 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
My Mom made the decision to unplug my Dad. Her decision was supported by all us kids. My Dad was on a respirator and it was suspected that he was suffering from some form of cancer. When the hospital wanted to move him to a hospice my Mom knew he wasn't going to get better so she had him taken off the respirator. He died shortly after. My mother is Catholic and she didn't regret her choice.
2006-11-25 16:36:01 · answer #7 · answered by hotandcoldwolf 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unplugging would be a difficult decision in any case for any family. If the person asked not to be unplugged.... that would make it all the more difficult. My decision would not be based on cost of keeping them alive (I live in Canada anyway, wouldn't be the same cost wise) but on what I really thought was best.
2006-11-25 16:30:30 · answer #8 · answered by libra1079 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You can withdraw "extraordinary means" of prolonging biological life when there is no medical possibility of recovery, and allow the person to thereby die a natural death. But you cannot withdraw ordinary care such as food and water, to cause the death of a person. Allowing a person whose heart or lungs or brain are no longer functional and will never be functional to die peacefully and naturally is morally and ethically acceptable. But starving a person to death is never acceptable. It is murder.
2006-11-25 16:39:42 · answer #9 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it was accidentally then i would have to find it in my heart to forgive the person. I'm pretty sure that the person is feeling bad enough already and they don't need me hating them on top of that.
2016-05-23 03:13:13 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋