I heard that when full blown aids patients are close to their final stretch of life, and they should happen to stop breathing, hospitals and doctors..etc, do not even bother to try to revive them.
I dont know if this is really true but thats what I heard and if it is true, it seems kinda cold-hearted to me.
What do you think?
2006-12-12 07:08:58 · 39 answers · asked by Sexual Chocolate 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
i think it is cold hearted
2006-12-12 07:10:25 · answer #1 · answered by H 1 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I am not totaly sure on this, I guess it would be upto patient discression... when Lincon was shot the doctors refused to atmpt to revive him, or get him recovered because they knew he was going to die anyway from the wound... it seems that through most points in history not only today that if a person had little or no chance of survival rather than waste thier eforts medical personel know to let them die, some may call it a bit selfish but if one is at that stage of any dissease or that close to death they should just let them go its not worth it. Having somthing called a resus fetish.... (some of you know what im talking about) I geuss they feel the same way you know, if they let them die in peace its kool cuz CPR And resusitation atempts can be rather tramatic on the body. I think that this practice is ok, aslong as thier is consent with the family, or the patient.
2006-12-12 07:15:32 · answer #2 · answered by rkjr1999 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My father died from AIDS on easter sunday in 2003. He stopped brathing on 2 occassion, and both times he was revived. He signed on for that thru his hospital and his ins. He stated specifically if he lost life 3 times on the 3rd time not to revive him. I was his Power of Attorney and I made sure his wishes were granted. It was hard to see that done but it was what he wished. So whoever told you that is only correct in the sense that the pt. does not elect to be revive.
2006-12-12 07:20:15 · answer #3 · answered by sofiedriskell 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well if the patient has a dnr than its a personal choice. but if they want more time than they should do the best they can to help. It is the system, they figure since they have had to spend millions of dollars of meds that it is less expensive to let them die. They don't care that they are still people not just the disease. we should all look at people like people and not money. Life is a gift, use it wisely....
2006-12-12 07:15:38 · answer #4 · answered by Moony Black 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would probably look wrong if you witness it. But if you really think about it, why would they bring him/her back to life and back into serious pain and discomfort? He'll or she will only die again within hours or at the most a day! Why bother? That human wants to rest in peace much more than live to stare at the hospital ceiling for another few hours.
I can see your point though! But their point is more valuable for everybody! And they need the beds.
2006-12-12 07:14:53 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that is just a nasty rumor. Hospitals now have protective barriers and breathing devices available to perform CPR on AIDS patients without the risk of exposure.
2006-12-12 07:13:10 · answer #6 · answered by Kevin B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A friend of mine had cancer, not aids, but I think its a similar situation. When it was known that she was fatally ill, she signed a paper herself instructing the hospital staff NOT to try and revive her once she stopped breathing. She was ready to go and had accepted that her time was approaching, and didn't want to put herself or her family through any more pain. I think they give the choice to the patient, or the pateint's family- otherwise, I think it would be illegal....
2006-12-12 07:14:21 · answer #7 · answered by piratewench 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In most cases I suspect this is at the patients request much like anyone else who may be terminally ill. What is the point. Like the many of the terminally ill I'm sure all other efforts were exhausted before they came to this conclusion.
2006-12-12 07:12:43 · answer #8 · answered by father of 4 husband of 1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if their quality of life is nearly non-existent and they are/were in excrutiating, debilitating pain I can see why the doctors would not try reviving their poor souls. At least they can be at peace and finally pain free. It's a sticky situation and can come across as cold-hearted, I know.
2006-12-12 07:11:54 · answer #9 · answered by Jen 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"Heard" is speculation. I don't know if that is true or not. I do know my mom had cancer and there was no helping her. We just let her go..when she took her last breath. No, they did not even try. What can they do. Her body distroyed itself and she could not function anyhow. No need to keep her in pain and suffering. Maybe its the same with aids.
2006-12-12 07:12:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Every patient has a choice of DNR. Which is a do not resuscitate. If you sign it no heroic measures will be used to revive you. Simple as that.
2006-12-12 07:12:08 · answer #11 · answered by *•BK*• 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋