Is it ethical to prolong a life that would be gone without excessive support?

Question

This crossed my mind this morning, reading all the questions about the ethics of abortion, so here's my question-

Premature babies - so premature that they would have died if born even 50 years ago - should excessive means be taken to keep these children alive? What if the family in question is on medicare and that money is coming out of your taxes? What if keeping that child alive financially ruins a family and they cannot recover?

Now what about adults? If someone is technically brain dead, but a machine keeps them breathing and fed, is it a kindness to them to hold them in their bodies? For those who believe in souls - are you doing that soul any favors by NOT allowing them to die?

Where do you stand on this? I know I asked a lot of questions; please do try to address them all if you can - and without scripture if possible - I'd like to see your own minds work, not get proof you can read and copy/paste.

I should have said- ethics of abortion and saving an enemy, etc.

All excellent answers so far, and I'd love to comment on some, but I have to get to work - can you all wait til later?

Umm, Jester? No dear, everyone does NOT get a tax refund. Just a small number of people.

Answer 1

I don't think so.... I've watched a good friend be allowed to go peacefully and had to order off the extreme maintenance for my dad... neither one had a hope of living without all the bells and whistles and for them to have to go thru all that, for nothing, is not right, IMHO.....

babies ... wow, that's hard... you cannot make a parent make that call.... not unless they are amazingly knowing folks....
and, to be scientific about the whole thing.... this is just what 'survival of the fittest' is all about.... when a body cannot survive on it's own, it's time for it to die.... the prolonging of life that has no expectation of returning to 'normal' is not only foolish and expensive, but cruel, as well....
I have a tired, bad heart... I've put it thru hail... and I have a DNR on my records for this.... I don't want my family's lives ruined by medical bills to try to get ;me a new one or a bunch of trial and error heart surgeries!!.... if it's done beating, it's done... nuff said....for me....I've lived long and prospered, tho, and someone who wasn't quite 'done' would feel differently, no doubt....

I remember a school chum who had a child before she graduated.... the child was hydrocephalic.... she dragged that poor lump of flesh around with her in a Radio Flyer.... the doctors worked so hard to save her baby... if they'd just have let it die, like it was supposed to..... how different that gals life could have been.... as it was, the whole town considered that her 'just rewards' for getting preggers at 17!!!!... how cruel is that???.....and what of the child?... the most it ever knew was it's mother's face.....and pain....and helplessness.... of course, this is just one case... and each case is different.... but they knew there was no hope for this kid .... it would have been kinder to let it go......

then, too, we had a baby born to our family at two pounds... how is this different?... it was, because this little one didn't need all that much support, even as small as she was... no tubes and breathing apparatus, etc... just a little extra oxygen in her warmer.... but I know her parents well enuff to say that if she'd have been one that needed a LOT of support, they'd have taken it off and let her go ......

Answer 2

With babies it's always tricky. Once a baby is born, even if it's premature, we should do every thing possible to take of that little life. After all, they deserve the same chance at life that we have. As far as the financial aspects of it, let's be real. Our tax dollars never really go where we'd like them to go anyway. So if my tax dollars are used to save those little lives, then so be it. Times being what they are, we are already loosing enough lives.
As for people on life support. Once a person is brain dead, it would be in the best interest of that person's family to gather together, say their goodbyes, and let that person go. Keeping a brain dead person alive on life support is just cruel. It's no longer for that persons' life, it's so the family won't feel the deep pains that comes with the actual lose of life. While it is inevitable. It's also cruel to leave their body laying there on display.

Answer 3

I think this is a great question, first I will start with the brain dead adult... No I dont think they should be lept alive, because brain dead is without a chance of recovery. Its that simple for me. If the person had even a glimmer of hope and the family wanted to keep hope then its there choice, so long as they are paying..
But as far as a premie, being born to soon. I think that that is the great thing about technilogical advances, while all is not for the better, this one thing is. I dont care if all my tax dollars goes toward the life of a newborn infant born to soon. Hell they could call me and ask for more when it comes to a child. The baby has a chance unlike the brain dead person. So I think all measures should be taken to keep them alive.

Answer 4

First off....I never compare a person's life to the amount of tax I pay..ever! Life is worth saving regardless. people need to let this tax debate go...once it leaves your paycheck its gone for the general use of the country....accept that for what it is..besides you all get refund in the end so why complain?
Second, people in commas have come out of it so it's always worth a shot to wait it out...there is only so much a doctor can do to save a life, the rest is up to the individual's healing capabilites so some may take longer than others.I've known of one person who came back to life in the freaking morgue!
Brain dead people is a different story, once the brain is gone, everything is gone...it's only a matter of emotional detachment of the family to get used to the fact and decide to let go. Hope speaks alot for itself especially when a loss is sudden and people cant let go.
Souls is more of a cultural beleif...if such a thing does exist then it leaves the physical body regardless if it's meant to be that way. But how much sense does the idea of a soul make if technology can revive a body after dying?

Answer 5

If there is hope that baby can lead a reasonably normal life, then yes.

As for older people (or anyone) with no real hope for living again, I'd say no, but I think it really is a personal decision for each family. I would not keep a loved one hooked up to machines prolonging a lifeless life. To me that would be a selfish action. I could also not argue against those who feel it is the right thing to do for them. Perhaps they need more time to let go of hope.

As for the cost, I think that doing the right thing often has an excessive cost and we cannot place monetary values on lives.

Answer 6

I was a premature baby and was kept in an incubator for a while. I a really glad that they did this because I am alive right now. They took care of me because I had lungs that had not fully developed. Now I am healthy, athletic, and full of life. If there is a chance for the baby to survive, all steps should be taken to do so. A life is a life. In the case of life support for brain dead patients,they have no chance so they shouldn't be kept alive.

Answer 7

Medicine has improved a great deal so yes, if the technology is there to save the life of premature babies, we'd be fools not to use it. And how can you put a price on human lives?

As regards adults, it must be up to the person or their family what they decide. My opinion is that it would be wrong to prolong the life of an adult if he or she was in pain or would never wake from a coma etc. However there will be people with different valid opinions. This will be an interesting topic to follow.

Answer 8

We should focus on what is best for society, as well as what is best for the immediate people involve, including the baby. It will end up being a moral judgement call, and will vary depending on your spiritual/religious beliefs. Money is alway a factor, since money spent one way, deprives money from other serious and very important causes. Should we spend lots of money keeping one baby alive, and then not have enough money for the prenatal care, that might save many babies from similar desperate situations? Lots of desperate causes, only so much money. I think we need to allow people to die, for the good of themselves, and society, sometimes. We should meditate/pray to God for guidance, but we are often put in the situation of making difficult and complicated decisions morally, where simplistic solutions don't work well. God gave us a complex brain for a reason, God will always help guide us, and inspire us.

Answer 9

My son was born pre-mature and spent a month in intensive care, today he is a 6'1" 220# speciman of good human being and an excellent father. If he had been born 10 years earlier he would not have survived. I did have insurance, but it still cost a bundle. I would have robbed a bank to keep him alive.

As an adult I would not want to be kept alive other than to donate my organs. If it were my wife on the other hand I would hope against hope that she would pull ot of it.

Answer 10

First thing I would do is call your local animal control and ask them what the laws are for your area regarding cat ownership. Here in the US the laws are different everywhere you go, but in many places, since cats are not usually required to be licensed, any cat found outside is considered a stray, and not owned, and therefore not illegal to take it in and adopt it. If they do consider her a legal owner, find out what the laws are regarding neglect and leaving animals out like she does. Here, there are laws for dogs being left outside in extreme temperatures based on their size. If you know the laws, document any time she breaks them and call animal control with that information. It might help you get it taken from her which would allow you to adopt it. Morally, you are saving a life. In my opinion, you are in the right. I'd rather be wrong and have to apologize than be right, not do anything, and allow an animal to die because I didn't want to upset someone. I have lost friends because of issues like this. I reported a friend's brother who would not get his dog vet care when it was suffering with such a bad case of mange he lost all his fur and had bloody gashes all over from scratching. I even offered to pay for the vet and go with him. He said he'd do it when he could afford it, then went to the racetrack the next day. My friend asked me to let it go. I called animal control. I lost a friend (or what I thought was a friend), but the dog got vet care. I agreed to take a kitten from a neighbor once because they couldn't take it with them to their new apartment, and had trouble affording to feed it. In addition, it had been hurt by her dog. Once I did her sister wanted it back. I said no, and she called the police and told them I broke into her house and stole it (which was ridiculous). The police made me give it back (which they shouldn't have), and then this idiot moved and left the kitten locked up in the apartment to die. Luckily someone else in the building was able to get in, get the kitten and gave it to me, and I got him into a good home. At least a happy ending, but my name is mud with the cops now. LOL Especially since I wrote letter complaining about the treatment I got and what eventually happened. So I do try to practice what I preach. If she doesn't care, then just do it & don't say anything. My guess is she won't even care, or might even be relieved. Thank you for caring.