This is big issue in health care right now. When a nurse asks a patient the rate their pain on a 0-10 scale, the answer cannot be wrong. It is by definition what the patient says it is.
The funny thing is, that when a person can't say they're in pain, others may try to play free and loose in speaking for them. Case in point, Terri Schiavo.
Thirst and hunger are types of pain that occur when one lacks food and hydration. Some don't seem to mind inflicting upon Terri that which causes pain in us. Maybe it's because she's not like us.
She cannot speak. Her experiences do not elicit a response on EEG. Therefore some say she will not suffer pain from the slow death of starvation.
I have a real problem with this line of thinking. If you inflict pain on conscious people and detect the response on EEG, it shows that EEG can detect pain. It does not show that pain does not exist if it cannot detected on EEG.
If George Felos, and Michael Schiavo are so keen on ending Terri's life, why not use a method that historically is painless. Why use a method that is known to be painful?
A narcotic overdose would leave her no more, no less dead than withdrawal of food and water. It absolutely would be quicker. Furthermore, narcotics are known to create a pleasurable feeling prior to loss of consciousness. Why is this option not on the table?
Please link to this article at National Review Online.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment