Regarding the Ron Houben case mentioned earlier by Joe Carter: There are crucial lessons to learn.
We hear constantly from the utilitarian bioethics crowd that people diagnosed as being persistently unconscious should be dehydrated to death because they are not “persons,” or even, they are actually “dead”–-and so should be available for organ harvesting. We hear that even if the family resists, futile care theory should permit bioethics committees to impose unilateral withdrawal of treatment. And we hear this even as repeated studies demonstrate that 40 or more percent of patients diagnosed as PVS really aren’t. Talk about not wanting to heed the facts.
Now, a man who was awake and aware for 23 years, but unable to communicate (locked in state), is telling his tale. This case serves as the latest in a series of warnings against treating the unconscious as if they weren’t fully human–a crucial principle recognized by the American Conference of Catholic Bishops in its new guidelines regarding the care of the apparently unconscious.
November 26th, 2009 | 12:24 am
If the lesson you believe this one case teaches is that all medical interventions ought to be employed without limits to all individuals in what appears to be a persistent vegitative state, there are a couple of important realities you are not considering.
1) this is one case. There have been hundreds of thousands of people over the past 10 to 20 years alone in this country that are kept alive with artifical means for long periods of time despite their wishes to the contrary.
2) We do live in a world of limited resources and as responsible adults we have a responsibility to use our resources as wisely as possible. The tens of thousands of dollars it costs to keep one person in a vegetative state alive for one year, could save the lives of thousands of people with simple yet life threatening diseases in poorer countries. Are you saying that this one life is worth more than a thousand others?
November 30th, 2009 | 7:23 pm
How would this blogger think that if this man had died, thousands would have been saved. Who would do this saving? It’s a ridiculous argument. He was alive the whole time, but his nervous system was partially paralyzed. Who can set a value on a life, especially if it’s someone’s else’s, not our own?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact