End of life decisions are a personal choice

Several years ago my grandfather was faced with a horrible choice. An alert, active 89-year-old, he collapsed while on a camping trip with his second wife (who he'd married only the week before.) The doctors at the hospital informed him that he had pancreatic cancer, that it was inoperable, and that he could expect to live another six weeks. The tumor, they told him was very large and had spread already; it was impinging on his colon. Soon he would be unable to eat and he would starve to death. Fortunately, his appetite would disappear as his inability to eat increased.

This horrible fate could be averted -- he could have a feeding tube and a colostomy which would keep him alive much longer. However, the tumor would continue to grow, and would cut off his nerves, and his circulation. First, his right foot would have to be amputated. Later the bottom part of his leg to his knee, and still later, his thigh. (I don't know why they didn't propose amputating the whole leg at once, but that was not the choice presented to him.) Under this program, he could be expected to live some six months.

My grandfather was quite clear that he had no interest in living a few extra months, while the doctors sliced off bits of him, and he spent most of his days in the hospital recovering, and coping with less and less function.

He passed away at home, with his dignity intact, some four weeks later.

Should doctors or the state have the right to make end of life choices for people like my grandfather? No. They should not. They should neither dictate that people's lives must be extended at all possible costs, nor should they rule that extraordinary measures are not worth taking. That is a choice that only the individual can make. For some, yes extraordinary measures only prolong the suffering, for others the added days are worth the pain.

Would end-of-life counseling have helped my grandfather make his choice more easily? Perhaps. He did not hesitate in his decision. It was a courageous choice, with scary consequences, but one he was very clear about and one he was comfortable with. (Of course, much the same could be said if he had taken the other route...) Not every one will have that same clarity. Counseling would be therapeutic, and help them to make some of the most difficult choices a human being will ever have to make. It is only humane to offer that counseling to a human being who is suffering not only physically, but also emotionally.

Would counseling have helped those of us who loved him cope with the horrible choices my grandfather had to make? Absolutely. We were reeling with shock and loss, devastated by the rapid deterioration of a beloved relative, and the sure knowledge that we had a very short time to be with him. While we honored and respected his choice, that did not make it easy to live with. (Again, much the same could be said if he had chosen to prolong his life).

By Pamela K. Taylor  |  November 5, 2009; 10:49 PM ET Save & Share:                 
Previous: Die with dignity or anguish: The choice is yours | Next: Random violence, shared responsibility

The comments to this entry are closed.