<< 7.3 Appendix 3: Workbook
7.4 Appendix 4: Letter to the Editor, Winnipeg Free Press (February 20, 2002)

"Position on prolonging life is chilling"

The article Who said playing God was easy (Focus, Feb.9), is both disturbing and problematic. It reminds us of our vulnerability when we are confronted with the dilemma of medical decisions that do not involve our wishes, let alone our input, at the most basic level. If a doctor deems a patient’s life is not worth living, neither the patient, nor the patient’s family have any recourse if they should want CPR, nutrition, artificial respiration, dialysis or even antibiotics. A doctor not only does not have to obtain the patient’s or his proxy’s consent, the doctor or hospital doesn’t even have to tell the patient or patient’s family that this decision has been made.

What if patients find life enjoyable, worthwhile and an ongoing challenge in which they want to participate? What if they don’t find life “futile?” Prof. Barney Sneiderman described what occurred to a patient with lung cancer who was “bound to die within the next few days, “ according to the physician in charge. The “bound to die” phrase, is, itself, problematic. Most physicians acknowledge they cannot predict the precise time line of a death. Giving Mr. Sneiderman the benefit of the doubt, it is true diseases such as lung cancer have a fairly predictable pathology. But the law is not confined to end stage disease, and its very lack of specifics becomes alarming for persons with disabilities, precisely because historically our lives have been undervalued and seen as pitiable existences. Too often, living with a respirator, having high-care needs, or even using a wheelchair are seen as living some sort of sub-existence. Yet, people go to school, get and keep jobs, and raise families and contribute in vital ways to their communities within these limitations every day. What happens when a doctor cannot imagine himself or herself living with a respirator and therefore rules a life as futile and not worth saving? Right now there are no laws to protect us from such scenarios.

We do not have to go very far back in our history, either as Canadians or as citizens of this planet, to find examples where the lives of persons with disabilities (or others who lived in ways different from the mainstream society around hem) were seen as futile? Mr. Sneiderman’s use of the argument of cost-effectiveness as a reason for not prolonging life only makes his position that much more chilling.


RHONDA WIEBE
Manitoba League of Persons with Disabilities, Winnipeg


<< 7.3 Appendix 3: Workbook


The Will To Live Template Project - Contents