If you had only a 1 percent chance of coming out of a long-term coma or PVS, wou

Question

If you had only a 1 percent chance of coming out of a long-term coma or PVS, would you want physicians to keep treating you, or would you rather they let you die?

2. Many elderly people will succumb to coma-like states in their final years as they decline into neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. Can society afford long-term care for millions of such people?

3. How do expanded definitions of death by neurological criteria depend on great trust in the integrity of the transplant community not to abuse such definitions?

4. What is the proper role of state and federal government in cases like Nancy Cruzan and Terri Schiavo? Should it protect vulnerable patients and assume the worst of families or should it assume the best of families and give them wide latitude to decide?

Explanation / Answer

1.in the first question age and body physics of that person plays a very vital role to take decision of continiuity of treatment or kept as it is so it's not matter whether it's 1% or 0% provability.

2. It's very difficult for society to afford long term care of such people. But individual families should do this or its their duty to take care of such persons otherwise society have to have raised more funds for care taking.

3. Brain dead it's a neurological defination of death . it's a medical condition of particular individual so it should not be abused by any community.

4.I think in cases like nancy and Terri of pvs where there is no hope left regarding improvement of health after 5 years or 6 years treatment state and federal government should assume the best of families and let them free to decide.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.