Doctors die. It's not like the rest of us, but it should be (2016)
44 points
1 hour ago
| 4 comments
| archive.cancerworld.net
| HN
jrapdx3
20 minutes ago
[-]
I'm a physician, an old one. We're lucky to live as long as we do, but life will end. The article emphasizes the value of dying peacefully. Sure, that's how we want it to be, but we have to make it known to assure it goes that way.

Don't know what happens elsewhere, but every time I see a doctor someone asks if I have a signed, notarized directive. Yes, I've done that, but so should everybody else concerned about the issue.

I have asked aged patients the same question. More than not the answer is "no". Why haven't you? Various versions of "on my list of things to do". We can't really predict future events, in our own interests best to be prepared. Some will take the hint, more than not, people procrastinate.

At least I've done what I can do, but we can't save people from themselves. Maybe people in healthcare are more aware of what's at stake, but everyone has the option to make it as clear as possible their wish (no, their demand) to die in peace.

reply
djoldman
1 hour ago
[-]
> Even when the right preparations have been made, the system can still swallow people up. One of my patients was a man named Jack... He explained to me that he never, under any circumstances, wanted to be placed on life support machines again.

> Even with all his wishes documented, Jack hadn’t died as he’d hoped. The system had intervened. One of the nurses, I later found out, even reported my unplugging of Jack to the authorities as a possible homicide. Nothing came of it, of course; Jack’s wishes had been spelled out explicitly, and he’d left the paperwork to prove it.

It's interesting that our laws punish homicide with maximum criminal penalties, but the opposite (keeping someone alive against their wishes) seems to be assault and battery at worst, with much much lighter punishment.

reply
delichon
36 minutes ago
[-]
There is a huge unspoken blind spot for a terminal hospice patient. The medicine cabinet just opens up. My dad asked the doctor exactly how much of what he shouldn't take if he didn't want a quick easy death, and the doctor just told him. He didn't end up using it but it was a comfort to him.
reply
ourmandave
27 minutes ago
[-]
This reminds me of an interview with neurosurgeon and author Henry Marsh who had prostate cancer.

He described how he's arranged to end his own life should he get alzheimer's or dementia as he didn't want to waste away. But he explained that he has access to knowledge and things ordinary people don't.

reply
dj_gitmo
7 minutes ago
[-]
I looked into this recently and it seems like it is basically impossible to pre-arrange assisted suicide for alzheimer's or dementia. Even in countries which allow death with dignity. I find it very strange because it’s so common and I’m sure many people would prefer DWD in those circumstances.
reply
gerdesj
51 minutes ago
[-]
Does the US have the concept of DNR (Do Not Resuscitate)?
reply
djoldman
43 minutes ago
[-]
Yes.

If one lives in the US and feels strongly about it, they should file an Out-of-Hospital DNR and POLST with every local hospital. Also consider wearing or carrying official bracelets/necklaces (varies state to state).

I'm neither a lawyer nor a doctor. :)

reply
netsharc
33 minutes ago
[-]
There was a "culture war" (the rightwing government intervening due to religious reasons) in the 2000's involving a "DNR"-esque case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case
reply
glimshe
50 minutes ago
[-]
Yes
reply
Simulacra
33 minutes ago
[-]
I truly believe the conspiracy theory that hospitals are very eager to harvest our organs, and they will absolutely pull the plug to do that, maybe not even waiting until we are dead. So I think it's absolutely plausible they would ignore a DNR
reply
Xorakios
14 minutes ago
[-]
Like many older people I know, my notarized DNR, provided by and on file with my insurance company, local hospital, primary doctor, and medical power of attorney, includes standard language permitting organ harvesting.
reply
croes
20 minutes ago
[-]
Aren’t that contradicting actions
reply
ggm
1 hour ago
[-]
> Many people think of CPR as a reliable lifesaver when, in fact, the results are usually poor. I’ve had hundreds of people brought to me in the emergency room after getting CPR. Exactly one, a healthy man who’d had no heart troubles (for those who want specifics, he had a ‘tension pneumothorax’), walked out of the hospital.

This point has been made by many medically trained people over decades. It's a very energetic intensive process, it cracks ribs. If it's not done promptly the brain has been starved of oxygen.

While I understand people not wanting to drag politics into everything I invite you to think about this and the situation of the senior senator for Kentucky.

reply
2bitencryption
47 minutes ago
[-]
> It's a very energetic intensive process, it cracks ribs.

I feel like lately this is becoming more common knowledge - but still something most people don't realize.

Part of it is probably the fact that it's impossible to depict "real" CPR in popular culture (movies, TV shows, etc) unless the production goes to extreme lengths to use a fake dummy. Even on The Pitt (which seems to make a point of being hyper realistic) I've seen them do "fake" CPR with shallow compressions.

reply
tialaramex
25 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, akin to the Gell-mann Amnesia Effect, we notice a few things where we're experts but then forget everything else is likely just as bogus. Apparently one reason "Queen's Gambit" was a big deal was that most pop culture chess isn't just not very good chess (as you might innocently assume), it's literally nonsense. Like, pieces on the wrong squares, illegal moves, even simple continuity errors where pieces move between camera shots. So QG begins scoring points for chess fans when it remembers stuff like the White Queen starts on a White square...
reply
j-conn
1 hour ago
[-]
Totally misleading. Early CPR (+AED if available) absolutely saves lives. Article is from 2011 by a family med doctor.

Overly aggressive resuscitation attempts are definitely a problem but context matters

reply
bonsai_spool
43 minutes ago
[-]
> Early CPR (+AED if available) absolutely saves lives. Article is from 2011 by a family med doctor.

You have to provide a denominator to make this statement. 30-day survival for out-of-hospital CPR is 10%, and discharge from the hospital (let alone functional status) is even lower.

CPR is thus a great example of the OP's thesis that doctors refuse certain things based on their poor efficacy.

https://www.redcross.org/take-a-class/resources/articles/cpr...

reply
clukic
10 minutes ago
[-]
100%. CPR initiated within 2 minutes of cardiac arrest increases survival rate by 81%. The fact that CPR is rarely initiated so quickly (and thus survival rates are extremely low), says nothing about the efficacy of CPR. In the best cases where CPR is initiated < 2 mins, and AED shock within < 5mins survival rate can be as high as 50%.

https://newsroom.heart.org/news/bystander-cpr-up-to-10-minut...

reply
classichasclass
38 minutes ago
[-]
"Early" is load-bearing. Even brief delays, just mere minutes, significantly decrease survival or positive outcomes.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010...

It's important to get people to realize the benefits of early CPR and more people should be trained on how to do it, or else it won't be prompt and the outcomes will be worse. That's what the Red Cross and AHA promulgate to the public, in so many words.

reply
oh_my_goodness
25 minutes ago
[-]
How has CPR (or CPR data) changed since 2011? What type of medicine do you practice?
reply
jordanpg
34 minutes ago
[-]
Can confirm. Top of the article could be about my dad. Same flavor of cancer and everything.
reply