quote: Even more importantly, though, I have noted that my assessment of how these questions arise is different from sndrake's. While he finds that the rhetoric is shifting towards encouraging removal of support, from my perspective, it is the reverse. I see physicians and nurses even less likely to discuss these matters, much less act on them, usually for
I agree with this, by the way. The way it's worked that I've seen is that patients get life saving measures unless they have written instructions to the contrary.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
when you point to a specific group of people as a major part of the problem, it does get very close to scapegoating. As in the other examples I cited - the "drain" of immigrants and special ed.
Strategically, as someone who has to deal with these issues, the pope's statement is very useful. On a very practical level, it means we won't be having to deal as often with ethicists and nuns who are ethicists sanctioning the starvation of people like Terri Schiavo on moral grounds.
The impact of a Catholic ethicist wearing their clerical uniform is significant - since to the public, Catholicism is synonymous with "prolife." This will make it less likely that Catholic ethicists will be called on to defend these types of situations. So we'll be dealing with secular ethicists instead.
Still not a level playing field, but at least able to play with a manageable "handicap." (Note clever wordplay) Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I just realized that is the first time anyone has EVER referred to me as "Mr. Drake" here.
Please can it be the last time?
I prefer to answer to "sndrake" or "Stephen" here.
I just wanted to bring up another thing about agreeing/disagreeing. To me, the most important point about the current debates regarding euthanasia, assisted suicide and so-called "end of life" issues is how they're dominated by a relatively small group of players representing a fairly narrow group - mostly in the professional class.
I don't expect ClaudiaTherese to agree with everything I say - she has a different perspective. What sets her apart (I'm not sure she'd agree with this, but I'll say it anyway) from most of her profession is her willingness to deal with conflict by engaging in conversation rather than working both passively and actively to shut groups with counter viewpoints from the policy discussion table. (I hope that's clear)
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the vote of confidence, sndrake. Now you've set me a goal to live up to.
(Most seriously, this is why I am so glad you are here. I firmly believe that we have to let the world resist our preconceptions. There is nothing more engaging than a genuinely thoughtful discussion with someone who disagrees with you, and who you both respect and trust.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
