|
|
|
|
|
|
by ajmurmann
3847 days ago
|
|
|
I agree that a quicker death would have been better. However that's often times the case add yet most states don't even site patients to choose between suffering and death. The patient suffered so much because the treatment worked, but not well enough to safe her. That however can happen with many well proven treatments as well. I have a relative who just got a port to feed her liquids, dive she cannot swallow anymore. That treatment will extend her life longer, but she well probably will just suffer longer and die soon anyways. This seems to be a constant trade off in health care these days and usually we decide blindly in favor of extending life regardless of the quality. How we judge experimental treatments seems completely different though. |
|
|
Well, the prognosis is 14 months, so if she lived a year, maybe it didn't work?