On the other side of the debate, there are many reasons that some individuals are anti-life support. One reason that someone would be anti-life support is that it drains resources. Life support is a very expensive undertaking, and families can be burdened with huge hospital bills. A single day of life support in an Intensive Care Unit hospital bed typically costs between $2,000 and $4,000 and can even be as high as $10,000. Annually, families can be spending upward of $80,000 on life-sustaining treatment (Ehrenfreund, 2013).
Additionally, hospital staff is obligated to provide care to life support patients regardless of outlooks for recovery, which involves around the clock care. Technically, legally dead patients are then taking the time …show more content…
A common argument in the life support debate is that life-sustaining measures only prolong patient suffering and the grieving process of his or her loved ones (List of 8 Main Pros and Cons of Life Support, 2015). Going back to the example of Marlise Munoz, the pregnant women kept on life support due to Texas laws. Marlise’s family knew that her wishes were to not have her life prolonged if there was no hope for recovery. Marlise and her family knew the definition of brain death and understood the implications and, possibly, devastating side effects of life support before making the decision. However, Marlise was kept on life support, which prolonged the dying process until the fetus could survive outside the womb. During this time, the family was put through the grieving process several times before she was finally removed from life support and died (Shoichet, …show more content…
For example, the Muslim religion sanctions the use of life support to keep a patient alive only if there is hope and evidence of revival (i.e. when ventilation is used in surgery), however once death is inescapable the faithful Muslim’s believe that families need to accept God’s will and stop organs from functioning artificially (Macfarquhar, 1999).
Additionally, some individuals are anti-life support because they take a quality of life stance. Those who think from a quality of life perspective believe when life no longer has quality and there is suffering that death is preferable to living a life lacking meaning/enjoyment (Leming & Dickinson, 2016). In 2009, a nine-month-old infant had been kept on life support since he was 3 weeks of age and had suffered severe brain damage. The doctors found evidence that the infant was experiencing pain and suffering so it was determined that it was cruel to keep this infant alive to only experience pain in his lifetime (Sears, 2009).
In all, there are many reasons that people are anti-life support, to name a few; cost of life support is expensive and drains resources, life support only prolongs the inevitable death of a person, religious issues, quality of life perspective, and that life support is sometimes seen as a form of cruelty to
Additionally, hospital staff is obligated to provide care to life support patients regardless of outlooks for recovery, which involves around the clock care. Technically, legally dead patients are then taking the time …show more content…
A common argument in the life support debate is that life-sustaining measures only prolong patient suffering and the grieving process of his or her loved ones (List of 8 Main Pros and Cons of Life Support, 2015). Going back to the example of Marlise Munoz, the pregnant women kept on life support due to Texas laws. Marlise’s family knew that her wishes were to not have her life prolonged if there was no hope for recovery. Marlise and her family knew the definition of brain death and understood the implications and, possibly, devastating side effects of life support before making the decision. However, Marlise was kept on life support, which prolonged the dying process until the fetus could survive outside the womb. During this time, the family was put through the grieving process several times before she was finally removed from life support and died (Shoichet, …show more content…
For example, the Muslim religion sanctions the use of life support to keep a patient alive only if there is hope and evidence of revival (i.e. when ventilation is used in surgery), however once death is inescapable the faithful Muslim’s believe that families need to accept God’s will and stop organs from functioning artificially (Macfarquhar, 1999).
Additionally, some individuals are anti-life support because they take a quality of life stance. Those who think from a quality of life perspective believe when life no longer has quality and there is suffering that death is preferable to living a life lacking meaning/enjoyment (Leming & Dickinson, 2016). In 2009, a nine-month-old infant had been kept on life support since he was 3 weeks of age and had suffered severe brain damage. The doctors found evidence that the infant was experiencing pain and suffering so it was determined that it was cruel to keep this infant alive to only experience pain in his lifetime (Sears, 2009).
In all, there are many reasons that people are anti-life support, to name a few; cost of life support is expensive and drains resources, life support only prolongs the inevitable death of a person, religious issues, quality of life perspective, and that life support is sometimes seen as a form of cruelty to