home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- LETTERS, Page 16The Ultimate Question
-
-
- Your article indicates that the Supreme Court must determine
- whether the state should have the power to decide to end the life
- of a person in a persistent vegetative state (ETHICS, Dec. 11). To
- discontinue life-support measures in response to a patient's signed
- living will enhances personal autonomy. But to stop such measures
- at the request of the patient's family endangers the lives of those
- too disabled to speak for themselves. The family to whom a patient
- is an emotional if not a financial burden is hardly in a position
- to make an unbiased judgment about whether it is in the patient's
- best interests to be allowed to die.
-
- Felicia Ackerman
- Associate Professor of Philosophy
- Brown University
- Providence
-
- Our son suffered head injuries that left him in a persistent
- vegetative state. We are faced with choosing whether 1) to ask that
- the feeding tube be removed and watch our son slowly starve to
- death or 2) to wait until he gets some infection and then request
- that treatment be withheld, resulting in possible death. Perhaps
- someone else could select one of these options. We cannot. If we
- had the choice we would prefer to have him injected with a drug
- that would let life slip gently out of him. Eventually, the laws
- must be changed and these poor damaged bodies allowed to go to
- their rest.
-
- Abigail and Bobby Gene Willis
- Austin