Part of the challenge of paediatric palliative care is weighing up the desires of parents (keep the child alive at all costs) vs. the rights of the child (a life free of unnecessary suffering).
Thread /1
#Palliativecare
Thread /1
#Palliativecare
Usually, with proper counseling, the doctors and parents of a seriously ill kid can reach a consensus on what path to take, in the best interests of the child.
But occasionally, there is a breakdown
/2
But occasionally, there is a breakdown
/2
We have seen this in the UK with the cases of Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans.
In both cases, doctors were of the opinion that the children had incurable, progressive diseases and that ongoing treatment was causing suffering.
/3
In both cases, doctors were of the opinion that the children had incurable, progressive diseases and that ongoing treatment was causing suffering.
/3
In both cases, the parents disagreed, and wanted treatment to continue, in the hope of finding a cure, even when they acknowledged that the chances of success were slim.
/4
/4
In both cases, the courts sided with the doctors, and deemed that ongoing treatment was causing unnecessary pain & suffering, and should be stopped.
This caused significant anger among some who believe parents have the sole discretion to determine what’s best for their kids. /5
This caused significant anger among some who believe parents have the sole discretion to determine what’s best for their kids. /5
But the truth is, children don’t ‘belong’ to their parents. They are individuals, and while some of their rights are necessarily curtailed (eg. they can’t vote), they have many of the same rights that adults do. /6
This includes the right not to endure unnecessary pain or suffering.
And in both instances, there was no realistic chance of either Charlie or Alfie getting better.
/7
And in both instances, there was no realistic chance of either Charlie or Alfie getting better.
/7
Therefore, as painful and as traumatic as these cases are, in my opinion, the doctors and the courts were correct to withdraw life-sustaining treatment (which was painful), and take a palliative approach instead.
In both cases, this was done in the best interests of child. /8
In both cases, this was done in the best interests of child. /8
As medicine continues to advance, and as we can sustain life for longer and longer, we ALL need to have serious conversations about what price we are willing to pay to keep ourselves and our loved ones alive, especially when the prognosis is bleak. /9
Because the truth is, sometimes sustaining a life (which the parents desperately want to do), using painful interventions, is not the correct path- and ongoing treatment is both unkind and violates a child’s rights
/End
/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
