Thoughts
After these interviews as well as seeing the affects taking care of my grandfather had on my grandfather made me wonder about some things. One idea that was touched on a couple of times was my grandfather driving. My mom mentioned that she thought my grandfather was a danger to himself and that my grandmother was terrified that he would hurt someone. My family was conflicted about taking away his keys but they also felt like he wasn't fit to drive. This talk of when should they take away his keys begs the question, if someone isn't able to care for themselves, to what extent are you responsible for their actions? Like if a mentally handicapped child unintentionally insults a stranger, was it their parents responsibility to prevent it? Are they responsible for the impact their actions have or because they don't know better are they not to blame? What is there role?
Furthermore, how much money should a family funnel into the care of someone with a terminal disease. It was clear that Alzheimer's would sooner or later kill my grandfather. At one point a month or so before he died, he was very close to dying of a Urinary Tract Infection. It would be easy to treat it, but left untreated it would kill him. In some ways that would end the suffering, but the infection was horribly painful. What was the right thing to do? We decided to treat the infection because he was in so much pain, but at any point we could have just given him pain medications and not give him water- a painless and quick way to end a life. Would that have been more humane? Would that be ethical? He was old and would get there eventually, but does that change anything? It was impossible to know.
Furthermore, how much money should a family funnel into the care of someone with a terminal disease. It was clear that Alzheimer's would sooner or later kill my grandfather. At one point a month or so before he died, he was very close to dying of a Urinary Tract Infection. It would be easy to treat it, but left untreated it would kill him. In some ways that would end the suffering, but the infection was horribly painful. What was the right thing to do? We decided to treat the infection because he was in so much pain, but at any point we could have just given him pain medications and not give him water- a painless and quick way to end a life. Would that have been more humane? Would that be ethical? He was old and would get there eventually, but does that change anything? It was impossible to know.
|
|
|