Hi andrew,
I agree with you that people should be able to refuse intrusive treatment if they wish. But this isn't about intensive care machines; we're talking about simple drips here, and as I say, how are they going to check whether that is what the person wants, if their directive does not have to be written down? If the person has made an advance decision, why couldn't it be written down at the time they made it?
The reason I am so worried about this is because I have been told by people who are friends of mine about bad practice. My friend's aunt went into hospital a couple of years ago; i think it was stroke, and she'd come round. However, her condition was rapidly deteriorating and it was only when a medical friend went to visit her that they found out what was wrong; they weren't feeding her and she was dying of dehydration. He ordered them to put her on a drip and she recovered quite the thing and came out of hospital.
Another friend of mine was working in a nursing home and she came in one morning and was ordered not to go into the room of one of the people she looked after. She went in just the same, and found her on the floor; she'd fallen and it looked like she'd broken something. She was going to call an ambulance but the manager wouldn't let her, and being inexperienced, she went along with it. The woman died a few days later.
a Jehovahs witness rang my doorbell a few days ago. My mum made an appearance and we started to chat about medical matters. She told me that an aunt of her's had gone into hospital with stroke, had come round and been in a couple of days,but she was refused food and water and they only found out when the aunt told them, by which time it was too late. She died the same day. When she spoke to a nurse friend of hers about it, she said 'Oh we do that all the time.'
If you look at where the money is going just now; we can't get proper funding for Aricept, three nursing homes per week are shutting in Britain and pressure is being put on hospitals about bed blocking, I think its quite obvious where this legislation's heading. Do you think that the law would trust an oral report from an interested party like a relative, of an advance directive regarding inheritance of property? like heck they would! So why are they being so naive and trusting, esp when death usually involves inheritance?
I'm not the only one worried about the bill; Values into Action, Changing Perspectives and People First which are learning disability groups are worried about it as well.
Where are all the people from shut nursing homes going to go?Hospitals? Back home? When are we going to have a campaign to pressure the government to end the deadlock over nursing home funding; either ring fence the money going to councils, or fund them centrally but don't let them all shut?
Sorry to sound off Andrew. but the trouble is that we assume that everyone is as well disposed to the mentally ill as we are, and they're just not. We cost a lot of money and the state would love to be rid of us, and it shows in the systematic neglect at every level of funding in care. I think this bill is a classic trade off; more social rights in return for fewer people to treat and we should be opposing it. Nursing homes in Holland have dropped by 80% since they brought in euthanasia, and what governmnet wouldn't want to save that kind of money. I know the bill says this is not euthanasia, but it has left the kind of loopholes that is going to effectively bring it in by the back door.
Yours cynically and sadly,
Jools