Dr Ezekiel Emanuel said no medical intervention after 75 ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My mom got cancer at 80. Aggressive treatment helped. The no treatments awas not an option as it was mouth cancer. So, in the end. She is doing ok. I have her in my life for as long as she is alive. I cannot lose her. She is a gem and the glue that binds us all together.

What about her own quality of life? You seem only concerned with her role and service in your life.

[Anonymous]

I can understand that argument in late 80s. Still don't agree with it, but see why it's being made.

75 is too young . Most of my family members are active in their 70s. My grandmother is living a full life at 85. Nothing serious other than back pain due to weight issues

[Anonymous]

My granddad didn't have chemo when he got aggressive lung cancer at 79. Chemo wouldn't have helped much anyway, maybe given him a few more months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all agree that my father's aggressive medical treatment that prolonged his life a year was a mistake. We shouldn't have done it.

Hopefully it was your father who chose it. You don’t know how you would feel if you had not pursued it. My mom wanted lots of intervention, and it prolonged her life but her quality of life was not good, and she had a lot of pain. A lot of people would not think it was worth it but it’s what she wanted. Nowadays it seems like the pendulum has swung too far the other way and you are deemed almost selfish if you decide the way you want to fight is by using the medical intervention that is available. I wish everyone the option to choose for themselves how they want to spend the end of their time on earth.

I wish everyone had that option too. But if you open the the New York Times today, you can read about a 40 year old mom who isn’t getting basic health checkups and medication for very treatable conditions because her family is struggling to pay off an $8000 medical debt for a 3 day hospital stay her infant had for febrile seizures. She had insurance but a high deductible.

My point is that in an ideal world the elderly could have the best medical care possible. But when we as a society aren’t providing universal health care to basically healthy people, it’s ignorant not to talk about the trade offs.

These are incredibly hard choices to make, and I agree with you to a point. We could also question the amount of money paid to save a very small preemie or person who survives an accident with little chance of recovery, etc.

[Anonymous]

For him! He said people are free to make their own decisions.

[Anonymous]

I’m watching my mom die of MS. It’s horrifying. If I had MS, I would do assisted suicide in Switzerland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching my mom die of MS. It’s horrifying. If I had MS, I would do assisted suicide in Switzerland.

Same. This is my plan if I start developing dementia also.

MIL has been receiving chemo for the last two years. I don’t see the point.

[Anonymous]

I have a pension. I am not going to die until I have squeezed every last cent from my employer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching my mom die of MS. It’s horrifying. If I had MS, I would do assisted suicide in Switzerland.

Same. This is my plan if I start developing dementia also.

MIL has been receiving chemo for the last two years. I don’t see the point.

It depends on how much it affects QOL. My mom received chemo for lung cancer between 76-79 years old and had relatively mild symptoms. The extra 3 years she got were long enough to let her get to know her grandchild, who was born around the time she was diagnosed. She thought it was worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the actual article people. He said for HIMSELF he won't get treatment if he gets cancer after 75.

Exactly. People are misinterpreting what he said and his intentions. He is reasonable in my opinion. I'm a nurse and after a certain point (this varies greatly from person to person based on your current health), some of the treatments have more detrimental effects than benefit. For me personally, like Dr. Emanuel, quality of life will be the most important driver for my medical decision. I'm not going to bother with mammograms, colonoscopies, bone density scans, yearly blood tests, etc. When I'm in my 70s, I don't want chemo for cancer. It's very personal choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the actual article people. He said for HIMSELF he won't get treatment if he gets cancer after 75.

Exactly. People are misinterpreting what he said and his intentions. He is reasonable in my opinion. I'm a nurse and after a certain point (this varies greatly from person to person based on your current health), some of the treatments have more detrimental effects than benefit. For me personally, like Dr. Emanuel, quality of life will be the most important driver for my medical decision. I'm not going to bother with mammograms, colonoscopies, bone density scans, yearly blood tests, etc. When I'm in my 70s, I don't want chemo for cancer. It's very personal choice.

Does this mean no doctor visit unless you have some kind of pain?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the actual article people. He said for HIMSELF he won't get treatment if he gets cancer after 75.

Exactly. People are misinterpreting what he said and his intentions. He is reasonable in my opinion. I'm a nurse and after a certain point (this varies greatly from person to person based on your current health), some of the treatments have more detrimental effects than benefit. For me personally, like Dr. Emanuel, quality of life will be the most important driver for my medical decision. I'm not going to bother with mammograms, colonoscopies, bone density scans, yearly blood tests, etc. When I'm in my 70s, I don't want chemo for cancer. It's very personal choice.

Does this mean no doctor visit unless you have some kind of pain?

I would continue to see a primary care physician, get the recommended vaccines (flu, pneumonia, shingles, COVID, etc.), treat high blood pressure and cholesterol if necessary because I don't want to have a stroke and live years with all the stroke related disability. It's not really possible to determine years ahead of time what you would do or not do because it's all situational but after a certain age, I'm not going to get chemo or go through cancer screenings, I don't want dialysis if my kidneys fail or open-heart surgery. Focusing on palliative care and quality of life does not mean you don't see a doctor and it does not mean, you won't receive care from the medical system. The difference is that the care you receive is focused solely on your quality of life.

[Anonymous]

Barbara Ehrenreich had a similar philosophy.

https://www.yesmagazine.org/health-happiness/2018/05/29/barbara-ehrenreich-why-im-giving-up-on-preventive-care

[Anonymous]

My family member will be doing radiation on his 81st birthday. I hope it’s worth it for them and not too stressful. I think the daily drives and visits will be draining

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can understand that argument in late 80s. Still don't agree with it, but see why it's being made.

75 is too young . Most of my family members are active in their 70s. My grandmother is living a full life at 85. Nothing serious other than back pain due to weight issues

He’s a doctor. I think he has a better grasp of the realities of the situation than your personal experience.