Afraid to die

October 19, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Dr. Mercy Obeime, a doctor and the medical director of St. Francis Neighborhood Health Center at Garfield Park, made an interesting observation during a recent IBJ Power Breakfast on health care.

Obeime, who was on a panel of health care experts at the breakfast, noted how people have come to expect life-sustaining miracles even when a patient is old and near death. Often, she said, relatives insist, “Well, we’re not ready for this …  they can’t die, they can’t die.”

Those miracles are expensive, of course, and her comments came as the panel discussed how to avoid building too much capacity into the health care system. You can find her remarks and the thoughts of others on the panel here.

Death is a part of life. Does fear of death cause Americans to expect too much from our medical system when it comes to prolonging the lives of the old and infirm?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Life becomes more precious the older we get
    BabbageOctober 19, 2009 12:15 PM
    Just a thought...

    If people are going to consider spending tens of thousands of dollars on risky treatment that might allow them to live a few more months or years at the most, maybe they should start thinking more about where they are going to spend their eternity. Isn't that what we should really do to treat our loved ones well? Why cling to the illusion that another operation will add a few more years?

    After all, last time I checked, mankind never discovered the secret of immortality.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Freedom to Choose
      dissapproving citizenOctober 19, 2009 1:15 PM
      Fear of death is a natural part of life as well. Many people may indeed expect impossible feats from today's medicine, but what is standard life saving practice today, would have been considered a "miracle" just 5 or 6 years ago. It is pretty audacious to start to think of making life or death medical choices for others. When your mother is sick or injured... or your child....and the new government imposed health plan determines that the chances of them having the "quality of life" that THEY determine as standard, is unlikely.... then what? The doctor writes a script for pain killers to make people "comfortable" as they pass? Do we really want others determining whether we choose to not give up on our ailing family members? For at least right now, this still is a supposedly FREE country for which we each have the right to make decisions for ourselves. Now there may be times when there truly is nothing more that can be done, but what choices are made at that point are up to the family ...not an insurance company or especially our government. Something we all should consider before it is too late to be changed...
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Freedom to choose
        jmooreOctober 19, 2009 2:05 PM
        In response to "disapproving citizen," yes, the choice to continue care for an ailing person does belong to the relatives; however, the cost to society (as well as the personal cost to the family) should also be part of that choice, and the family needs to be realistic. Should someone (be it the family, an insurance company, etc.) spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a "miracle" that will add less than a year of life to a severely ill elderly person, simply because the family isn't ready to let Grandpa go? What about Grandpa's wishes? I'm 100% against insurance companies making the decision for purely profit reasons, but we all have a duty to think about the sustainability of the overall health care system when considering our options.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment

      Post a comment to this blog

      COMMENTS POLICY
      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
       
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
       
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
       
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
       
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
       

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      ADVANCED SEARCH
      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT

      1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

      2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

      3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

      4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

      5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

      ADVERTISEMENT