Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (19285)	9/11/2010 4:42:33 PM
From: dybdahl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Here, the doctors always have to ask for permission to treat, but they can declare the patient unable to make a rational decision. This is an obvious process for unconscious patients, but it can also happen for conscious patients that may be too unfocused to understand, that they are being asked whether they want to live or not. For instance, let's say that somebody says: "My priest says that I should say no to blood transfusions", what then? What if they say "I don't want a blood transfusion, my priest says that it is wrong"? What if they are unclear in their statement, whether it's their opinion or somebody else's, or if they don't speak the local language clearly? What if you only have the information from the relatives, or from people from the Jehova Witness organization? There were unclear situations, and there still is. However, the default is still to save lives.