FEEDING TUBES FOR STROKE VICTIMS: Yes or no? Who decides?

An American lady aged 90-plus recently had a stroke which left her unable to swallow.
She had previously signed an “advance directive” specifying that no artificial hydration or nutrition be given her if she wasn’t going to recover.
But her nephew, her designated proxy, insisted that Catholic teaching be practised in her case, and that a feeding tube be installed anyway.
* * *
Father Thomas Weinandy, spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, confirmed that Catholic health facilities have “an obligation to provide patients with food and water, including medically-assisted nutrition and hydration for those who cannot take food orally . . . you can’t just starve them to death. It’s hard to know whether someone will regain consciousness or not.”
A feeding tube was not, he said, required if it wouldn’t prolong life, or would be “excessively burdensome for the patient” or would “cause significant physical discomfort.”
In this case, doctors believed the patient had, at most, a few months to live, but would die sooner unless a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy ( PEG ) tube was surgically inserted.
* * *
A rumpus ensued when the nephew made his decision – but as it happened, in the midst of it all, the patient died.
So did that solve the problem? Not entirely. This particular lady has gone to her judgement. But there are going to be thousands (millions?) more, just like her, about whom similar decisions will have to be reached.
We seem to have reached a turning-point in human history. Some questions can no longer be avoided.
What is a human being? Who decides what is “burdensome” and what isn’t? Burdensome to whom?
* * *
The key point, for Catholics, is that you cannot do evil so that “good” may come of it.
Some people, including some doctors, don’t really distinguish between good and evil – when using those words they really mean more convenient or less convenient. For somebody.
