Section (B)
Decisions of the Heart
Assume for a moment that your 90-year-old mother has recently suffered a stroke. She is right-handed, and now she is unable to move her right arm and leg — they are worthless to her. She can make sounds, but she can't make herself understood.The condition has lasted two months and since there has been no sign of improvement, the doctor tells you she will never get significantly better. Until this time your mother has always been an active,independent person who lived on her own. Now she is completely dependent on others.
Next, x-rays show your mother has a lung infection — a frequent problem with stroke patients. The doctor then calls you, her only surviving relative."We can treat the infection with drugs and she'll probably get better in a week," he says. "When I say better, I mean she'll go on as she has — until some other germ comes along. Or I can deny her the
medicine, in which case she'll probably die in three or four days. We can make those days comfortable by giving her painkillers and sleeping pills. Which course do you want me to follow?"
Tough question, isn't it? On the one hand, you cannot bear to see your once vigorous mother living the painful, limited life to which the stroke has condemned her. On the other hand, you hate to be the one to decide to let nature take its course.I'll tell you which choice I would make in this theoretical situation. I'd say, "Don't give her anything to
fight the infection. Keep her comfortable and let's see what happens; maybe she'll fight off the infection on her own and if she doesn't, she'll die a peaceful death. I don't want to be responsible for condemning my mother to a living hell."
I can make this decision because I've gone down this road with patients many times. Recently I operated in vain on an eighty -year-old woman with cancer of the liver ... There was nothing I could do to relieve the problems the cancer had caused. She was an intelligent woman, without any close relatives, and a couple of days after the operation I sat down with her and explained the situation.
"I can give you some anti-cancer drugs," I said, "but they will make you sick and cannot cure you.Similarly, I can give you fluids through a needle in your arm, which will keep you fed as your appetite slips away; the fluids might add a week or two to your life. Or I can withdraw all other treatment and just give you a vitamin pill, and we can see what happens. Personally, my recommendation would be the last choice. I'll keep you comfortable, and we'll see what happens."
The patient elected to follow my advice and died peacefully, pain free, a fortnight later.Sometimes such a transparent decision is more difficult to come by. Recently I had a patient who suffered a severe stroke. He was completely unable to move and couldn't swallow anything. We gave him fluids for the first two weeks and then fed him through a tube which passed through his nose into his stomach.
After three weeks he was still completely unconscious, and the tube caused him to have a constant,painful sore throat ... I talked to his four grown children and told them I thought we should insert a tube directly into his stomach through a small hole so he could be fed without so much pain. I also told them, "I can remove the tube and just let him swallow whatever he can. Chances are he won't live long,but he won't be in pain." No one wanted to take the responsibility for permitting an operation, yet no one would give permission to stop feeding the patient entirely.
As a result, the poor man continued on for nearly three more months with a painful throat and frequent bleeding caused by sores in the mouth. He died of a major infection - a sad way to die.So what should responsible persons do when confronted with the necessity of such an enormous decision?What it all comes down to is common sense. For the 30 years I have been a doctor, and for hundreds of years before that, doctors and families have been quietly cooperating to decide what is best for a patient in the final phase of an illness.
In 95 percent of the cases a sympathetic, reasonable decision can be made after appropriate discussion. In 5 percent of cases where such a judgment cannot immediately be reached, the proper decision will become apparent after a few days or weeks of basic treatment, observing the patient's progress.
Let me sound one note of warning. Neither families nor doctors like to make life-death decisions. But there is no question that if either party insists on bringing in a so-called "neutral"; third party (usually some representative of the state or legal profession), not only will the process take longer, in many instances it will be more arbitrary and less sympathetic.
What we are trying to avoid is neutrality; the only people with any qualification to decide are those who know the patient intimately and can put his or her interests first. If there's one place from which the interference of lawyers and government officials should be barred, it's from the rooms of critically ill patients.
Words: 902
New Words
stroke n. 1.中風(fēng) 2.擊,打,敲 vt. 撫摸
worthless a. 無價值的,沒有用處的
dependent a. 1.依賴的,依靠的 2.取決于... ...的
x-ray n. 1. [C] X光照片 2. [C] X射線; X光
■infection n. 1.傳染病 2.傳染,感染
germ n. 1.微生物,病菌,細菌 2.萌芽,起源
deny vt. 1.拒絕給予,拒絕……的要求 2.不承認,否認
condemn vt. 1.迫使……陷于不幸的境地 2.批評,譴責(zé) 3.判……刑,給……定罪
theoretical a. 1.理論(上)的,假設(shè)的,推理的 2.根據(jù)理論(而非實踐)的
hell n. 1.地獄 2.極不愉快的經(jīng)歷(或事) 3.用以表示憤怒或驚訝,或用以加強語氣
vain a. 1.不成功的,無效的,沒有意義的 2.自負的,虛榮的
eighty num. 八十
liver n. [C, U] 肝
relieve vt. 1.減輕,解除(痛苦、疾病等) 2.救濟,援助
similarly ad. 也; 同樣地, 類似地
withdraw vt. 收回,撤消,撤退 vi. 縮回,退出,撤退
recommendation n. 1.建議,忠告 2.推薦,介紹
elect vt. 1.選擇,決定 2.選舉
fortnight n. 十四天,兩星期
transparent a. 1.明顯的,無疑的 2.透明的
tube n. 1.管,軟管 2.(倫敦的)地下鐵道
throat n. 咽喉,喉嚨,嗓子
insert vt. 插入,嵌進
permission n. 許可,準許,同意
necessity n. 1.必要性,需要 2.必需品
cooperate vi. 合作,協(xié)作,配合
phase n. 階段,時期 vt. 分期計劃,按階段執(zhí)行
sympathetic a. 1.有同情心的,表示同情的,同感的 2.表示好感或贊同的
so-called a. 所謂的,號稱的
neutral a. 1.中立的 2.(化學(xué))中性的
profession n. 1.(尤指需要特殊訓(xùn)練或?qū)iT知識的)職業(yè) 2.行業(yè),(某一)職業(yè)界 3.聲明,表白
arbitrary a. 任意的,武斷的;專斷的
qualification n. 1.能力,條件;合格性 2.資格,資歷
intimate a. 1.親近的,親密的 2.私人的,秘密的 vt. 暗示,提示
intimately ad. 親密地,私下地
interference n. 干涉,干預(yù)
bar vt. 1.阻止,不許 2.阻礙,阻塞 n. 酒吧,吧臺
Phrases and Expressions
make oneself understood 使他人明白自己的意思,說清楚自己的意思
on one's own 單獨,獨自 獨立地
be dependent on 依賴,依靠
treat with 以... ...治療,用... ...治病
go on (情況、形勢、狀態(tài)等)持續(xù)不變
come along 到達,出現(xiàn)
on the one hand …on the other hand… 一方面... ...另一方面... ...
condemn sb. to sth. 使某人做不愿做的事,把某人逼入某種狀態(tài)
take its course 任其自然發(fā)展,按常規(guī)進行
fight off 抵抗,擊退,避開
be responsible for 對……負有責(zé)任
in vain 無結(jié)果地,無用地
come by 努力獲得
chances are (that…) 可能
confront with 使面對(問題、挑戰(zhàn)等)
die of 死于
come down to 歸結(jié)為,實質(zhì)上是
bar… from 禁止某人做某事
充滿愛心的決策
假設(shè)一下你那90歲的母親最近中了風(fēng)。 她是個右撇子,如今卻不能移動她的右胳膊右腿——對她而言,它們就沒有用了。 她雖然還可以發(fā)出聲音,卻無法讓人明白她的意思。
這種狀況持續(xù)了兩個月,因為一直沒有好轉(zhuǎn)的跡象,醫(yī)生告訴你她可能永遠也不能完全康復(fù)了。 在此之前,你的母親一直健康活躍,生活自理,獨自居住。 如今她卻要完全依賴他人了。
而后,X光透視顯示,你母親肺部受到感染,這是中風(fēng)病人的常見病癥。 于是醫(yī)生給你打電話,因為你是她惟一在世的親人。
"我們可以用藥物治療感染,一周后她可能會好起來," 他說,"我說‘好起來’,是指她會保持她感染前的狀況——直到出現(xiàn)某種別的病菌。 或者,我可以停止給她用藥,這樣一來,她可能三四天后就會去世。 我們可以把這幾天弄得舒服些,辦法是給她用止疼片和安眠藥。 你希望我采用哪一種方法?"
這是個棘手的問題,對不對? 一方面,你不忍心看著自己一度精力充沛的母親活在因中風(fēng)而變得痛苦而有限的生命里。 另一方面,你又討厭做一個決定聽任母親的病情自然發(fā)展的人。
我來告訴你我在這種情況下會怎么做。 我會說:"不要給她服用任何抗感染的藥物了。 要讓她舒服,然后看看會發(fā)生什么事。 也許她會自己克服感染。如果不能,那她也會死得安詳。 我不愿擔(dān)當(dāng)硬讓自己的母親生活在地獄里的責(zé)任。"
我之所以能做出這樣的決定,是因為我多次碰到過這樣的病人。 最近,我給一位80歲的患肝癌的婦女動過手術(shù),但沒有成效。 對緩解癌癥導(dǎo)致的病變我無計可施。 她是個聰明女人,沒有任何直系親屬。手術(shù)后幾天,我坐在她身邊給她解釋了當(dāng)時的情形。
"我可以給你用一些抗癌藥," 我說,"但是它們會讓你難受,而且還治不好你。 同樣,我也可以在你手臂上插上針管,通過它給你輸液,這可以讓你保持進食,因為你的食欲會漸漸消退;輸液可能讓你的生命延長一至二周。 或者,我可以撤消所有的治療,只給你吃維他命,然后再看看有什么效果。 我個人建議你選最后一種方案。 我會讓你沒有痛苦,然后再看看會發(fā)生什么事。"
病人選擇了聽從我的建議。兩周后,她安詳?shù)亍⒑翢o痛苦地離世了。
而有時,要得到如此顯而易見的決定卻很困難。 最近,我有一個病人嚴重中風(fēng)。 他完全動彈不得,而且不能吞咽任何東西。 頭兩個禮拜我們給他輸液,后來又通過一根導(dǎo)管將食物從他的鼻子輸送到他的胃里。
三周后,他依舊昏迷不醒,而導(dǎo)管使他的喉嚨經(jīng)常疼痛。 我與他的四個成年孩子商量,告訴他們我認為該把一根導(dǎo)管通過一個小洞直接插進他的胃里,這樣喂食他就不會那么痛苦。 我還告訴他們說:"我可以把導(dǎo)管拿掉,就讓他吃些他能吃得下的東西。 有可能他活不長久,但他不會太痛苦。" 沒有人愿意承擔(dān)允許施行手術(shù)的責(zé)任,然而也沒有人愿意允許完全停止給病人進食。
結(jié)果,可憐的老人又多活了近三個月,喉嚨依然疼痛不已,嘴里也因灼痛而經(jīng)常出血。 他死于嚴重感染——一種令人悲痛的死法。
那么,作為負責(zé)任的人,在需要做出這樣大的決定時該怎么辦呢?
歸根到底是個常識問題。 在我行醫(yī)的30年里,以及在這之前的數(shù)百年里,醫(yī)生和病人家屬一直合作默契,共同決定在疾病的最后階段怎么做才對病人最好。
有95%的病例,在恰當(dāng)磋商之后,都能做出人道而合理的決定。 另外的5%不能立即達成這樣的決議。遇上這種病例,做上幾天或數(shù)周的基本治療,觀察病人的進展之后,正確的決定就一目了然了。
在此我警告一句。 不論是家屬還是醫(yī)生,他們都不愿做出生死攸關(guān)的決定。 可是毫無疑問,如果任何一方堅持要有所謂 "中立"的第三方(通常是政府代表或者職業(yè)律師)介入,那不但會拖長決策過程,而且在很多時候,決策還會更加武斷、更加不人道。
我們試圖避免的就是中立。惟一有權(quán)做出決定的,是那些非常熟悉病人的人,能將病人的利益放在首位的人。 如果有一個地方應(yīng)該禁止律師和政府官員的干涉,那就是危在旦夕的病人的房間。