they are only children
Reading this article, I found it to be quite a mind boggling situation because of the mere fact that children are involved. We all have a soft spot for children and their care but what if the care given, is taken away?…Many would not agree that it is a good thing but is it for us to decide whether you must withdraw or withhold treatment to a child that is not going to live?… I guess one will never know unless you are personally involved in a similar situation. Everyone will have their differences and opinions and no one in these type of situations will be able to tell what will be best for the child. The doctors will say one thing and the nursing staff, parents or family members will say another. I personally feel that parents as well as the health professional team should come to a solution, decided upon by all parties. In situations like these I think that withdrawing or withholding care can be done but to make it easier on the family or on the child’s remainder of life, palliative care should be administered just so that, those children can pass away with some dignity. I know in the real world things do not work like that but what if it could work regardless? Some situations are just beyond everyone’s morals and believes and one just have to decide in the end what is best for all parties especially the children involved because they are just helpless children after all
Thank you for your comments. I believe it IS for us (as health professionals) to make those tough decisions on behalf of others. The guidelines on the withholding or withdrawing of lifesaving treatment in children by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health clearly gives 5 situations where such action could be taken. I believe them to be very precise and acceptable. No one with a heart would ever want to take such action on an innocent child but when these situations arise, hard decision need to be made and someone unfortunately needs to make them. It’s all good and well saying the decision needs to be made by all parties involved but occasionally that will not be the case. Families, especially the parents of the child, are vitally important in decision making but they will not want to let go of their “baby”, even when treatment is futile. It is a hard reality to face but sometimes decisions need to be taken out of the parents hands before even more emotional trauma can be caused to the family. I agree with you 100% about the palliative care option, the child should be cared for right up to the time of death and this will also give the family peace of mind in the fact that the health professionals are not just giving up on their “baby”, but rather treating them with respect and dignity.
It is a tough situation, one I hope to never find myself in.
It has been correctly stated that when you are dealing with children the situation is extra sensitive. The role of parents, healthcare proffesionals, teachers, caregivers and even the police force are to protect our children and see to their well-being, that is why they enjoy special protein under our constitutional and legal systems. I believe that is why the case of children is so sensitive . It is all very easy on paper, but in reality, when dealing with a child’s precious life when do you as a parent/nurse/doctor decide that the child is in a state to withdraw or withhold treatment.
It seems so easy to put a set of rules down on a piece of paper and decide that those are the rules that should determine all decisions. It’s too difficult to do that, especially with children. we can’t look at thinks in black and white. I think that it should ultimately be the parents decision. but they do need to have all of the relevant information first, which is where the health professional come in. I also agree with the palliative care option, they should be cared for up until they die with all the respect and dignity that the child, and their family deserves.
i actually agree with withholding care for severly sick children. i was on rotation at a children’s hospital and i had one patient (cerebral palsy admitted with four septic bed wounds) that was very sick, her trouble started due to neglect at the home where she was kept. I dont agree that palliative care is a dignified option in all cases, sometimes that palliative home causes them to land up in hospital such as this girl i treated. where is the dignity in that?
I become very sensisitive when it comes to children. I don’t like seeing them suffer, that just breaks my heart. however, I think withholding care from a sevirely ill child is not the answer. That child has a right to be cared for. The parents wouldnt be left wondering whether they did a right decision or not, or asking themselfves questions like what if the child still had a chance to live. No matter how the may look like, the child should be care for up to the end of his/her life. what if the child could talk?what ifthe child were to make decisions about life,what if the childwouldsay she wantsto be caredfor up until she/he dies? what then? would they still withdraw the treatment from a child. Its tough decision to make, thare a lot to be considered in this situation. But in whatever decision that is there to be made,each and every person’s right whether a child or an adullt should be considered.
I think we should not confuse non-treatment with patient neglect. We can so easily become emotionally involved where childeren are concerned because they are considered as the “weaker” species and therefore our reaction to want to protect them is so much greater than it would be for an adult. It seems demeaning to catagorise children into stages in whether to withhold or stop treatment. I agree that palliative therapy is a more “humane” approach and will hopefully cause less of an uproar than with non-treatment.
I agree that evryone has a soft spot for children and it is extremely difficult to make a decision like that. I also agree that the parents should have the final say in wheather the child shoul live or not but must definitely have all the relevant information to make that decision. I believ that we as health professionals should voice our opinion but the parents should make the ultimate decision.
@2513508
i fully agree with you but that is why I said that the child should receive palliative care in these specific five cases as stated through the article because otherwise stated it would just be unacceptable and immoral.
When does one decide to withhold or withdraw treatment from a child who does not even understand the concept of pain? From personal experience an interview with parents that dealt with the situation it was found that the child’s body became very fragile after continuous treatment and bearing the sight of this it was very emotional for them. I agree with most comments made and article. The subject is very sensitive to discuss and I would not even want to be placed in such a position but as a health professional it is my heartfelt duty to treat such a patient to the best of my ability. As the previous comment on the subject only in those specific 5 cases in article it may be acceptable to me.
It is quite obvious that each and every party involved in deciding on whether or not to withhold treatment from a child will ultimateley have their own opinion. The parents and family members involved; their decision will be based on their personal feelings towards the child as well as on their relationship that they may have with the child. Whereas from a health care professional’s view, they will hopefully base their decision on the patient’s best interests and on what will actually benefit the patient in the long run. Whether or not the health care professional’s decision will be the ‘correct’ decision can only be determined in the long run. I personally feel that a hasty decision should not be made regarding whether to withhold treatment from the child or not, even if the child is critically ill, the final decision should be a well thought out and discussed by all parties involved in the overall care of the child.