FEATURE
The cost of providing long-term care, particularly for individuals with complex needs, is astronomical. As people live longer, oſten with multiple conditions, the financial demands on healthcare infrastructure increase exponentially. In this context, the option of assisted dying, while oſten presented as a matter of personal choice, has the potential to significantly reduce the burden on already stretched resources.
This is not to suggest that healthcare providers are actively advocating for assisted dying in a cynical attempt to save money. Rather, the pressure to deliver efficient and sustainable care inevitably leads to a re-evaluation of resource allocation.
When individuals are kept alive against their wishes, oſten in a state of considerable discomfort and without any meaningful quality of life, it prompts difficult questions. Should time and resources be devoted to providing medical interventions that the patient does not want, when those same resources could be directed towards areas where the impact on wellbeing could be greater? Is it ethically defensible to spend vast sums on sustaining life when the individual has explicitly expressed a desire to die?
“Is it ethically defensible to spend vast sums on sustaining life
when the individual has explicitly expressed a desire to die?”
It is estimated that there are more than 24,000 patients in a permanent vegetative state (PVS) or minimally conscious in NHS care in England. The cost of treating a patient in a PVS is more than £100,000-a-year, excluding legal bills for the NHS and the cost of Legal Aid for the family.
The family of Jodie Simpson, who spent four years in a PVS between 2012 and 2016, was forced to apply to the Court of Protection to seek permission for doctors to withdraw feeding, to allow their daughter to die. Such applications are made by the local clinical commissioning group and usually cost around £50,000. Only about 100 such applications have been made in more than two decades.
Jodie, from Barrow-in-Furness, in the north-west of England, suffered irreversible brain damage aſter taking an overdose. She could breathe without assistance but was fed and given liquid through a stomach tube. After spending 10 weeks in intensive care, she was moved to a nursing home. While her physical condition was stable, doctors said there was no sign of consciousness and she suffered occasional seizures.
Professor Derick Wade, an Oxford-based consultant in neurological rehabilitation estimates that managing one person in a vegetative state for 10 years costs the NHS the equivalent of saving five avoidable deaths in other people.
Although rarely stated explicitly, every healthcare system operates within a fixed budget. Choices have to be made about where to allocate resources and, equally importantly, where not to allocate them. While the rhetoric surrounding healthcare is usually focused on treating and curing illness,
21
www.tomorrowscare.co.uk
the reality is that healthcare providers must operate within a world of constraints, where money spent on one patient means less money for another.
The growing acceptance of assisted dying has been further fuelled by the fact that people now have greater power than ever before. The days when healthcare professionals held all the cards are long gone. Patients increasingly seek out information and are actively involved in decision-making processes, using online forums to share their personal experiences.
Celebrities speaking out on assisted dying, even though their views have no greater validity than anyone else's, help to keep the subject in the public domain and legitimise the debate. This has created a more consumer-driven dynamic in which individuals are taking greater responsibility for their health and are pushing for options that were once unimaginable.
Ultimately, the economics and market forces surrounding healthcare are shaping the debate on assisted dying. As populations continue to age and healthcare costs continue to rise, the pressure to allow people to make choices about their end-of-life experience will only increase.
While moral and ethical considerations will always play a part in the discussion, the financial pragmatism of the situation cannot be ignored. The conversation is shiſting from one based on what is morally acceptable to what is economically sustainable and the growing demand for consumer choice will be the deciding factor. The current trend indicates that the push for the acceptance of assisted dying is likely to become an irresistible force in the coming years.
https://sneddencampbell.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42
