h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I don't think that a few hours of life gained by the use of machines *is* rightfully yours. If the machines can keep you alive long enough for you to recover, or give you time with people you love, then I would go to any lengths to let a patient use them, but when life *only* exists because of those machines, which is the case in most patients where there is an ethical dilemma, then there is no real life.

In Alexander's case, (and I don't believe you would have done any differently, faced with the reality), his organs were failing and the only thing keeping him alive was the machine forcing his lungs to work. The ironic thing was that that same machine was causing progressive acute lung disease, by forcing his damaged lungs to keep working. Keeping the machine on would have meant killing him by bringing the lung disease to a point where the tissues could no longer absorb oxygen, an acutely agonising process. Our choice was between stopping the oxygen so that he could die in comfort, in our arms, or killing him by machine, so that he died in agony, in an incubator.

Our case was not unique, in probably the majority of cases it is not a matter of whether you should turn off life support, but when you turn it off. Most of the machines cause damage after a point, because human tissues are not designed to be worked by machine. If you can give someone a few extra hours of life, then do so, but I don't think any of us have the right to artificially prolong suffering, just because we are reluctant to admit that someone we love has been lost.

As a Christian, I believe that in letting Alexander have rest, and go to his reward, we were guided by God.

Yes, my Godfather (I use the term loosely, in Islam we don't have Godfathers, but people who are equivalent in families) died of cancer a few years ago. It was painful, long, difficult, the doctors gave us as a family the option of pulling the plug several times, in fact we got the impression they were more concerned with freeing up the bed than with trying to alleviate his suffering.

What got me most was the fact that they approached us separately, disregarding the refusals for termination given by other members of the family. I am fairly certain this is a breach of medical ethics, but I'm not sure, and it's too long past now. My whole impression then was quite negative, and I feel very strongly, and quite deeply that we should do everything possible to prolong and preserve life, and maintain it's sacred state. My Godfather, while he was in pain, and excruciating amounts of it, still fought for life with every last breath. It's something one doesn't forget, and is worth honouring whenever people bring up situations like his in real life forums, or indeed digital ones like this.

Please understand me, I know what it is to watch someone you deeply love suffer, and die. It's not easy, I would never think of saying it is. But it's a matter of life and death, not just personal choice, and I don't think we can so easily call upon death to limit our exposure to stressful situations. How we respond to psychological pain is just as important as how the patient responds to physical pain. That makes a huge difference.

Presumably your Godfather still had at least moments of conciousness, if as you say he 'fought for life'. Alexander made no attempt to breathe on his own after the oxygen was withdrawn, and had obviously given up the fight - although the look of relief was obvious when the tube was withdrawn. We simply let events take their natural course.

Please don't think I support euthanasia - I believe that if someone is conscious we should give them the best possible care according to their wishes, even if death is inevitable within days. However in most cases when a patient is near death they are not capable of making their own choices, and that is when artificially prolonging their life is an unwarranted intrusion, unless they have specifically asked for such treatment while still conscious.

I also believe that people should have the right to request that medical treatment is stopped, even if they are still conscious. My grandfather repeatedly asked for his morphine to be stopped so that he could live his last days without constantly hallucinating, but was refused as it would shorten his life. Eventually they believed that he knew what he wanted and stopped the treatment, which led to his death sooner than would otherwise have happened, but allowed him to talk properly to his family again and be aware of us in his last days.

I also think that if someone is dying in extreme pain, giving them strong painkillers that while relieving the pain are too strong for a dying body and lead them to die half an hour earlier is hardly helping them to 'call upon death to limit our exposure to stressful situations'. There is a point at which artificial life is no longer true life, and our efforts to keep pumping air into a body are just interfering with God's intent.

Berndatte Lynn, thank you for choosing to share a very painful and intimate memory with us, to try to educate the less compassionate and more controlling amongst us.

I find it frankly incredible that anybody would dare to say "What worries me most about this discussion is that it doesn't seem to be elevating above issues of personal philosophy, or individual choice." as though trying to cram your own personal beliefs (or I might better say delusions) down someone else's throat - even at death's door - somehow confers you an elevated status. We see the true colours emerging with: "I still cannot bring myself to agree with your action." as though this Jaez' person's opinion matters, or should matter in the least, to the one who is dying or the ones who most love the dying person.

Cruelty, thy name is religion: "You denied him those few hours of life that were rightly his". As the bishop who wrote the initial words in this thread was everything a religious person should strive to be, you are everything that all religions should be ashamed of and repulsed by. You were not there, you were not him, you have not the faintest idea what went through anybody's head at that time. How dare you make such a statement?

I have no idea if I would do the same thing in Ms Lynn's situation, but I know that I would never dream of telling someone who had endured what she has "and I have to be honest and say that I don't know if you did the right, or the wrong thing." In other words, I have to be rude, insensitive and controlling beyond measure and say......No, you didn't have to say. You wanted to say, there is a difference.

Nobody cares, least of all this woman, about whether you think she did the right or wrong thing. She did what she judged to be the compassionate thing for her child.

"Pain is part of life". As is death. Try actually reading the first post at the start of this thread. If you are so sure of your god why are you so petrified of death? It's all just part of the big circle of life, and meeting death as an abject coward, clinging to a few last agonising breaths, or worse still forcing someone else to do so, is not a choice I would make. I have no idea how I will go when I go, but I do hope it is not suffering and terrified of one of the most natural things there is - death.

"and what happens afterwards is in the hands of God, in whom I trust completely."

How lovely for you - but try to get this through your head. Whether you trust your god or not is irrelevant. Your beliefs don't count one jot in the day to day life of most people. Your opinion in the matter, either way, is irrelevant. What matters is the opinion of the dying person. If we cannot communicate with the dying person then someone who loves them deeply is their next best advocate. Here's a major difference between you and I - if you were dying I would abide by your beliefs, however ridiculous I might find them. Spare me from the likes of you being my advocate on my death-bed.

"However, I am keenly aware that your religious beliefs maybe very different from mine, and that will play a huge role in this choice."

What a shame you couldn't simply have saved us the proselytising then.

I was too angry to reply to this a few days ago, I am still fairly angry now, and have amended this post many times to remove particularly vituperative phrases. I do not blame Ms Lynn for maintaining a dignified silence in the face of such breathtaking and deliberate cruelty. Why are so many religious people also control freaks? To make these comments to a mother who had lost her son in such tragic circumstances is simply inexcusable.

There are no words which will make you understand how repulsive your post was - not because you disagree with this woman, but the manner in which you disagreed, and above all the conceit evident in every word of your message. The stunning conceit whereby you ludicrously cling to the idea that your opinions should have any weight in such a circumstance. Nor for that matter should mine, or anybody but those most intimately involved in the process of dying.

Piety is a lovely cloak for deliberately twisting the knife, isn't it?

Apologies, I see that Bernadette Lynn has replied, which is more than I would have done in the circumstances.

"we shouldn't let emotions rule logic. although they are perfectly acceptable as partners, they are only that."

You might want to try and remember those words, next time you are busy telling people that Allah gave you life and only Allah can take it away.

"To make these comments to a mother who had lost her son in such tragic circumstances is simply ____"

What boundless grace Bernadette has.
We were basicaly speechless long after she responded. It was a stab to the heart to me, took my breath away. Posts of Bernadette and Jaez!

Bernadette Lynn you are very special to have handled this so beautifully. I hope you are ok, after responding to Jaez's statement.I hope it only served to further reaffirm your love for your child. You do not need to be questioning yourself now.

I posted the original words because I felt it could span a gap in some minds.I hoped it might ease some pain for others. Having been through similar, I know what the Bishops words did for me

"Please don't think I support euthanasia"
I understand.
Exactly why that is a whole nother topic. These views from Jaez are held by others, some Doctors. If we cannot Let GO, then there is No place for an added responsible form of euthenasia.

The above Post was meant for you Bernadette,even more than for Abaus. I could appreciate the emotion from Albaus and their desire to comfort you after what felt like an assaultto your heart.

I too have had a very dear friend die from cancer. Say what you like about a person's faith not having anything to do with how we face death, but I know she had a deep faith in God through Jesus, and because of that faith was able to face this ordeal with tremendous grace and dignity. There was no fear of death, nor was there any rush to die.


She'd had cancer for 5 years, with very little medical intervention, up until the last month of her life. Even then, it was only morphine to control the pain, and supplemental oxygen to help her breathe more easily. She did not use the oxygen all the time, and the morphine was administered through patches applied to her skin.

It was painful for me personally to watch her go downhill, but even though I know her pain from the cancer was never *completely* alleviated by the morhpine, I can't say it looked like she was ever truly suffering, because as her pain increased, they increased the morphine dose to keep up with it. Her family and friends worked hard to keep her comfortable right up to the end.

She was a lot more aware of the people in her surroundings than I expected her to be, right up to the very end. As I said, she was not even on the oxygen all the time. Sometimes the oxygen blowing through those little nose tubes start to tickle your nose, which is very annoying, so when it would start to bother her, her husband would remove the tube from her face until she began having trouble breathing again. The day she died was one such day. She was brushing her hand against her nose to try to get rid of the annoying tickle, and he asked if she wanted it off for a while. She said yes, so he removed it. Her breathing never became more labored indicating that she needed the oxygen again. She was gone within minutes.

It was a very peaceful departure from this life. She died with the utmost dignity.

Oh for the love of all that is good and holy, will you please, the lot of you stop trying to paint me as some sort of self-righteous religious maniac!

Bernadette, ultimate respect to you for living through what must have been an incredibly painful time for you. You and I both have been through the horrific circumstances of watching someone we love die, and the fires which forged our world views beat us both into different and (in this forum at least) opposed shapes.

But my irritation is not with you, your actions here have been exemplary, no, it's Albaus that has ticked me off, for his incredible insensitivity towards an argument that has been difficult enough for me to make under normal circumstances.

Doesn't he realize I'm not condemning Bernadette? I share in her sorrow - she lost a loved one, and my most sincere hope here is it never happen to her, or indeed anyone again? Hasn't he read over what Islam says about life? About the sacred nature of life? Can't he understand I am honour and duty bound to defend it in this or any other forum? That everything I have been taught about the preservation of life has been confirmed by my experiences? Clearly not.

Look, I'm ticked off for the mo, so I'm going to stop here before I offend anybody and go and cool down. Sigh. I really really wish people weren't so judgemental.

Even though I can see drawing a line in suffering of a sustained techo-life ending.
I believe that suffering too, has some value. It teaches others compassion, amoung other things. It can give the families time to absorb and heal before ,accepting a death. In many ways a quick death is more brutal to those left behind. I do not advocate ending all life suffering. It would be lovely if none exists. It does and can serve some purpose however unfair. All births and death have value and uniqueness.

In reply to Lady Scott,

I don't think anybody has said that a person's belief system does not have anything to do with how they face death - if by that you mean their beliefs may affect their decision on whether to prolong their life or not. My point, made very clearly, is that it does not matter what you, me, or anybody else wants or believes - it matters what the person who is dying wants and believes. I am truly glad your friend had a peaceful death and died as she chose with loved ones around her, she sounds like she was a brave woman, it's good she didn't suffer much. However, you do understand I hope that her case was simply hers, and an individual's death is unique to them - as are their choices. To allow someone to die as they see fit is to allow them to die with dignity, regardless of the actual circumstances.

Whether you choose to believe in a god or not, it is the ability to be unafraid of death that I find inspiring - and many, many people without any religious beliefs are accepting and comfortable with the idea of death. I recently have been privileged to be within the close circle of a friend of mine, a staunch atheist, undergoing brain surgery for the removal of two large tumours. The surgery was traumatic and his recovery - after two separate operations, one in each hemisphere, approximately a month apart - slow and painful. He has never wavered over being an atheist, and has shown tremendous courage and determination in light of the fact that it was quite possible that the operations would either kill him or leave him brain damaged - in which case he made it quite clear to everybody, particularly his parents and long time girlfriend, that he wanted to die.

On the eve of his first operation, he made sure his papers were in order and left legal instructions to try to ensure that nobody would usurp his rights and hold a religious ceremony, should he die. He did not want anybody to think that he would condone such a thing. He chatted on the phone to friends and was calm and pleased that the operation was going to take place after weeks of waiting. He tried to console his mother who was beside herself and was generally the most focused and alive we had seen him in weeks, as the pain of his headaches and the waiting had been taking its toll. I have never seen such courage, it made me proud that he had chosen me as his friend. In the face of what might easily have been his death, he exemplified the concept "Be Here Now".

We his friends and family, agnostics, atheists and the religious alike, are just delighted that he seems to be making a full recovery with all faculties intact. It simply never occurred to him to be afraid of dying, despite his belief that when he dies, that's it, the end. He strongly wanted to make a full recovery because he loves life so much.

I think that I would want to live for as long as I could if I were terminally ill, although nobody knows until they are actually in that position what they will think . But if I was dying and chose to die sooner rather than later, I would expect, in fact demand, the right to make that decision. I don't know what comes next, nobody does - but I do hope it is as grand an adventure as my life has been until now. However, if I die and I simply cease to be, that doesn't frighten me either. I live my life as fully as I can, and as it is pointless to worry about that which I cannot change or fret about things that are simply unknowable; so I don't.

And as I stated earlier, however ridiculous I might personally find somebody's beliefs, I would still respect the person's right to choose their own way of dying, as should we all.

Whatever your beliefs, they don't much matter to anybody but you - and that goes for me too. The dying individual has the right to choose whatever they wish. If they can't then that often falls to the ones who love them deeply. In a nutshell, if someone exercises their right to choose to die in a way that does not accord with your own beliefs or belief system - well, that's just too bad.

Well, Jaez, your response gave me the first chuckle of this thread. Here we have a person who would try to score cheap points off of a grieving mother and simply cannot seem to stop himself from proselytising at the drop of a hat. This same person is upset because he has been told in no uncertain terms that his desire to control other people's choices and behaviour, and apparent inability to see beyond himself, is not going to succeed.

I remind you of the following: "I still cannot bring myself to agree with your action." As though your opinion on the matter carried any weight at all! Or how about "You denied him those few hours of life that were rightly his, and I have to be honest and say that I don't know if you did the right, or the wrong thing." Which can only be a malicious attempt at cruelty. Besides which, your statement is at best inaccurate, as you have not the slightest idea what the boy wanted or went through. Finally "and what happens afterwards is in the hands of God, in whom I trust completely."

The crux of it is, you just cannot seem to grasp the reality that because you choose to believe in your god, your opinion and your beliefs still mean absolutely nothing, nada, zero to a person who is dying or whose loved one is dying - unless that person is you.

"Oh for the love of all that is good and holy, will you please, the lot of you stop trying to paint me as some sort of self-righteous religious maniac!"

This does seem rather like shooting ducks in a barrel - but I feel I have to point out the saying, if the shoe fits....

>Bernadette....You and I both have been through the horrific circumstances of watching someone we love die,

I am at a loss for words (though not for long, lol). Have you genuinely no idea how ridiculous this sounds? You are actually trying to compare your loss to a mother's bedside vigil for her dying son. I wonder, reading this, if you are still very young. I would like to think that only a teenager could be so stunningly egocentric and lacking in understanding.

I will try once again to make this clear to you. You have not the faintest idea of what this woman went through. Even if you had lost a child - and you evidently have not - both your experiences would have been different. You can never, ever compare and contrast grief, it is the ultimate in ignorance and poor taste. To say to anybody "I know what you are feeling" when they have lost a loved one, or to even imply it, is deluded in the extreme.

Please, really make the effort to understand that you do not have the faintest idea of what a mother would feel watching her child die. Is there no end to your conceit?

"Doesn't he realize I'm not condemning Bernadette? I share in her sorrow". Doing your best to add to her grief whilst sanctimoniously informing her that you disagree with her heart-wrenching decision, and having the nerve to imply that you know what she went through, but not condemning eh? Her son is dead, and in the end she was put in the unenviable position of making the call. Your comments were unhelpful, tactless and above all pointless, unless of course your desire was to try to wound her more deeply.

To be factual, I should also point out that I am a woman, and a mother, and I would happily walk in front of a truck, with a smile on my face, to save the lives of my children. I have also lost people in my life and have come close to losing one of my children.

But I still wouldn't try to say I know what Ms Lynn went through.

"Hasn't he read over what Islam says about life?"

Here we go again. I re-read Jane Eyre the other day, but I don't plan to live my life around it. Can you at least try to understand that your beliefs are just that - yours. Your godling books are just books, like any other religious books - some parts edifying, some repulsive, some boring and all of it written by people who died a long time ago. If you are not brave enough to face life without your comfort blanky, at least have the common sense not to annoy others with this tripe.

"Can't he understand I am honour and duty bound to defend it in this or any other forum?" It sickens me that you would attempt to make a virtue out of trying to control other people and deny them their right to freedom From religion. Stop trying to elevate yourself so you can feel justified in your immaturity and cruelty. You are bound only by your own fear and your deliberate choice to abdicate your own morals and your own responsibilities. You do not have the right to go around preaching to and hurting people so you can feel like you have scored points for your godling. Rather than make difficult life choices for yourself, you choose to abide by the words of long dead men - and that's all they are, words written by men. For further clarification you could read my post in "Is It Trendy to bash Christianity" post number 142, January 2003. There are also freethinking websites all over the internet.

Let's try this again shall we? So, you have chosen to believe something because you find comfort in that belief. Happily, your beliefs are absolutely irrelevant to others - unless they coincidentally share them. Your religion, and indeed all religions are of no importance, and have no relevance, in the decision of an individual to die as they choose - unless the dying person themself chooses to embrace the religion of choice. It is just this sort of controlling, sanctimonious garbage that makes me despise religious zealots. The fact that you cannot, or rather will not, accept that your religious beliefs have no bearing on the issue at all is both sad and frightening.

If I visited a friend in hospital who was religious, and I knew they were dying - I would find it very frustrating and upsetting to watch them, as I see it, waste their time grovelling on their knees to an non-existent entity. But I would keep my mouth shut and respect their right to make their own choices, and find their own comforts. Perhaps some day the light will dawn and you will see that your religion is no different, no less fear driven and no less nonsensical than any other.

"Sigh. I really really wish people weren't so judgemental". Yes it must be terrible when people have the utter gall to prevent you from cramming your delusions down their throat. It must be very hard to be so put upon by those who insist on making their own decisions and won't let you control their lives. How dare anybody not allow you to foist your beliefs where they are not wanted or helpful? It is clearly judgemental of me to insist upon everybody’s right to decide for themself – without your interference.

The essence of religious zealotry is judgementalism, (an irony you apparently fail to grasp), and an inability to just leave people alone to live their own lives. I couldn't give a rat's arse what you do with your life - live it and die it as you choose. Just be sure to afford others the same respect.








"Doesn't he realize I'm not condemning Bernadette? I share in her sorrow". Doing your best to add to her grief whilst sanctimoniously informing her that you disagree with her heart-wrenching decision, but not condemning eh? Her son is dead, and in the end she was put in the unenviable position of making the call. Your comments were unhelpful, tactless and above all pointless, unless of course your desire was to try to wound her more deeply.

To be factual, I should also point out that I am a woman, and a mother, and I would happily walk in front of a truck, with a smile on my face, to save the lives of my children. I have also lost people in my life and have come close to losing one of my children.

But I still wouldn't try to say I know what Ms Lynn went through.

"Hasn't he read over what Islam says about life?"

Here we go again. I re-read Jane Eyre the other day, but I don't plan to live my life around it. Can you at least try to understand that your beliefs are just that - yours. Your godling books are just books, like any other religious books - some parts edifying, some repulsive, some boring and all of it written by people who died a long time ago. If you are not brave enough to face life without your comfort blanky, at least have the good breeding not to annoy others with this tripe.

"Can't he understand I am honour and duty bound to defend it in this or any other forum?" It sickens me that you would attempt to make a virtue out of trying to control other people and deny them their right to freedom From religion. Stop trying to elevate yourself so you can feel justified in your immaturity and cruelty. You are bound only by your own fear and your deliberate choice to abdicate your own morals and your own responsibilities. You do not have the right to go around preaching to and hurting people so you can feel like you have scored points for your godling. Rather than make difficult life choices for yourself, you choose to listen to the words of long dead men - and that's all they are, words written by men. For further clarification you could read my post in "Is It Trendy to bash Christianity" post number 142, January 2003. There are also freethinking websites all over the internet.

Let's try this again shall we? So, you have chosen to believe something because you find comfort in that belief. Happily, your beliefs are absolutely irrelevant to others - unless they also happen to share them. Your religion, and indeed all religions are of no importance, and have no relevance, in the decision of an individual to die as they choose - unless the dying person themself chooses to embrace the religion of choice. It is just this sort of controlling, sanctimonious garbage that makes me despise religious zealots. The fact that you cannot understand that your beliefs have no bearing on the debate at all is both sad and frightening.

Case in point - if I visited a friend in hospital who was religious, and I knew they were dying - I would find it very frustrating to watch them, as I see it, waste their time on their knees to an non-existent entity. But I would keep my mouth shut and respect their right to make their own choices, and find their own comforts. Perhaps some day the light will dawn and you will see that your religion is no different, no less fear driven and no less nonsensical than any other.

"Sigh. I really really wish people weren't so judgemental". Yes it must be terrible when people have the utter gall to prevent you from cramming your delusions down their throat. It must be very hard to be so put upon by those who insist on making their own decisions and won't let you control their lives. How dare anybody hold a contrary opinion to yours, and worse express it vehemently and coherently every time you drag out the old godling chestnuts? It is clearly judgemental of me to insist upon everybody’s right to decide for themself – without your interference.

The essence of religious zealotry is controlling judgementalism, (an irony you apparently fail to grasp. I couldn't give a rat's arse what you do with your life - live it and die it as you choose. Just be sure to afford others the same respect.

Apologies to anybody who reads the last message - it seems to have cloned itself, and I have no idea what &#8217 is all about, I certainly didn't type it! Perhaps my computer is having a nervous breakdown...

Albaus old bean, there's the difference between you and I.

I actually *care* about what I'm saying, and I try my very level best not to offend or hurt people, and take great care to apologize if I think I have done so by mistake.

It should be noted that Bernadette has so far said nothing bad to me about what I've posted here, even though it may have offended her, and again, this is a mark of the quality of her character. Something which I admire greatly.

However, to make personal attacks on the scale that you have, surely that's a bit well, extreme? Perhaps you should get over yourself. Or maybe not bother, something aren't worth overcoming.

In anycase, as to the topic of conversation, religion and death are intimately tied together. Most have strict rules about what death rituals and the status accorded a human being during their final hours, and these it must be said vary widely. Perhaps the differences between my point of view and those expressed in this forum reflect this? I hope we've touched something deeper though, and are dealing with issues of fundamental importance to all people everywhere.

My position, if you want to call it that, is very clear. No Euthanasia - Ever.

Please note that I draw a distinction between this and the removal of artificial life prolongers of certain specific types, mostly mechanical, and unintegrated. So in Bernadette's case I agree with her actions. This agreement came about when she explained the details of the case, and her motivations. Each case is individual, as is each patient. My only concern here is the preservation of life as much possible, for as long as possible, and I for one think that's a noble goal worth fighting for.

It's almost funny. It's almost as though I were speaking in a foreign language and you were replying without any understanding of the words you were speaking.

Jaez, this is the last time I intend to reply to you unless you have something new or relevant to say, as I seem to be repeating myself here to no effect. Here's a thought, try replying to my many and varied points in previous messages, before you repeat the same old party line, once again.

>I actually *care* about what I'm saying, and I try my very level best not to offend or hurt people.

This is a joke surely. You try your very level best to preach your particular godling belief to all and sundry, under any circumstances, however inappropriate.

You are still labouring under the misapprehension that anything you think matters at all to a person who is dying. Here you say:

>My position, if you want to call it that, is very clear. No Euthanasia - Ever.

Still, the same conceit. What a person has requested of their loved ones carries no weight with you. Ridiculous, silly, conceit. Your "position" doesn't matter. Shall I try that again? What you think doesn't matter. The wishes of the dying do.

>In anycase, as to the topic of conversation, religion and death are intimately tied together.

No, they are not. Since you seem to have a problem grasping this, let me repeat myself - No, they are not. Unless by this you also mean beliefs which repudiate religion - but on the whole I rather doubt it. So, once again - No, religion and death are not tied together at all - unless you choose to embrace (any) religion. Is that really so difficult for you to understand? To many millions of people throughout the world, your religious ideas (or anybody's) are absolutely unimportant, nonsensical and without any bearing on their lives - or deaths.

>Each case is individual, as is each patient.

One of the few sensible things you've said here.

Now, try re-reading all of these posts, particularly the Bishop's statement at the beginning. Then try answering some of the points I and others have raised. Then, if you have something new or interesting to say, feel free to reply. Until then, you hold no more interest for me.

An interesting piece of news I found on BBCi, BBC News World Edition recently: You can go to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2819149.stm or just type in BBC World News and I am sure you can find it.

Pensioner's 'Do Not Resuscitate' tattoo:

Ms Polack's tattoo sets out her wishes. Retired nurse Frances Polack has taken an extraordinary measure to ensure doctors do not try to prolong her life against her wishes.

Ms Polack, 85, from Lyndhurst in Hampshire, is so concerned about unwanted medical care that she has invested in a £25 tattoo across the front of her chest.

It reads "Do Not Resuscitate" in capital letters and is set around a red heart with a line through it. She feels it is the only way to ensure that doctors take account of her wishes, and that anybody opening her blouse to try to restart her heart will stop immediately.

There have been instances of "Do Not Resuscitate" instructions being found in patient notes after they have received emergency care. And Ms Polack is concerned that the living will she carried in her handbag might go unseen by medics busy trying to save her life.

Frances Polack is a former nurse. She also fears that plans to put more than 700 defibrillators in public places will increase the likelihood of a well-meaning stranger trying to give her a few more years.

Ms Polack told Nursing Standard magazine: "I don't want to die twice.
"By resuscitating me, they would be bringing me back from the dead only for me to have to go through it again.

"There is enormous pressure on doctors and paramedics, often from the relatives, to try to revive patients at any cost, even when the patient has made their wishes clear on hospital notes.

'I am not afraid of dying. But I am afraid of living when I should be dead."

Survival rate:

Ms Polack said her years as a nurse had left her well aware of just how hard doctors will try to keep a patient alive.

By resuscitating me, they would be bringing me back from the dead only for me to have to go through it again

Frances Polack: "By having this tattoo, nobody can be in any doubt. It's not something I've done on a whim, it can't be washed off and I won't change my mind," she said.

Her granddaughter Dr Claire Polack, a GP in Edinburgh, told the BBC her grandmother was right that the medical profession did not discuss the issue of resuscitation enough. "It's her way of easing her anxiety," she said.

Recent guidelines from the General Medical Council recommend that people should be involved in all decisions about their medical care.

Figures show that survival after resuscitation is only around 20% - and outside hospital the rate drops still further.