Cancer treatment in the elderly.

Seems a bit harsh. An Uncle 85 was given the full range available for lung cancer, it still killed him, but he lived a year longer than the original prognosis. He enjoyed life and thought the extra year was worth the trauma. I doubt I would though but that's individual choice. It's a bit of a shock to learn of that cut off age.

Although in some cases other existing ailments can make the treatment redundant or dangerous enough to actually shorten their lives.

I think we may have to bite the bullet and realize that there won't be enough to go around forever and somebody is going to have to miss out on something. It's a hard but pragmatic fact that logic demands that the younger, with more to lose, be treated ahead of the elderly if necessity forces a choice. Hard to face though isn't it?
 

I tend to agree Di; and we all have to die of something, sometime .
The NHS is poorly managed at the moment, in my view; changes will have to be made, again, but this way does seem a clittle harsh.
 
I received a call from our local VA hospital asking me if I knew of person named ------ -------. I told them he was my father, but I hadn't seen my sense I was 13. They explained that he was refusing to accept further treatment, so would I come get him? As I was his only child I said yes. They gave him 3 months max. He was on oxygen, was diabetic, and had already had a heart bypass. I thought, I can do this, it won't be for long. He survived for 5 more years.
 
Oh Ina, I feel for you. At least this forum makes you laugh!
done any dusting lately?!
 

Back
Top