to be disgusted at these comments made by Lord Sumption

[DoreensEatingHerSoreen]

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2021/jan/17/jonathan-sumption-cancer-patient-life-less-valuable-others

Lord Sumption today told Deborah James, who is living with stage 4 bowel cancer, that her life is less valuable than the lives of others.

As a fellow stage 4 cancer patient, I find it appalling that someone could suggest our lives are less valuable than those without cancer.
In spite of my diagnosis, I live a wonderful and fulfilling life, and intend to carry on doing so for as long as is possible.
It's terrifying to think that I may be denied access to a ventilator should I become ill with Covid, and I believe we have a collective duty to do everything we can to reduce pressure on the NHS and minimise the horrific collateral damage of Covid on those living with other illnesses and conditions.

I can promise you hamsterchump there is nothing luxurious about worrying whether I would have access to life saving treatment due to my cancer status if I were to become seriously ill with Covid.
I understand, that if a doctor had to make a choice between providing a ventilator to me, and a similarly aged person without cancer, I likely would not get it, inspite of me potentially having many years of quality life left in me yet. It's terrifying.
I feel we need to do everything that we can to reduce the pressure on ICU capacity, and the medical professionals that have to make these horrendous decisions.

These type of judgements are made all the time. As a poster upstream mentioned, the QALY system makes these decisions every year. Especially at a time when healthcare needs to be rationed, it makes sense to divert resources to people who have longer to live or the best chance of surviving with a good quality of life. Of course when it’s personal then it’s hard to be rational about it but I agree with what he said. If keeping people alive was the only thing to consider then we wouldn’t spend any money on anything else except the NHS pumping billions into diminishing returns of sustaining questionable quality of life in sick and elderly. Every country decides on what the balance should be. I’m not a sociopath - just a realist.

@MrsKoala

Did you watch the programme op? I did and I think his words have been taken out of context. He was saying that people in their 80s dying wasn’t as tragic as children dying. And that the measures will lead to terrible effects on younger people. He said continue to shield the vulnerable and lift lockdown on the rest of society.

While I don’t agree with him, I think this article is portraying a much more callous statement that was originally said. I’m sure you can get the programme on catch up if you want to see the discussion.

The vulnerable cannot shield themselves in solitary confinement for ever. Solitary confinement is used as a punishment for a reason. It is unbearable for any length of time.

Many of the vulnerable are elderly, frail or have other reasons why they need to be cared for. We have a very elderly relative in a support bubble with us. If lockdown is lifted on the rest of society, it makes it much more likely that dh or I could catch it, and then unwittingly pass it on to her, however careful we are.

In any case, it isn't just the 'vulnerable' who are becoming seriously ill or dying from Covid, is it? Lift lockdown on the rest of society and millions of the 'non-vulnerable' will catch it, and many will need to be admitted to hospital. The NHS will be overwhelmed and we will be back to square one again.

Yes it was shocking and IMO a despicable position to take and irresponsible forum to use his position to give credence to. Yes someone somewhere will have to make these decisions, that person should be a doctor with support of guidance. They are the people entrusted to make such a decision (and my heart feels terrible for them having to and the consequences of making such a decision on their own mental health). He is not qualified, and does not have relevant experience in this area. If he wants to profess his god complex for all to see, he should stick to law! I haven’t seen any doctors using their platform to diminish the value of any life. As for putting value on life, this is a philosophical question... many would argue that a violent criminals life is worth less than a mother of twos who provided for their family. In this horrible case, yes age and potential for recovery will be the deciding factors due to the situation. I am all for people taking actions including lockdowns to avoid this so far as possible.

@bluecheesefan
Solitary confinement is used as a punishment for a reason. It is unbearable for any length of time.

And yet that is what has been imposed on the 8+ million adults living alone in the UK for almost a year. Not to mention the people in homes who are not allowed to receive visitors and denied any human touch: extreme cruelty in the name of possibly prolonging their lives a little.

Stick his name down first on the list for no treatment & see how long it is before he screams it is unfair. What he is suggesting is just what the Nazis did during the war, anyone who was sick, disabled or ill was exterminated first to try to build a super race. Who is anyone to say that any life is more important than another. You could say that a child in care with no parents is less valuable than a child with two parents, it is a line that should never be crossed, the NHS has been skating on thin ice for years over this.

And of course children's lives have more value than octogenarians'. Throughout the animal kingdom, the young are prioritised. This is entirely natural; indeed, it is a biological imperative.

Everybody's life is equally valuable to their loved ones, but socially and certainly biologically, younger people - those in their productive and reproductive years - are the life blood of any society.

Let's put it this way: if everyone over 45 died (and it used to be the case that very many did), we would lose their collective knowledge and wisdom and abilities, but life would go on. However, if everyone under 45 died, the human race would die out within a few generations.

It seems that this truth has become unsayable. But it is truth, nonetheless. People across the world have lost the plot: essentially sacrificing the young and seriously hurting their life chances in an attempt to prolong the lives of the moribund.

@Nat6999. But we have always made those judgements. It’s not eugenics to suggest that pumping limitless funds into keeping old and sick people alive is not feasible. Read the QALY criteria and most other countries have similar frameworks .Treatment is based on value for money - how many years of healthy life a patient can hope to have. Comparing a virus to intentional genocide doesn’t make it true.

@Nat6999

Stick his name down first on the list for no treatment & see how long it is before he screams it is unfair. What he is suggesting is just what the Nazis did during the war, anyone who was sick, disabled or ill was exterminated first to try to build a super race. Who is anyone to say that any life is more important than another. You could say that a child in care with no parents is less valuable than a child with two parents, it is a line that should never be crossed, the NHS has been skating on thin ice for years over this.

Except that NOT ACTING, i.e., not intervening to artificially prolong the lives of people who would otherwise die, is the very opposite of such targeted action.

Indeed, you could say that fighting to prolong the lives of very old people in wretched health is of no benefit to anyone - least of all those people themselves. Not to mention when you SACRIFICE THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY INDEFINITELY in the attempt.

Most people would accept their life being more difficult (even in extremes) if it meant saving a life. That is what is being compared it is not death of a child v death of elderly as that’s not the situation. It is financial and social hardship versus death.

You're completely missing the point of lockdown, @McSilkson. It's not about prolonging the lives of the 'moribund' but about preventing the NHS from being overwhelmed in order that everyone is able to access it, for every kind of health issue.

They can't at present and that's with lockdown. Without, it would collapse and cause a hell of a lot more long term issues throughout society.

And it's not the most elderly sick people in ICU beds at present, the biggest percentage are in their 50s and 60s. Are they all moribund? Do they count?

I can totally understand why this is a highly charged topic.

But I'm really surprised at the amount of people who see it all as equal.

My mum was a hosp doc and I remember her telling me when I was young that when they got a young man in a and e who conked out of the table, or a child having an OP. That they would try to resuscitate for ages. That if they were doing a hip on a 90yo they would give it a good shot but not go and go and go.

Some may find that shocking but it's always been the way.

Fwiw a woman in her 40s with children is 100% in category a. It's young.

I know this stuff is really hard. I think it needs to be discussed though.

If the new variants are not affected by the vaccines. And it's global it will keep mutating that's what viruses do. How long do we go on?

There always needs to be balanced. Many people including children are being harmed by lockdown. The economic downturn will be incredibly hard. I wish it wasn't so polarised but understand why it is.

I've watched lord Sumption a few times and I think hes misunderstood at times and its possibly by the way he expresses himself. He has his own opinions as we all do.

There was a thread on here earlier where someones mums cancer treatment stopped due to Corona and she was 64 I think. That is not acceptable.

What of a sick child, who might only live 5 years? Are they less valuable than an 80 yr old who might live to 100?

And in @McSilkson dystopia, what would happen to a young woman with MS, who was not “productive or reproductive”?

I think is is horrendous how people feel entitled to make these value judgements on human life.

'Most people would accept their life being more difficult (even in extremes) if it meant saving a life. '

In the news today apparently there's been a 25% increase in serious child abuse (death and, well I don't like to think about it).

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-55682745

No I don't accept your statement. It's too simplistic. The figures in that article will be the tip of the iceberg.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/08/sharp-increase-in-uk-child-sexual-abuse-during-pandemic

'NCA figures shared exclusively with the Guardian show that during each of the 13 weeks of lockdown, around 350 cases of online child sexual abuse were passed to police, a 10% increase on the same period last year.'

And that's just the stuff reported to police.

I mean there's loads of stuff getting bad. Currently with furlough etc the job losses are on hold but they will come.

It's just not that easy. It's not that simple. And I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions. But we need to have these conversations.

I agree OP.

It's one small step away from "everyone is equal but some are more equal than others."

Worst my daughter has maybe 5-7 years she is currently 7.
My grandmother is 83 and I know what she would think.

'people feel entitled to make these value judgements on human life'

'people' don't.

Governments and agencies do. Some of it depends on their politics. Stopping people having a shit time/ dying costs money. There is a budget.

The situation is new but the fundamentals are unchanged.

@Greysparkles

I think the way this was put across was wrong, but these decisions may have having to be made due to lack of icu capacity.

Emotion has to be taken out of it. I just really feel for anyone who has to make these types of decisions and live with themselves after

We make decisions based on whether they are likely to survive an ICU admission, not whose life is most worthwhile FFS. Those are very different things.

Both me and DH and my parents and his dad would give up our lives to save our children.

We're mammals. We protect our young.

I have also done stuff like. Walked in front of a bus with my hand up to make it slam it's breaks on when I could see it was going to run over a boy who was coming home from school and too short for the driver to see.

Admittedly I am a bit reckless.

As a society, a group though. Don't we see the young as the most important? Even if they aren't ours?

I saw the television show and his words were taken out of context. Maybe watch the whole programme.

The reality of the situation is that with the current pressures placed upon the NHS (primary and secondary care), decisions are having to be made that we would otherwise not wish to make- or would usually have to make very often. Juggling who can be stepped down so that a new admission who is more unwell can get that bed, or so that a sicker patient can be stepped up even though ideally we would not move any of our patients as there is a clinical justification for all to be there, for instance. Sometimes age or pre-existing conditions do play a part in the decision making as it can impact on the chances of you surviving, put bluntly.

Not a single one of us wants to put cancer operations on hold or delay chemo- or radio-therapy. But, the reality is that unless we turn COVID patients away at the door to ensure a patient in theatre for an operation even has a bed to return from theatre to (never mind being sure there is a HDU or ICU bed available in the post-op periods, as is sometimes the case) we have little choice. So treatments of all kinds and many much-needed operations must be delayed.

In some hospitals it’s only the emergency theatres running. much of the rest have been turned into ICU’s or HDU’s. and/or the anaesthetic staff requisitioned to cover these newly created units. Heck, lots of staff are being redeployed to cover.

if I was a cancer patient, or a patient with severe/end-stage chronic illness of another kind, I think I’d probably feel it was unfair that COVID patients appeared too be being prioritised over me. And i can assure you as someone who has, and continues to be, one of the clinicians who has to make those hard decisions about treatment- it is very difficult and never done lightly. But the reality is that I must make a decision based on something, so all things being equal if there is something which negatively skews the balance of success, we have to chose the patient most in need but likely to survive. It does not mean one life is without value or less value- more that limited resources have to be focussed on those people most likely to survive.

Telling a patient and/or their families (especially when you are doing it by telephone) is one of the hardest things we do. Many, many of my colleagues are exhausted and struggling. I know i am. I know colleagues who are a little broken right now, some who have been shattered. I know some are making plans to get out once this is over- some just out of the NHS, some out of the country, some out the profession. Some all 3. Repercussions will be felt long into the future,

I will always trust the medical professionals taking care of me to make the decision that is in my best interest, but I understand that with limited reaources another life may have to be prioritised over mine. It's sad, and it's frightening, but I can accept that reality.

My specific concern is over those of us with cancer (or other incurable but treatable conditions) being told that their lives are less valuable.
I work, I am a single parent to a child
with additional needs, and I live a fulfilling life, my diagnosis does not define me. Why is my life less valuable than someone of a similar age without cancer? I don't have a death sentence, I may or may not live for many years to come, the same as someone without cancer.

In some cases I know of, young cancer patients being admitted to hospital with Covid are being asked to sing a DNR immediately, and being told they will not be put on a ventilator.

QALYs are a guide, but every cancer patient is unique, and for many of us, our prognosis is simply unknown - I don't know how long my current treatment will continue working, I don't know if the next treatment option will work, I don't know if I'll have access to a clinical trial, and if it would work. My oncologist cannot guess my prognosis, an ICU doctor would not be able to either.

If my chances of meaningful recovery from Covid are higher than someone else's, I may still not get priority treatment, because the words "stage 4 cancer" are on my admission form.

The problem is we are dealing with unknowns. I don't envy the medics who need to make these impossible decisions - but I do feel that we must do everything we can to prevent ICUs from becoming overwhelmed in the first place.
As much as I want to stay alive - I don't want another person - of any age or medical status, dying because I took a ventilator over them!

@Fr0thandBubble

His words have been taken out of context. He said his grandchildren’s lives were more valuable than his, because he is old and has had most of his life already. I completely agree with him on this and everything else he has said on the this government’s approach to the Coronavirus.

I too found myself agreeing with him.

If both I and one of my granddaughters had a life-threatening illness and there were only enough funds to treat one of us, then it should be my granddaughter who is treated, not me. That's just the way it is. There is no way on earth that I would want to be given priority over her.

There will never be enough money to treat everybody for every illness and every emergency.