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 thought Deborah James was so eloquent in her reply:

twitter.com/bowelbabe/status/1350778543513460737?s=21

Lord Sumption is very opposed to lockdown. Let's be glad he isn't responsible for making decisions that would mean doctors had to make even more difficult decisions than they are faced with already.

Best wishes for you continued wonderful and fulfilling life DoreensEatingHerSoreen.

Consider the life of a young man who has never and will never work, nor do any good turn for anyone until his dying day, and who has killed as many people as he could, who states he wants to kill more, the moment he finally gets out of prison, and to convince others to his mindset while he is in there, costing the taxpaying families of his victims a fortune.

His life must be 'worth more' than theirs, and worth more than that of someone like Professor Hawkins, who couldn't move unaided, but earned an excellent living, did pioneering work and paid a lot of tax until the day he finally died, mustn't it?

And the imprisoned mass killer's life must be worth more than old people like the doctor now in his 90's, still braving a war zone because nobody else dares go, and nobody else has his skills as a war injury surgeon.
Severely disabled people's lives, and old people's lives, are worth less and only young and healthy people should get life saving treatment.

Merely being young means you are a treasure to yourself and all around you, and an asset to society, which proves your 'worth', doesn't it? Being a drug addict, never working, constantly doing harm, and with absolutely no intention to stop, is of high 'worth'. Really, Lord S.?

Getting up at 3 a.m., as you have for seventy years, to get to work in the family's corner newsagent, (and permitting yourself at last a weekly day off, after all those years, to follow your first hobby, distance running, ) makes your continued existence worthless, does it?

Speak for yourself, Mr. Sumption, never for anyone else, and remember that, as you know, you do have the complete freedom, under English law, to take your own ' worthless' self for a long walk on a short pier, if that is truly your opinion, to prove it for yourself. Your gold plated civil service top rate pension is indeed a great burden on all the rest of us, and if you yourself really don't value staying alive to take the money from us, we can certainly use it for social and respite care instead.

These decisions are already made every day and have been since ICU was first invented in response to another infectious disease - polio.

Whether or not mechanical ventilation is offered is a medical decision. We cannot offer treatment that is futile; it is unethical.

It is very common not to offer certain interventions to people with certain metastatic cancers. NOT because their lives are less valuable but because we need to know that we are appropriately offering treatment for reversible problems, and we need to recognize things that can’t be reversed, recognise dying, and recognise that there will come a time in everyone’s life when the appropriate medical treatment is to focus on comfort and dignity. People who are inappropriately ventilated or receive other invasive treatment can in fact be robbed of comfortable time with their family. It is a very serious thing to do.

It is really, really not as simple as there are two ventilators and three patients and you have to pick. It’s vastly more complex and based on what is right for the patient in front of you.

The fact that people have no idea that I and others make these decisions daily is a shame; that they think we do so on spurious grounds is even worse.

I assure you it is an extremely heavy burden that contributes to our high rate of burnout and suicide. Nobody feels ‘entitled’.

I'm guessing that old chap Captain Tom's pretty worthless, at his age, too then?

AnabelleMarx
Thank you for all that you do.

I have metastatic cancer, but currently with no evidence of active disease. If I were to become seriously ill with Covid, I would hope that this would be considered reversible, and that I would have access to all available treatment. I would trust the ICU team to make the right decisions based on my condition at the time.

I appreciate that these decisions have to be made all the time, and the expertise, training, and empathy that is required to do so.

The situation I fear is one where the decision would usually be to treat / intervene, but there are simply not enough ventilators to do so - this is what I think we need to work to avoid as much as possible, so that the decisions can be made purely on medical grounds, and in the best interest of the patient (whether that be to treat or not to treat) and not to have your hands tied by lack of resources due to ICUs being overwhelmed.

Is the there are things you can think but shouldn't say theory gone now? Because you can say difficult choices need to be made but all we've heard from the start of this pandemic is people saying 'but they're old, but they're vulnerable,' I'm 40 and when I was younger people thought a bit more before they shot their mouths off and were more diplomatic. I'd hate to be elderly and regularly hearing about how they're possibly going to die anyway, and all the other comments people make.

We have to weigh everything up in the long run. It would be amazing if we could all go about as normal but we can't. In order to keep the economy going and also create a decent future for our kids i do think vulnerable and elderly should be careful and isolate more than everyone else.....which most are. Its not discrimination...just common sense.
I say this as someone who has recently lost 3 people to cancer.

When immigrants were drowning in the Med I didn't see marches in the street demanding our Gov saves them all, no doubt there were a few. Ditto those arriving across the Channel.

Somehow their lives are not as important as our freedoms to live without lots of foreign people moving here.

I can see the argument that we need to discourage people from 'flocking' here. But it's quite shocking really how hard hearted we can be when it's not us.

Another point - if staying alive is so important we should all be slim and fit, not drink too much and avoid sugar, cigarettes. People are complex.

I definitely see the OP's point, as the parent of a young child it must be quite frightening to think you might not be prioritized.

I watched the entire programme; his words have been taken out of context.

The vulnerable cannot shield themselves in solitary confinement for ever.

Exactly this, and many shielding live with others who are not. As many as 60% of adults have "underlying conditions" (although not advised to shield) and are at moderate risk of complications of Covid.

And healthcare staff may not be CEV but would we be expected to isolate forever? Care home staff? Anyone likely to come into contact with CEV during the course of their work?

Our health system is based upon the quality-adjusted life year" which gauges drug effectiveness in terms of how much it would cost to give you a year of healthy life. The threshold for drugs is £20k per QALY gained. Under this system the lives of the elderly and those with underlying conditions are deemed less valuable than the younger population.
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/guidance/LGB10-Briefing-20150126.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwikqI-76qTuAhUXQ0EAHWQvCQ0QFjACegQIDhAC&usg=AOvVaw1oaULCynw6lB0WoD-dRI4g" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/guidance/LGB10-Briefing-20150126.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwikqI-76qTuAhUXQ0EAHWQvCQ0QFjACegQIDhAC&usg=AOvVaw1oaULCynw6lB0WoD-dRI4g

This is a difficult subject that's hard to discuss but I do believe these discussions need to be had. Everyone is valuable but some have more social value than others. His point was that if there has to be a choice, social value is the trump card. We simply can't sacrifice the young & fit for the old & sick. Anger about this should be directed at government as persistent underfunding is forcing these choices. There SHOULD be enough resources for everyone, but there isn't.

It's absolutely disgusting to say - to someone's face especially - that their life is less valuable. I don't care how it's justified, it's a rude and nasty thing to say. No amount of context and background is going to change that.

I completely agree OP. I've posted about this before but I'm a cancer patient, early 40s with a (then) 1 year old. My cancer, as far as we know, has a good prognosis. I got a (quite apologetic) phone call from the GP asking if I got Covid if I wanted to be treated at all. Not DNR, just any treatment. And she said it wasn't about treatment shortage.. I spoke to my Maggie's Centre about this who said it was likely a misinterpretation of a memo, but this is the kind of thing that is making us think our lives are less valuable.

Honestly OP, if you get Covid & were at the point of needing ITU care with additional stage 4 metastatic cancer, with the current severe shortage of ITU beds I doubt if they would take you to ITU. Questions have to be asked about overall prognosis & likelihood of surviving an ITU stay. It's not just about 'do we have an ITU bed today' - if we use that bed today, it's not available tomorrow- when there is likely to be a younger, fitter person with the same level of Covid, who also needs ITU care. Decisions like this are already made daily, they've just got a lot sharper with Covid. 'valuable' may be an unfortunate term to use - but it does come down to what potential life span & quality of life you have in front of you, & that's a lot lower if you are elderly or have advanced cancer (or heart disease, or COPD, or dementia, or kidney/liver failure).

I remember before I had kids going on a car journey with some friends. We were all in our 20’s. One of them suggested I sit in the middle with no seat belt as the others had kids and therefore needed seatbelts more!!! It was said as a joke but it made me feel awful, that my life was less valuable! Now I have small kids though I do get in in a way, my kids would be absolutely lost without me at the moment (i’m sure they would get over it in time) where as if someone with no kids died, or who’s kids were grown and independent, that level of loss would just not be the same. Sure I will get utterly flamed for saying this!!
Unfortunately there just IS a value on life, everyone feels it. People are much sadder or shocked if a life saving doctor dies than a homeless person, it might not be right but it IS reality.
I say all of this as a person with a chronic illness who desperately wants to live but I also know that there would be people who deserved the ventilator before I did if there was a competition.

@Simarilion

Honestly OP, if you get Covid & were at the point of needing ITU care with additional stage 4 metastatic cancer, with the current severe shortage of ITU beds I doubt if they would take you to ITU. Questions have to be asked about overall prognosis & likelihood of surviving an ITU stay. It's not just about 'do we have an ITU bed today' - if we use that bed today, it's not available tomorrow- when there is likely to be a younger, fitter person with the same level of Covid, who also needs ITU care. Decisions like this are already made daily, they've just got a lot sharper with Covid. 'valuable' may be an unfortunate term to use - but it does come down to what potential life span & quality of life you have in front of you, & that's a lot lower if you are elderly or have advanced cancer (or heart disease, or COPD, or dementia, or kidney/liver failure).

And here is where my concerns lie ... my prognosis is unknown - completely unknown, I could live for many many years to come. Although my cancer is metastatic, it is not currently active, therefore as far as I am aware, I am no less likely to survive an ITU stay than anyone else. My worry is as you mentioned - not being given the opportunity in the first place, due to my cancer status. As an earlier poster pointed out, these decisions are never made lightly, and I trust that the Drs would make the right call based on my condition at the time.

There’s no excuse for the insensitivity towards other humans who’s lives matter just as much even if they’re vulnerable at whatever age.

His comments are disgusting.

@AwaAnBileYerHeid

I watched the entire programme; his words have been taken out of context.

I've caught up now and watched it all. I don't think it can be said that his comments to Deborah were taken out of context. He addressed her directly (interrupting her) and said "I didn't say your life wasn't valuable, I said it was less valuable". Regardless of his wider argument about viewing his own life as less valuable that those of his children / grandchildren, I find his comments to a Deborah unacceptable. He is however backtracking in the papers this morning, and saying he couldn't hear her.

These decisions are made everyday in the NHS and to say every life is totally equal is very wrong as it then implies misuse of very limited resources. The debate here I’m guessing is around the diplomacy needed but I doubt anyone would say that in the fight for ventilators he is wrong. Would I give up my place for someone a lot younger and healthier? With longer to live? Yes. Obviously. But it shouldn’t be up to me. It should be up to the professionals

Piers Morgan is having a go at him right now on GMB.

@Guavaf1sh

These decisions are made everyday in the NHS and to say every life is totally equal is very wrong as it then implies misuse of very limited resources. The debate here I’m guessing is around the diplomacy needed but I doubt anyone would say that in the fight for ventilators he is wrong. Would I give up my place for someone a lot younger and healthier? With longer to live? Yes. Obviously. But it shouldn’t be up to me. It should be up to the professionals

I'm being rather philosophical below on behalf of myself, Deborah James and other stage 4 cancer patients who are living well with unknown prognoses.

In truth I don't value my life OVER anyone else's, and if it were ever down to me to decide (and thank goodness it isn't) then like a previous poster, I like to think altruism would kick in and I would want the bed to go to someone else.

I'm glad that decision would only be made by the medical team in charge of my care, based on the information they have available at the time, I appreciate there may be an unfortunate need for them to put a value (so to speak) on my life in that moment, and I respect their requirement to do so, and the care in which the decision would be taken.

I do not feel it is appropriate for Lord Sumption, or anyone outside of that medical team to make any inference about the value of my life, or that of any other cancer patient.

I just feel that we have to do everything possible to change this situation - so that I and others WOULD get those ITU beds, if needed.

It’s nothing to do with value. It’s to do with whether putting you on a ventilator would work or not. It’s less likely to help if you’re very frail and elderly. Also if you’re very elderly (or only have three months left to live due to a terminal illness) you’ve only got a short time left whereas a ten year old hasn’t yet had their allocated life span. So if - IF! - it was a choice between the two (which it rarely is, even in a severe crisis you’ll always find a way if you have to), you would of course choose the child.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a saintly, billionaire 90 year old versus a criminal, destitute 20 year old. That sort of “value” is simply not taken into account by ICU doctors. They don’t even ask.

Lord Sumption is a very unpleasant man with disgusting views on many issues. I’m just glad he’s barred from voting, as a member of the House of Lords. In days gone by “lunatics” were also barred. Not sure if that’s still in law but he’d certainly qualify on that count too.