Published: Wednesday, January 25, 2012
In our view / Aggressive medical treatments
Eventually, returns diminish
An ABCNews.com blog post asks, "Could stress have spurred Joe Paterno's rapid demise?"
The writer states, "Some experts say the stress brought on by the child sex allegations against Jerry Sandusky, Paterno's longtime assistant at Penn State, last November could have sped up Paterno's demise."
But in reading the post carefully, none of the medical experts say anything about Jerry Sandusky. They do talk about stress.
A better question might be: Could our society's attitudes about death, disease and medical treatments have spurred the former Penn State football coach's rapid demise?
On Nov. 18, Paterno's family disclosed his diagnosis of a "treatable" lung cancer. On Dec. 11, Paterno broke his pelvis and was admitted to the hospital to make it easier for him to receive chemotherapy and radiation treatments, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
He was released from the hospital on Dec. 18, but returned on Jan. 13 with "minor complications" from his cancer treatments, according to news reports. Paterno never left the hospital and died Sunday.
This common scenario illustrates how deeply ingrained some of our thinking, and responses, are toward certain diagnoses, especially cancer.
The day the family announced Joe Paterno's lung cancer, his son, Scott Paterno, told the Associated Press that doctors were optimistic the (then) 84-year-old Paterno would make a full recovery.
We trust the doctors didn't really say that. Patients and families understandably have a difficult time assimilating information at such an emotional time. The impulse to "act" immediately can be strong.
Back to the ABCNews.com blog and what the experts really say: "The harsh side effects of chemotherapy and radiation make it difficult to treat cancer patients over the age of 80. While age alone is not used to make cancer treatment decisions, elderly people are more likely to suffer from chronic illnesses that may make it difficult to tolerate the aggressive treatments."
After cancer treatments started, Jay Paterno said his father had his "good days and bad" but added: "He's a fighter and he's fighting this."
That's part of our language regarding disease, especially cancer. But at age 85, how much can a frail body "fight"?
What we lack in our medical repertoire is a convincing poker analogy: Know when to hold 'em. Declining aggressive cancer treatments late in life is often the smart choice. It doesn't mean "giving up." It quite possibly means ending up with more, instead of less, time. It may mean more quality days, rather than devastating "chemo" days.
"Playing the odds" may not have the same ring as "being a fighter." But it's a smarter strategy.
The writer states, "Some experts say the stress brought on by the child sex allegations against Jerry Sandusky, Paterno's longtime assistant at Penn State, last November could have sped up Paterno's demise."
But in reading the post carefully, none of the medical experts say anything about Jerry Sandusky. They do talk about stress.
A better question might be: Could our society's attitudes about death, disease and medical treatments have spurred the former Penn State football coach's rapid demise?
On Nov. 18, Paterno's family disclosed his diagnosis of a "treatable" lung cancer. On Dec. 11, Paterno broke his pelvis and was admitted to the hospital to make it easier for him to receive chemotherapy and radiation treatments, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
He was released from the hospital on Dec. 18, but returned on Jan. 13 with "minor complications" from his cancer treatments, according to news reports. Paterno never left the hospital and died Sunday.
This common scenario illustrates how deeply ingrained some of our thinking, and responses, are toward certain diagnoses, especially cancer.
The day the family announced Joe Paterno's lung cancer, his son, Scott Paterno, told the Associated Press that doctors were optimistic the (then) 84-year-old Paterno would make a full recovery.
We trust the doctors didn't really say that. Patients and families understandably have a difficult time assimilating information at such an emotional time. The impulse to "act" immediately can be strong.
Back to the ABCNews.com blog and what the experts really say: "The harsh side effects of chemotherapy and radiation make it difficult to treat cancer patients over the age of 80. While age alone is not used to make cancer treatment decisions, elderly people are more likely to suffer from chronic illnesses that may make it difficult to tolerate the aggressive treatments."
After cancer treatments started, Jay Paterno said his father had his "good days and bad" but added: "He's a fighter and he's fighting this."
That's part of our language regarding disease, especially cancer. But at age 85, how much can a frail body "fight"?
What we lack in our medical repertoire is a convincing poker analogy: Know when to hold 'em. Declining aggressive cancer treatments late in life is often the smart choice. It doesn't mean "giving up." It quite possibly means ending up with more, instead of less, time. It may mean more quality days, rather than devastating "chemo" days.
"Playing the odds" may not have the same ring as "being a fighter." But it's a smarter strategy.
Comments
(