CTV News | Jewish man's death 'tragic' victory for family

Top Stories -   

Jewish man's death 'tragic' victory for family

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV Winnipeg: Stacey Ashley on the man's death

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(58)

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Wed. Jun. 25 2008 10:54 PM ET

An elderly Winnipeg man whose family fought to keep him on life support, despite the concerns of doctors, was buried Wednesday after he died of natural causes.

Samuel Golubchuk, 84, passed away Tuesday at Winnipeg's Grace Hospital.

"We won," family lawyer Neil Kravetsky told CTV Winnipeg. "He got to die without some doctor pulling the plug; he got to die when God was ready for him."

Golubchuk's family had obtained a court order requiring doctors to keep him alive, saying that to hasten his death would constitute a sin under Orthodox Jewish law. The case was set for trial this September.

"In many ways, as tragic as this is, he did win in the end because he died under his own terms," said longtime family friend Michael Eskin.

Another friend, Nella Muyal, said Golubchuk's death means the legal question of who decides when someone should be removed from life support remains unresolved.

"The end is not clear," she said. "It's left for future generations -- for the rest of us -- to have to deal with the messy question of who makes the decision."

Since November 2007, doctors at the hospital had wanted to take Golubchuk off life support. They felt he had no chance of improvement.

Three doctors felt so strongly that they resigned their privileges over the case.

In his resignation letter, Dr. Anand Kumar detailed how doctors had to "surgically hack away at Golubchuk's infected flesh" because of ulcers on the patient's skin. He likened the treatment to torture.

Family members had argued Golubchuk was aware but couldn't express himself.

The elderly man had suffered a brain injury in 2003. He was hospitalized last October suffering from pneumonia and pulmonary hypertension.

Once in hospital, Golubchuk's condition deteriorated.

His case sparked a widespread debate on end-of-life issues, including topics such as the costs of keeping the terminally ill alive and physicians' ethical responsibilities.

With a report by CTV Winnipeg's Stacey Ashley and files from The Canadian Press

Comments are now closed for this story

Hilary
said

The doctors were not acting like God, they were stating facts. Noboby shoud be kept artifically alive if there is not hope. Hopefully now this man will rest in piece.


Dale Wilson
said

In his final moments, I hope he found comfort in his beliefs.

Congratulations to the doctors for making decisions based on their ethics rather than their pocketbook. If I'm ever ill in Winnipeg, I hope you're my doctors.


Steve
said

If the man was surviving solely because of the machine he was connected to, how would pulling the plug be "hastening his death?" If he had taken ill in the middle of the forest and there was no machine around to keep him alive...who would be to blame for hastening his death?


DB
said

It just goes to show everyone that when you need medical help in any fashion, you have to put your faith aside and have only faith in the doctors who are there to help you, not in the lawyers of this country. Its the doctors who are the trained individuals we line up in our hospitals to see for all our problems, its our doctors and nurses who deserve every dollar they ask for to ensure we are well looked after, and in all cases its not religion that should take presidence in our hospitals. In the end, it just shows that all these doctors were right and once again our health care costs just keep going up because of individual needs. Its time we listen to our doctors advice and not the lawyers who make money off our health care system. Because of one individuals rights, had left many others at risk when these doctors quit that hospital. It was not the doctors at fault here, they just took their knowledge elsewhere. In the end, it just shows who we should be putting our faith into and this time it was not the courts as the courts in this country have a poor track record of ensuring us a quaility of life in their judgements they pass day to day. Its just too bad each city in our country could not have those doctors as it seems they know what to do and how to do it in a dignified manner.


Kate
said

I understand the religious views, but if there is no hope of getting better, then take me off the life supoort and let God take me home. Living on a life support machine is not really living!


JP Piovesan
said

He should have been taken off of life support long ago. If God had wanted the gentleman to stay alive, then he would have. If not, THAT would have been a death of natural causes.


Joyce
said

It seems to me that it is very wrong to FORCE a person to live on life support. To remove a person from life support is NOT the same as killing him. It is simply not forcing him to live when his body no longer can support life, and there is no chance of recovery. Small measures are okay, such as oxygen and mist machines.


Earl Robert
said

Golubchuk's family obtained a court order requiring doctors to keep him alive. Since November 2007, the Doctors made a medical decision to take Golubchuk off life support. Doctors don't make these decisions lightly. None of us should feel that we are "Children of a lesser God" but when a ship is sinking we accept the rule that woman and children come first. Why make it complicated? May he rest in peace.


Derek
said

If taking him off life support would violate the Orthodox Jewish faith, what exactly did they do before life sustaining machinery was invented?



jj
said

One can see from the first 9 comments how little religious sensitivity these commentators have.

So many times doctors have predicted and been wrong. 9 years ago I was given 1 year to live - God had another plan.

I wonder if the patient was Muslim and his family had the same request if the doctor's reactions would have been the same.

There is a clear anti-Christian and anti-Jewish religious bias in favour of atheism and respect for Islam in our society today.


dK
said

We are all definitely entitled to our own personal opinions and this is mine. I never want to be dependant on a machine if it's the only thing that is going to keep me alive. If it saves my life and is only temporary, please, keep me alive. We all need to enjoy life to the fullest. But if it was the wish of this dying man and these were his convictions (life no matter what), than nobody has anything to say about this. If he had practised this religion his entire life, who are we to say he is wrong?

The only time I have a problem with this is when children are involved. They do not have a voice and until they are at the age of consent, we must take into account that the Canadian system and laws should look after these children when parents refuse treatment.

I hope this man truly did follow through with his beliefs and that his family can now move on...


Leah
said

Derek - taking Mr. Golubchuk off life support didn't violate "Orthodox Jewish Faith" it violated the Jewish religion period. And the Torah says we should do all we can to sustain life until G-d takes it from us, that includes taking someone off of life support. Maybe you should should take some time to learn something outside of your own religion before passing judgement.


Jaid
said

There comes a point where I would be in disgust over an issue like this. If religious beliefs were to reign supreme in hospitals I might as well make a religion in which it's a sin to not have a nurse or doctor by me 24/7 as it hastens my death.

In many cases, money talks more than religion. If respecting someone's beliefs were to come at the cost of an extra 1 million dollars, imagine how many more people would be suffering because of this shortage.

In the final moments of someone's life, all it takes is courage to accept their death than to blame someone else for being a "symptom" of that someone.


Terry
said

One of the problems in this day and age is that the medical system has gone downhill so much you do not know whether or not pulling the plug is the right decision. I had a family member where we had the doctor working in the ICU one week telling us to the pull the plug and the following week's doctor telling us we shouldn't even consider it. How do you react to that?


Michelle
said

As I read other comments it makes me sad. After my 5 year old son's death from cancer I went searching for answers. I studied all the religions to find those answers. I did not find the answers as to why my son. What I found is that no matter what the beliefs are we are all human. We are born. We are here to learn. We are here to love and be loved. We have our time to go back. How and when we die we do not know and for one I do not want to know. I am here to love my family, my greatest gift of my children and to be a good person along the way in a world with so much anger and hate. I believe that we all have our time to go back home. I will like the day I get to see my son again until then I will live the life I was given with love and understanding.


Mark M
said

Only in North America is keeping an animal alive called "suffering" and keeping a person alive is called "compassion".

My family are all aware of each others wishes should this happen to any one of us. In my case, it's pull the plug....


Lina
said

If you would rather not live than live on life support, that is your choice. You have no right to make that decision for anyone but yourself. Obviously this man's belief's led to a preference of being sustained on life support even if there was little chance of improvement.

Let everyone choose for themselves. I personally would rather be kept alive until my body died on its own. I know that some people would choose this option like me, and some would not.

No one, not even a doctor, has the right to make the decision of when life is not worth holding on to, except for the individual in question.


MTA
said

If it's God's will that a person be alive, then pulling the plug from the machine won't make any difference. In this case, the lawyers kept him alive, dragging it on much longer than necessary.


Boyd
said

Hey terry, its never called pulling the plug! I work in an ICU, I know what goes on. Things change, especially in an ICU. Maybe the Dr prematurely made a decision, nonetheless I'm sure its "quality of life" vs "quantity of life" the DR was refering too!! The System may be downhill, but the expertiese of Doctors, nurses and the like are still the same, if not better my friend.


SM
said

jj summed it up exactly right. May the family find comfort that they followed their conscience even when everyone else challenged them. May the old man rest in peace.


Chris
said

This story just accentuates the need to have a living will. I know I don't want my loved ones not knowing what my wishes are, and living with the guilt of whether whatever they did was right or wrong.


Kate
said

To jj-
It is not that we do not have religious sensitivity because I do take religion seriously and take my faith into account when I make the decision as to whether or not I want to live by a machine. Religious reasons or not we are all entitled to our own opinions. As well, in this multicultural country, why is it that as a tax payer, I must pay to keep a dying man alive because of his religious beliefs? Like someone said earlier, doctors do not make these decisions quickly or lightly and if there is no hope left then why spend all the extra money and continue the pain and suffering. Should we not me remembering someones life for the good things and not a lifeless body hooked up to a machine. Again these are just my opinions but in my case as well, take me off the life support and lets get on with the healing process!


John
said

Well, nobody else seems to be going after the money and resource side of this issue, but how much did this little episode tax our already overwhelmed health care system?

With a limited supply of hospital space, beds, doctors and other health care professionals available to look after so many people, one has to wonder what the impact was of sustaining this one life for so long with the best technology we have.

Hopefully no other 'living' patients were turned away or suffered due to neglect so the system could devote so much of its resources to this...sorry to say it, but hopeless cause.

Religion - nothing but fear and superstition. Hardly a basis for rational decisions.


MCM
said

Michelle, I am so sorry for your loss!


Richard
said

I think this one is more complex than meets the eye.

I think if they wanted him to stay on the life support it is their wish. Religion should have nothing to do with that. It seems to me that religion is "used" far too often to get special needs of sorts.

It does look quite clear though that this fellow was done and basically a vegetable. Maybe people should specify in a written well prepared will that if something was to happen then what to do if they become incapacitated and unable to make any rational decisions.

my 2 cents


SIDNEY
said

response to Derek and others.

I did not support the decision to prolong Mr Golobchuck's agony.

However, to clarify the religous belief. In orthodox judaism, it is permitted to refuse treatment but once initiated it is not permitted to remove treatment.

Thus, DNR or not performing a procedure that prolongs agony is permitted.

Turning of machines after they have been started or removing IV's nutrition and drugs etc where such a result will end a life is not permitted.

hope this helps


Merle Terlesky
said

It is not against God's will to refuse extra measures to stay alive.
It is againt his will to simply off someone by euthanasia.
There is a big difference between the two.
I had cancer in '98 and it would have been wrong to simply choose suicide over chemo, but had I gone into a coma and had my family unplug the machine would have been fine.


Losing Faith in Humanity not God
said

It is wonderful that in this country you are all able to make that choice - whether you are kept alive 'artificially' or not. You do not, however, seem willing to respect the choice of others when it is not the same as your own. That is terribly sad.


Marty
said

Please people keep one thing in mind. The Torah is an ancient writing, like the bible, that was written in times where life support and the like were not even a possibility. It may say to do everything to keep a person alive but they meant something completely different than ventilators and heart monitors. Unfortunately when doctors keep someone on life support they are in essence playing God. The body wanted to die and it cannot because of medical intervention. With today's modern medicine a body can probably be kept alive well beyond what is humanly possible or even intended. I highly doubt this is what the Torah or any other ANCIENT religious document intended.


Nicole
said

I am a nurse of 30 years and there was many times that the gut wrenching delema of taking a person off life support was addressed by the medical care givers. This is a decision that is taken lightly and is made with the family's feedback. Despite what some may believe, the patients and the patients family religious beliefs have to be respected. As care providers, we care for these patients for a short time versus the quantity of life these people have had and lived and this within their religious beliefs. So again as a care giver, I may not agree with the family's decision of prolonging life knowing fully that the quality certainly may not be at its best, but we have as a society have to remember, respect is the key word here...and not what I believe in.


Leslie
said

Taking Golubchuk off live support does not violate Jewish Law. On the contrary. We have life support created by Man not GOD. Sometimes live support is a good thing, sometimes it is not. To use Judaism or Christianity as a reason to use or not use life support has nothing to do with faith or religion. It is emotional decision. Is not a faith or religious decision. People want to live as long as possible or Not live as long as possible. Life supports is a temporary means - it does not sustain life.

The Torah and Christiantiy Scripture are equal in this teaching. GOD says we should sustain life - That means life of the earth and all that is in it. It includes, People, Animals, Enviroment etc.

GOD gave us the responsibiltiy to take care of Earth. Not change Earth. Our lives are temporary. We are not owners of the earth. We are here until our time is up. The next generation continues where we have left. Life is infinite. We don't own or control it. GOD is incharge of that.


Jon
said

One of the many reasons why I'm an atheist (former Orthodox Jew):
Sick of religion trumping reason. If 3 top doctors say there's no chance of recovery, and he's suffering, pull the damn plug! Let him be at peace.
In a case like this, only an irrational ideology like religion would choose suffering over peace.


Lana
said

There is a very simple solution to this. Once the doctors say that there is no chance of recovery or the person is clinically dead and the family wants the life support to be kept in place, then at that point, it should be considered elective treatment and the family should start paying out of their own pockets for the services and use of the life support equipment. Wouldn't that cut down on a lot of wasted resources? I would lay heavy odds that if the families had to start paying for optional life support after about a week - they would be more receptive to discontinuing the service and letting their family member go naturally...


D S
said

As a physician of another deep religious faith I fully understand how one does not wish to "tamper" with nature's way. However, we as the medical profession have already "tampered" by introducing artificial means to continue "life". Had this gentleman been in another country/ location he would in all likelihood not even had opportunity to experience artificial life support. What life ?...in this case the unfortunate patient was a victim of his family's inabiity to be compassionate towards him and put their own interests aside in his favour. These decisions are always extremely difficult for the healthcare profession to deal with. For this reason hospitals are increasingly advising for Bioethics Consultation to enable physicians and families to come to terms with what is best for the patient.


E. Frohwein
said

As an Orthodox Jew, I thank G-d that He finally took Sam from this earth to keep him closer in heavens. I was literally disgusted by the way the family dealt with his situation. May Sam rest in peace.


Walter
said

My condolences to the family.

I believe in a state where medical care is provided by the people (that being the Cdn taxpayer) there should be no option to prolong life. To allow patients to pollute the system with various religious dogma is dangerous, expensive, and runs contrary to the secular country we live in. The only 'religon' that should be permitted in our publicly finded hospitals is Medicine. I cringe when I consider the resources that were wasted to sustain a shell of a man. I fail to understand why someones religious beliefs are allowed to trump the professional opinions of public doctors, or allowed to trump the common good. Should someones religious beliefs require certain medical procedures not supported by our doctors they should pay for it, not the taxpayer.


bunny
said

Well god bless him.May he now rest in peace.I didn't think what his family did was right - but I am not his family



Matt G.
said

If you are going to die, and there is absolutely no cure for what you have, why should you be kept alive at the cost to tax payers and strain on the already fragile healthcare system?
Why?


Jeff Shantz
said

This is a case of a family using a religious argument to cover up the fact that they are unable to let go.

It's hard to have sympathy for people when they create ridiculous controversies like this.


Karl Watkins
said

Seems to me we're missing the point with all the religious back-and-forth. The question is simply, who decides if we live or die? Should the hospital be allowed to make a decision against the wishes of the family (and the patient him or herself)? The health authorities were worried about money and they admitted as much. This is about resources. And it seems scary that we will start switching people off to save a few buck. Today's it's this old guy, tommorrow a middle-aged guy, then me...


cdngirl
said

How is being kept alive via machine natural? I don't understand. Th man was sick enough that he died on life support. He would have died even more naturally had he not been on the machine in the first place.


Don
said

I never understood why anyone "believes", but each to his own... I agree that life support, as it exists today, isn't exactly what the bible or torah envisions. My interpretation is that personal care should be given, even as one is dying, so that a person doesn't die alone. It has nothing to do with life support machines.


TS
said

Taking someone off life support is not hastening their their death, it's allowing death to happen. Having a machine live for you is hardly natural. God doesn't use machines, they are human inventions, in this case used to keep someone alive longer than their own body could.
Kudos to the doctors for trying to do the right thing.


Steve
said

Dying ain't much of a living"- Clint Eastwood


lily
said

What is ethic?

2 things are in conflict here. The doctors think it's not ethical to keep the person alive with the life support. In my opinion, at the same time, it's also not ethical for the doctors to 'force' what they think is right to the patient's family. They seem to be disrespectful

Each person is entitled to their own faith, and health care team should respect that. I don't think the doctors here and all people who pass judgment to the family are being respectful.

Personally, I don't trust doctors (after seeing many of them practicing, making errors, or even listening to their conversations). They're very authoritative.

Let's say even if they're right, there might be still the Greater Power who can do the impossible. I've witnessed many of them.

So please don't think that doctors are always right. They're just very authoritative.


Malka
said

I am saddened to see that so many folks will go on about a subject which they really know nothing about. Unless you are an Orthodox Jew no one is in a position to comment on the laws which these people adhere to nor what is right or wrong in terms of maintaining, sustaining or terminating life. To each their own. Show a little respect for this family who today grieves the loss of their loved one.

May God comfort you among the other mourners of Zion and Jerusalem.

Ha-Makom y'nachem et'chem b'toch sha'ar aveilei Tzion v'Yerushalayim.



jj
said

"As well, in this multicultural country, why is it that as a tax payer, I must pay to keep a dying man alive because of his religious beliefs?"

Just another reason our health care system sucks. Life 7 Death are now in the hands of the accountants, eh?

And to the "Rabbi" who explains what the Bible means because it was written "long ago", that's the point of faith. Believers know that God, the Author, knew "way back then" what the future held - and still instructed his followers to live by moral standards.

Atheists who make up their own rules as they go along cannot grasp this concept. Abortion, euthanasia, quality of life matters more than life itself - you want to live that way? Your choice, but don't impose those "morals" on others.


Kathleen Hewitt
said

My condolences to the Golubchuk family and their loss. My take on all of this is that if God had wanted Mr. Golubchuk to remain alive, shuting off life support would have made no difference, he would have remained alive through God's will and not by man's medical support system. For me if I were on life support and the mediacl teams thought it best to shut of life support, I know my Son and Daughter would listen and do the right thing. If I remained alive that would be God's will and it wouldn't be my time. If I died then it was definetely my time and God's will.


RRO
said

This is why people need to take care of their affairs and sign personal directives.

His papers should have outlined weither he wished to be kept alive over a prolonged period or not. Not withstanding that it must be the wishes of the family that are respected.

I appreciate the doctors point of view and agree with them but in the end it is the families decision. Those Doctors demonstrated emmence compassion though.


Margaret
said

I don't understand how it can be against someone's religion to remove life support, but it wasn't against their religion to put the life support on. Isn't using life support interfering with "god's will"?

If I am ever in that position with no chance of quality of life, please remove the life support and let someone who has hope of recovery use it!


jules
said

This situation should not even exist!!! We have laws in our country that should be respected. I am not racist but strongly beleive that religion is something to practice un between your walls and not force your beleives to us that accepted you in our country. We should have the same laws as other countrys where if you are not happy in the coutry you choose you must go back. We tolerate and tolerate, soon we will have lost our cultures and laws!!!! Sad to see that Canadians can not stand for their laws!


peggy
said

If I ever end up in that man's condition, I would want to be taken off life support. What's the point of hanging on, when there's no chance of recovery?


Mohammed
said

I found the familys' request to be completely reasonable and within ethical boundaries of medicine and I respect their religious beliefs and in the end, their faith was reinforced.

Doctors are not Gods; they're people and who is a man to say when hope is gone?

The family believed their loved one would die on his own without denying him air and food and letting him suffocate to death.

This story proves that faith picks up where medicine fades.



geebee
said

The nation has borne witness to medical elites
having a tantrum at the
expense of a man who
stood to be deprived of
a dignified passing.


kendall
said

nicely put DB it is time for Doctors to take over the hospitals not Lawyers ,


...
said

Why were they trying to make a body be run like a machine?

PB
said

"We won," family lawyer Neil Kravetsky told CTV Winnipeg. "He got to die without some doctor pulling the plug; he got to die when God was ready for him."

What a ridiculous comment considering it was mans "interference" that was keeping him alive. I for one would rather die with what ever dignity I had left rather than have a machine prolong the inevitable.

I can't help but wonder where this society is headed.

Linda Fuller
said

Just imagine if most people decided to "live",in a vegetative,near brain dead state ,with organs being kept alive only by machines?
We'd need warehouses,to keep them all,and our health care dollars would quickly diminish.

Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz