Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to NASA rethinks DEATH on LONG Space Flights

Some decisions can only be made at the time and with the people involved.
Bowser — (archived)

Trying to control things at a distance, including proximal, relationship and time, is an exercise in arrogance. And really this gets a bit more simple.

What NASA could do is give them a range of acceptable options, of ultimate goals.

There are many reports of people criticizing mountain climbers who leave someone to die on Mt. Everest when the only issue is if there will be one, two or three or more deaths. That is really a non-issue.

As far as the disposition of the body, the Masai have it down. They drag the body out beyond the fence protecting the village for the animals, usually hyenas. It's worthless. That's another non-issue.

What is important to them is the person's spirit, which goes to "the other place". Which is always nearby, no matter where they are.

Another non-issue, really, is what to do with terminally ill people. Make 'em comfortable. Don't jeopardize the mission for the sake of a few more days of life as an ill person.

What to do with sick or injured people who might live if they were somewhere else with better care? They aren't.

What to do with someone sick or injured who is draining needed resources from others who need those resources to survive? Simple, really. Difficult but simple. Greatest good for the greatest number. Learn from more "primitive" people living under similar stresses who had to face this issue.

When one isolates oneself from "civilization" one runs some risks. You minimize your risk with knowledge, training, communication and supplies, and then you take yer chances. That's the way it goes.

Arf

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (79 posts)