I just found out that if an elder is over a certain age is considered over their life expectancy and therefore their life no longer matters. This seems to be the reason why when an elder is in a hospital or nursing home they can give them as many powerful sedatives as they want. They even can take away the meds they want or at least it is done. So this is why I would like to know how ban haldol and other powerful sedatives and is there anyway that we can make elders life matter to the medical staff. It seems to be acceptable. Even if an elder is killed in a medical facility by overdoses it is acceptable because lawyers don't get much money for suing if an elder is killed by overdoses. I heard of one case but it was done on many victims.
Haldol is a powerful antipsychotic. For some folks with psychotic symptoms, it is the only way for them to lead lives that are safe. Some people have to make hard choices when taking medications; doctors often have to make hard choices about prescribing them.
My mother is not on antipsychotics, but if she was being tormented by hallucinations, paranoia and feelings of persecution, I'd be willing to try them to give her a better quality of life.
One option to consider is a custom living will called "the Will To Live" that you can find info on at www.priestsforlife.org/euthanasia/livingwill.htm and your state's version of at
www.nrlc.org/medethics/willtolive/states/.
The problem though with banning Haldol or any other "powerful sedative" is that it has legitimate use as an antipsychotic. Psychosis can involve great suffering and danger to self or others, and usually need to be treated. Side effects can be serious but often can be managed; a common example is either dystonia or aggravation of parkinsonism and for that a drug called Cogentin can work very well if the antipsychotic relaly has to be continued.
I hope that helps. Your question is very timely. Both for better and for worse, we no longer live in an age where the prime assumption is that everyone wants their life saved and prolonged as far as possible.
There are lots of generalizations in your post.
My mother is on strong antipsychotics to control her dementia-caused violence. She will beat, claw, and spit on staff on a non-stop basis, and anybody who tries to get near her. Sometimes powerful meds are simply necessary. Staff don't deserve to be injured while trying to care for patients. Ranting & raving day & night is not safe for the patient either. She sees hallucinations and has a paranoia level that's off the charts. It would be cruel of me to withhold medication from her and force her to live like a scared wild animal.
Some medications are absolutely not safe for dementia patients to use because there is a side effect of death, so doctors are not going to offer those unless the benefits outweigh the risks. Some of them do have a sedating effect at a certain dosage level, but in my state, this is heavily audited and monitored. Staff can't administer ad-hoc sedatives out of convenience.
The sad truth is that the elderly die. They die at home, they die in nursing homes, they die on the street. It's a hard reality to embrace, but it's going to happen to all of us at some point.
I prefer to have my mother in a facility purpose built for the care of the demented where she can be safe from herself and the world, fed, cleaned, and watched over.
All the strong antipsychotics have serious potential side effects, so the use of them has to be done very cautiously. No doctor can promise there won't be side effects. Sometimes medication has to be changed for all kinds of reasons such as conflicts with other meds, side effects, it's not effective to solve the problem, it's creating a new problem, and so on.
I've never heard of a doctor who withheld medication because of someone's age. There has to be more to the story.