Much of that depends on exactly what type of breast cancer she has and what shape shes' in. Me? At 95 I'd probably opt for palliative care.

Our risk for breast CA increases with advanced age. My mom is 97 and has 2 sisters (93 & 91) who had breast CA in their 80's. They both had surgery & have done well. If my mom were to be diagnosed now, I would listen to what the dr had to offer, but.... it would take a lot to convince me to submit her to aggressive treatment.

at that age? I'd certainly opt for no treatment. It would be extremely hard on a body of that age, and would buy what? Maybe another few months? a few years at most? Maybe nothing, because at that age, ANYTHING could take you on a moment's notice. I wouldn't want to waste my children's inheritance on expensive treatments. Also, in many (most?) cases, no dr is going to treat a patient of that age, anyway, because of the danger that the treatment could be too much for them.

Related situation--my aunt was diagnosed with intestinal cancer the first week of Dec. last year. She had made her wishes very clear that she wanted no extreme treatment, were she ever to be diagnosed with something serious. As her caregiver, I honored her wishes and engaged hospice to care for her for the next 5 weeks. She was tired of the daily fight, tired of not being able to do for herself as she'd done for 85 years, tired of feeling like a burden. She'd even (before her diagnosis) expressed to her pastor that she 'didn't know why I'm still here'.

The one thing I've learned over the past 15+ years of being my mom and aunt's caregivers is that many older folks (80's and 90's) do NOT see life the same way we younger people do. To them, in many cases, it's become a great burden, and while they enjoy parts of it, they often aren't all that distressed that the end will be approaching in the near future.

It absolutely depends on factors that are not presented here, including the overall health of the patient, the stage of the cancer and the associated prognosis.
It could mean a lumpectomy and a few weeks of targeted radiation that if she were in good health, she could tolerate.
It is breast cancer awareness month. Please schedule your mammagrams.

My MIL is 92. I know what she'd do. Nothing! She has frequently offered her opinion on this. She won't even have a mammogram.
I can't say I blame her. Not sure what I'd do. I'd have to wait until I'm her age to tell you.

I'd ask the doctors to explain what treatment is available, ,the success rates, side effects of treatment. I'd let the patient (and maybe a religious advisor) to make the decision.

At age 75, my Dad, a life time non-drinker, was told he had cirhhosis of the liver and the only treatment available was surgery to remove the diseased part of his liver. He refused the surgery and was gone in two months.

I'd do nothing...

I agree with Gardenspice.....it would depend on factors not mentioned in the post. I actually have known two women at age 95 who were very healthy and active. The stage of the cancer and the treatment would determine my answer along with the health issues. I can tell you that I'm 72 and I would still aggressively treat any disease and I doubt a healthy 95 year old would just say...leave me be.

Life for me at 72 means a few health issues that I didn't have when younger but my brain doesn't register that I am an old woman and I wake up every day looking forward to something knew, and we are enjoying this stage of our life as much as or more than ever before. Being "elderly" isn't the curse that some people believe it to be.

Nothing. I'd also come back and haunt my kids if they subjected me to anything I didn't want.

I would say, "no thank you". I want a tatoo on my chest with a large print DNR. I don't want any one hooking me up to a respirator and then saying I didn't know she didn't want that.

I'll echo those who have said that it depends on the stage and aggressive of the cancer and the patient's overall health. If the patient is in pretty good health and the cancer is treatable, why not get treatment? Breast cancer treatment shouldn't impact a 90-year-old's quality of life that negatively assuming they don't have cardiac issues. I'd much rather have treatment than to let the cancer spread and cause me pain and suffering that could have been avoided.

If I learned nothing else in my 8 years in the military I learned this. We can all sit around and conjecture how we would act or what we would do in any given situation, but the truth of the matter is, until you personally face the problem head on, the best you can do is try to rationalize what you think you might like to do.

It would depend for me, on how early it was caught. I would have to consider how easy the treatment would be to handle. Breast cancer usually spreads to the lungs, liver and bones/brain. Dying with the spread of cancer can be very painful, and I would definitely seek treatment if the treatment was easier. Radiation would be my choice over chemo if I was older. If I was active and otherwise healthy, I would consider surgery. If I was all alone in life, depressed in a nursing home, that might also impact on my wish to survive.

I'd bet at that age my quality of life would be such that I wouldn't want to do anything to prolong it.

my mother died of cirrhosis' and never drank a drop of hardstuff in her life.She had a hysterectomy thirthy years befor and during the operation they damaged her liver.I'm 81years old and want to live as long as I can but if the doctor comes out and tell me I have cancer (depends on where it is)I will tell him not to bother because I can't live forever.If it's skin cancer I will let him operate.Anything else I will have to take it to my grave.How much longer can we live anyhow.Always said I wanted to live to be 104 but I'm thankful for each day I get up and remember what day it is.

I agree with lazypup and will wait until it comes my way
then do what I feel like doing. And, that is the way I treat my friends and family. Just tell me what you are going to do and I will hang in there with you.

My aunt was diagnosed with it at 93,she decided not to do anything at all.She said i lived a good life,and i'll go to meet my maker with all of my parts.She died 2 years later from Pneumonia.

I would do the same as she did if i was that age .Unfortunately i was given that news at 70 and i had the bilateral mastectomy and chemo and am doing very well now.Prais GOD.
kathi

'Being "elderly" isn't the curse that some people believe it to be.'

Amen, Sistah!

My Aunt Lillie lived into her nineties, & although she was somewhat fragile, she was as sharp as a tack & enjoyed her life.

& she was a gift to all of us.

I don't think there's enough info to say "no treatment".

My impulse would be to say, "get rid of it before it spreads, & let me enjoy my life."

Well all I know is the people that I know that have had cancer and had chemo and radiation were much younger than that and it was absolutely a terrible experience. My mom had radiation for breast cancer and was sick from it for a few years...she had another cancer and told them to just remove it and she was absolutely NOT going to take treatments, she lived about 15 years past that to be 89 YEARS OLD! My In Law had lymphoma and had radiation and actually died and had to be brought back during the treatment. He's OK now but he was only in his early 40s. My mom had a routine surgery when she was 84 and had a stroke from it and lived to be 89 not knowing what was up or down...just a terrible way to live! At 95 years old, I'd think you'd lived a good long life and just because there's a cancerous tumor doesn't mean you will die any time soon.

I agree with those who feel it depends on the general health and wishes of the person affected. My neighbour's mother got colon cancer at 87 and did get surgery and radiation but no chemo. She lived 12 more healthy years after that and died in her sleep at 99.

Yes I had a penpal since 1970s shes like 90 she just had both breasts removed now on dialysis,shes still fighting.What a lady..