Even that issue isn't that simple. There is no right answer to the debate between being there as long as you can for them and not wanting to have them experience their parents withering away and dying, entirely helpless. I have been fortunate not to be in this position but I can't imagine the latter being very healthy for the children. It's up to every parent and family to decide this in their own way.

I've known two people in the medical field in this position, late stage cancer with young children at home. Both chose to fight with drug cocktails and experimental treatments (such as sipuleucel-T when it was in trials) but stopped short of life debilitating treatments like chemo, although one was lucky enough to get laser based irradiation therapy (I forgot the technical term, but it uses an accelerator to irradiate a tumor without harming surrounding tissue as much as chemo: http://www.protons.com/protons/index.page). I never asked but I'm guessing that they've seen all too often what the family goes through with a loved one dying from terminal cancer and don't think it's worth the pain or suffering, for the family or for them.

Some people choose to stop fighting, gain a few weeks or months of reduced pain and better (temporary) health, and settle affairs as best they can. Remember, if chemo doesn't work, then it is a longer, more painful demise.

It's a hard tradeoff. Maximize the quality time you have, and prepare for your family's future -- especially before the diagnosis comes.