Originally posted by punkrock i am sorry but i will have to say pull it..... i would hate to see my loved one like that. i am osrry but that is what i think
Thats whats going to happen, unless she finds herself a miracle.
agreed, if that was my loved one i would let them go. it would kill me seeing them like that, and i know myself i would absolutely hate living like that. i would want to die. my family has actually gotten into cnversations about this recently and all of us agree that we would hate to live like that.
think of it this way
if she isn't PVS (although i personally believe she is) she has been sitting in her chair stairing at a wall not being able to do anything but think about her situation for the last 15 years. how would you like that?
Schutzbar - Human Warrior - Windrunner Alliance - World of Warcraft Nihilanth - Kerra Paladin - Blackburrow - EverQuest II XBL Gamertag - Eagle15GT
Originally posted by Finwe Keep it civil. Which means keep it away from politics. This is not a political thread. Do not steer it in that direction.
I will keep it civil, as you ask. Perhaps you could do the same by removing your highly political and religious remarks in your very own signature. I found those far more inflamatory than my suggestion that certain political groups are making political "hay" out of the tragic Shaivo case.
A parents love knows no boundries. Her parents want to keep her alive and hope on the slim chance that she may recover. They are fighting tooth and nail against overwhelming odds to give her that chance.
A husbands love also knows no boundries. He want's to remove the tube to free her from her persistant vegitative state.He also is fighting overwhelming odds and sentiment. Many folks have sent him hate messages,death threats etc.
She has no higher brain functions. All movement and actions you see are just neural reflexes. Blinking,breathing etc are autonomus reflexes controlled by what is commonly called our "subconcious' brain.
The doctors say she is and will forever be in a vegetative state. That her chances of recovery to lead even a minimised lifestyle are exceddingly slim.
Yes there are cases of folks who have been in coma's for 20 years waking up suddenly. But again you are much more likely to win the lottery twice than of that happening.
It is no easy matter to weigh in one's mind the pro's and con's of a life such as her's and making a decision based both on logic (she is vegetative,unresponsive etc etc) and moralistic (it's my wife/daughter,there's always a small chance she could awake)
My wife was struck by a vehicle that slid on black ice while she was waiting at a bus stop. She broke many ribs, her hip and femur, along with both arms and 2 cracked vertabrae. Not to mention the 200ish stitches and staples. A few months ago after many many many surgeries, she developed an infection that led to a fever so high that it in effect she was boiling from the inside out. She ended up in a coma, in a vegetative state. She was on life support for the 2 weeks it took for everyone to say goodbye. Between her parents and I we decided to honor her wishes of not being forced to live that way.But I will tell you that every waking moment of my life,every time I look at our daughter I am reminded of her. But along with that comes the what if's. What if we had waited an extra week or 2? What if she hadn't been at that bus stop? etc etc. Do I regret abiding by her wishes and letting her go?I have regrets but I am happy in knowing this is what she wanted.
But the basis for all this rambling was to say that both sides in this dispute love her wholeheartedly. Her husband seeks to release her and her parents seek to keep her. IMO neither is in the wrong, as the decisions they both made are based on love.I personally would let her move on.
As with any issue that concern's the life of a human being there are many opposing views, and IMO the end all and be all of what is right or wrong isn't for the judges or state senate to decide but rather it comes down to what you as a person feels.
The tape that they show of her smiling and reacting to people was reportedly made 10 years ago shortly after her heart condition. She has supposedly deteriorated since then, but the parents keep wanting that video shown as it makes it seem like she's still a functioning human being.
What caused this condition is that her heart stopped for several minutes, depriving her brain of oxygen. They're not sure what caused this heart stoppage, though they believe it could have been a potassium deficiency. As part of this, her throat muscles got scarred preventing her from being able to swallow. This is why the feeding tube was put in, and why she CANNOT be fed through normal means.
Most doctors are in agreement that she cannot be rehabilitated. Plus she had communicated her wishes to her husband that she not be kept alive in this state. This would be a done issue, with everything settled quietly, except that her parents decided to make a media circus out of it, dragging as many people as possible into the ring. Hundreds of people make similar decisions every day, and it's the toughest decision that most families ever have to make. I can't imagine how much harder it would be if every case required federal government approval to continue.
I consider myself to be a fairly conservative Christian, but this case frustrates me greatly. The reason for it is these doctors, policiticians and family members are playing God. Technology is to a point where you could technically keep the body functioning nearly forever. In many cases this is a good thing - pacemakers keep heart patients alive for years, for example. However, there are many doctors and families that just won't let go. They are so afraid to deal with their own emotions that they fail to see the suffering their loved one is going through.
Death is a natural part of life and part of God's plan, and you'd think that in the week of Easter, that would be even more readily obvious to these supposed "Christians". It's nothing to be afraid of, and her life should be celebrated and allowed to pass, rather than drug on through years of needless misery. It's her turn to go - God or nature or whatever you belive in has made it so. I don't think its our responsibility to go "above" God and make the decision for ourselves.
I consider myself to be a fairly conservative Christian, but this case frustrates me greatly. The reason for it is these doctors, policiticians and family members are playing God. Technology is to a point where you could technically keep the body functioning nearly forever. In many cases this is a good thing - pacemakers keep heart patients alive for years, for example. However, there are many doctors and families that just won't let go. They are so afraid to deal with their own emotions that they fail to see the suffering their loved one is going through.
Death is a natural part of life and part of God's plan, and you'd think that in the week of Easter, that would be even more readily obvious to these supposed "Christians". It's nothing to be afraid of, and her life should be celebrated and allowed to pass, rather than drug on through years of needless misery. It's her turn to go - God or nature or whatever you belive in has made it so. I don't think its our responsibility to go "above" God and make the decision for ourselves.
As a fairly conservative Christian myself, I am also frustrated with the desire by many to play God, or at least make decisions based upon the specious logic of, "I wouldn't want to live that way." That may be well and good, but we're not talking about how you or I would choose to be treated in such a situation, and to suggest that her life is not worth as much as someone else's is to take that first precarious step onto a slippery slope to where the federal courts start deciding whose life is worth living.
Terri Schiavo cannot feed herself. Neither can a newborn child. Nor can a severely retarded teenager. Where do we set the limit as to whose life has quality, value and/or meaning? And who gets to make such a decision? Doesn't refusing to feed a person who is on no other form of life support qualify as making the decision to let her die? Would you feel similarly if the husband of an octogenarian Alzheimer's patient made similar claims about his wife's wishes and then stopped feeding her until she died? It's one thing to make a decision to turn off a ventilator and quite another to stop providing nourishment.
Some in this thread can't resist displaying their bigotry by calling conservatives "brain dead" in a rather tasteless analogy. The fact is that both sides have legitimate concerns. The issues raised here go beyond one woman, not to trivilialize her life.
What angers me is the actions of the federal government - all three branches. To subpoena a brain dead woman in an effort to circumvent a federal court order is really irresponsible and shows a lack of respect for the power wielded by those in Congress. Conversely, to use the federal bench to override state law is equally irresponsible. Whatever happened to the tenth amendment?
Conservatives who have been complaining for years that the SCOTUS should never have ruled on Roe v. Wade are now trying to use the federal government to muscle through their agenda on Terri Schiavo. Liberals, who have encouraged legislation from the bench for years, are now using their typical histrionics about how this will destroy democracy. There's enough hypocrisy to go around here.
Personally, I don't think the feeding tube should be removed. I know the husband has said Terri told him she didn't want to live this way, but there's no documentation of such and he's now with another woman and it all smacks of him wanting to do what's best for him, not Terri. There are family members who are willing to care for her and to absolve him of any responsibility, so I do not understand why he is so resolute about killing the woman. I think the feud between the husband and the parents has now gotten into a contest about who can win. The saddest thing is I'm not sure either side has Terri's best interest as their chief concern, and that is truly tragic.
Terri Schiavo cannot feed herself. Neither can a newborn child.
Good point, but a newborn child is certainly expected to take care of that responsibility in ten years. At any rate, the last place this should show up is at the federal level. I do question the husband's character, myself, not because I deserve to question him but because this is a situation in which it very well requires it.
There are family members who are willing to care for her and to absolve him of any responsibility, so I do not understand why he is so resolute about killing the woman.
If he's telling the truth then he's doing the right thing in fighting to kill her (or let her die), but then again this all comes down to a question of trust. I think things might be less complicated (at least here) if there were no rumors of sources of information showing that he's been unfaithful in any way to his wife. Anyone have an update on her condition?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Well, there was a nurse on last night that overheard her husband (a while back) asking something along the lines of "when is this b***h going to die?" She was also learning to speak when she was at one place getting therapy, but her husband pulled her out of there. There is also the speculation that he is the one who caused her condition.
I don't know about anyone else, but the fact that you can't even give her water through normal means without being arrested just strikes me as something that just couldn't happen in America. That is far beyond keeping someone alive through artificial means, that is depriving someone of even a chance of survival through normal means. That would be like pulling someone off the resperator to let them die, and then putting a plastic bag over their head and depriving them of breathing air on their own if pulling the plug didn't kill them.
Well I think the whole "when is the bitch gonna die" thing is bullshit. I can't remeber exactly how Terry got into this state but I know it had to do with an eating disorder as well as some medical foulplay. Anyways the husband sued the place that made the medical mistake on Terry(really wish I could remeber what it was) because they said it contributed to her condition. He got $750,000 for it. And you know what? Almost all of it has been spent on caring for Terry. I think that shows he's does care for her and truly in his heart wants the best.
I hear alot about the feeding tube being removed is infringing on her rights. But don't people have the right to die as well? Her case has recived way more special attention than any other cae of this kind so she has surely recieved due process of law. She has been in this state for 15 years and shows no signs of consistent awareness. I understand where a lot of you guys are coming from but I just have to disagree. If one good thing comes out of this it's that fact that people will now be filling out living wills so we don't have another case like this.
Actually, after recieving the judgement, he pulled her out of the treatment where she was showing progress and spent the money to cover his legal fees to let her die.
Also, there was no medical evidence of a medical condition, but there were marks on her neck that had them actually call in the police and start the investigation off as a homicide case.
The big problem I have is not that they are pulling the feeding tube, but they won't allow here to return to the treatment that worked or even allow here to try to learn to be fed normally. They won't even allow her a sip of water while she is dying.
"Anyways the husband sued the place that made the medical mistake on Terry(really wish I could remeber what it was) because they said it contributed to her condition. He got $750,000 for it. And you know what? Almost all of it has been spent on caring for Terry. I think that shows he's does care for her and truly in his heart wants the best."
Strange I heard that the 750k was actually used because he was hiring lawyers for some reason or another and that only 50k is left! They said that the doctor suggested therapy and treatments for her and he did not enroll her in any of the therapies. I am a Conservative Christian and I fully agree with Koltrane's point of view. Why should we make the decision of when to end a human life? Teri has been following people around the room with her eyes....it almost seems like her condition may be improving some. I personally have no respect for her "husband" since he has a whole other family now. Why does he suddenly want her dead? Is he trying to hide something in case she does in fact get better? Or is it that he wants to be only with his other family and forget about all this mess?
If it HAS to be in the decision of someone, I would say it should be dealt with by her parents, not her "husband"
If it HAS to be in the decision of someone, I would say it should be dealt with by her parents, not her "husband"
I agree. Her parents, the ones who gave her life to begin with, should be the first to determine whether she continues in that life or forfeits it. Then it should be herself and then her mate.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Originally posted by milhoan6 "Anyways the husband sued the place that made the medical mistake on Terry(really wish I could remeber what it was) because they said it contributed to her condition. He got $750,000 for it. And you know what? Almost all of it has been spent on caring for Terry. I think that shows he's does care for her and truly in his heart wants the best." Strange I heard that the 750k was actually used because he was hiring lawyers for some reason or another and that only 50k is left! They said that the doctor suggested therapy and treatments for her and he did not enroll her in any of the therapies. I am a Conservative Christian and I fully agree with Koltrane's point of view. Why should we make the decision of when to end a human life? Teri has been following people around the room with her eyes....it almost seems like her condition may be improving some. I personally have no respect for her "husband" since he has a whole other family now. Why does he suddenly want her dead? Is he trying to hide something in case she does in fact get better? Or is it that he wants to be only with his other family and forget about all this mess? If it HAS to be in the decision of someone, I would say it should be dealt with by her parents, not her "husband"
Religion has no place in our government or courts, thanks. The whole issue at hand here is if she has the right to die, and the husband has the right to make that decision. I say yes, myself, as if I were as unfortunate as this poor woman not to get my desire down in writing (which years ago when I first heard this case, I had it put in writing), I certainly wish that this whole situation wouldn't happen. Instead, we have some self-righteous parents saying she's showing signs of improvement (which I find hard to believe since doctors have said the damage is so severe she'll never recover), and trying to use religion as a reason to go to court, get the state to change their laws, and when that failed, trying to get the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to change it's laws. Seriously now, if it was an average family that wasn't Christian (either another religion OR agnostic/athiest) there wouldn't be as big of a story about this. The parents would have filed suits quietly, and that'd have been the end of it. Instead, you have some conservative christians, backed by our moron of a president, who feel religion should be tied to government (which our constitution says there MUST be a clear seperation between the two), and have been trying to change federal and state laws (yes I know I'm repeating myself) over ONE LIFE. Seriously, if it were like a whole hospital of people in this situation, I'd understand. If there were scientific PROOF to back their arguement, I'd understand. Hell, if they could get one of her doctors to say they thought she'd get better, I'd be a little more sympathetic to the parents, but since NONE of these has happened, I say leave the poor husband alone. Yes, I have heard he's found someone else and they have their own family, but after 15 years, wouldn't you have moved on too, reguardless of religion? She's basically dead already, so I cannot blame him.
completely disagree with the last post. You can't choose your parents you can choose your mate.
To me that alone suggests the mate being more suitable to make decisions on behalf of the woman. Think about it, with whom are you more honest? your parents or your significant others. If you were talking to someone about whether you would want to be kept alive in a certain kind of state with whom would you share that info most likely: A your parents or B your mate.
Personally I vote B I've had conversations with significant others about not wanting to live if certain things happened to my body... Never have I had a conversation like that with parents.
Parents are also less willing to "let" a child die even if it's for the best I think. A mate (in my opinion) would have an easier time thinking about what they would have wanted.
EDIT: its actually the post before the last post... someone posted as I was typing this:)
Hell, if they could get one of her doctors to say they thought she'd get better, I'd be a little more sympathetic to the parents
I've heard they already have. I heard that one doctor was with her for ten hours and said she could get better with time and effort and then another that was with her for 45 minutes (?) and said there was no hope.
I would say that if she was taken out of therapy (which I've also heard that she was) then she should not be showing signs of healing but rather degradation; especially now that they're starving and dehydrating her.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Originally posted by Adreal Hell, if they could get one of her doctors to say they thought she'd get better, I'd be a little more sympathetic to the parents I've heard they already have. I heard that one doctor was with her for ten hours and said she could get better with time and effort and then another that was with her for 45 minutes (?) and said there was no hope. I would say that if she was taken out of therapy (which I've also heard that she was) then she should not be showing signs of healing but rather degradation; especially now that they're starving and dehydrating her.
There's my proof about doctors. About the only people saying she could get better are some neurologists for the FLORIDA Adult Protective services. However, the article will tell you more. I(f you still disagree with me after reading that article, please tell me why.
Happydan, I agree with you in part and so here's my take on it.
As I've said, those who have given you life should be the ones that determine whether or not you should continue living or die. Sound harsh? Let me clarify. Just as a sculptor has the right to destroy or fashion his own creation, so the creator has the right to support or tear down their creation; the creator being the parents and the creation being children.
This right should only be forfeit if the parents have abused their power to create life (ie. a prostitute having multiple children and then having also multiple abortions). Yes, I believe that someone's mate should have some say in the matter and should advise the parents in their decision and should even have the power to decide their fate if (as said above) one or more of the parents have abused their power and the person in question is incapable of ruling their own fate.
Parents are also less willing to "let" a child die even if it's for the best I think. A mate (in my opinion) would have an easier time thinking about what they would have wanted.
Never being a parent or mate to another, myself, I wouldn't know for sure about this. I do believe that a mate would likely have as much or more love (or at least feeling) for their mate than a parent would have for their child (seemingly not in this case however). I know that sometimes feelings cloud people's judgement, but I disagree with your implication that love hinders one's judgement to best choose for their loved one. Emotions cloud one's judgement. True love I think allows one to decide what is best for another - whether to let them go or save them.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Consider also, she has been this way for a long time... as time goes on the odds of negating the effects of brrain damage decreases. Heres why: The brain is not compartmentalised very well. It borrows from just about every function it has to do mosts tasks (in other words to read something... you arent just using your eyes).
The longer your brain has a segment that is damaged it degrades sections that also use it... which degrade sections that depend on those... this (slow) process continues and as it does its FAR less likely to recover.
If one of your hands stop working it degrades what your entire arm does as situations in which you can use the arm greatly decrease. This affects you overall as well. That is not to say you cant compensate, but we arent talking about an arm in terry's case we are talking about vital functions. If the body could compensate for vital functions they would not be vital:P
Christians have always preached that God takes care of everyone.
lol. Let me first say that I believe myself to be "born-again" so-to-speak (what one may title as a Christian) and I would disagree with that claim if that is truly what Christians are preaching. I believe he ultimately looks out for the best of those who love him (whether in life after death and/or this life), but there are numerous accounts of his judgement and justice on those who have abused what had originally been a "good" world (from my perspective).
Anyway, let this not turn into a debate on religion (though religion is strongly tied to it). I have my views and you have yours so that's cool. I'll try only to preach my views when they need to be defended and perhaps even conform to truth if it is anything contrary to what I currently believe in.
As for your article, Brian, I do see a lot of supporting evidence for your claim so at the moment I'd have to say that I'm with you on this one. But neither of us knows what's truely going on in her head which is, yes, tragic.
If one of your hands stop working it degrades what your entire arm does as situations in which you can use the arm greatly decrease.
Which is why I would have supported her being in an extended treatment session. I have a great grandmother who has suffered from a stroke and is now in a nursing home. She lost the ability to speak, the use of her legs and one of her arms. She now has regained, I would say, 70% of her ability to speak and the use of her two legs and her right arm which a doctor had doubted she would ever accomplish. She did this in the space of 2-3 months if my memory proves correct.
Physical and mental training can accomplish much, but I'm not sure how bad off Terri was at first so I couldn't say whether or not she had originally any chance of recovering.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Comments
MYSPACE ACCOUNT
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=80721225
Which FF Character Are You?
Bush is hardly a hero. I have said all I will.
"Whoever controls the media controls the mind..-'Jim Morrison"
"When decorum is repression, the only dignity free men have is to speak out." ~Abbie Hoffman
god bless her family they have to get into alot of stuff all we can really do it pray for them,
MYSPACE ACCOUNT
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=80721225
Which FF Character Are You?
agreed, if that was my loved one i would let them go. it would kill me seeing them like that, and i know myself i would absolutely hate living like that. i would want to die. my family has actually gotten into cnversations about this recently and all of us agree that we would hate to live like that.
think of it this way
if she isn't PVS (although i personally believe she is) she has been sitting in her chair stairing at a wall not being able to do anything but think about her situation for the last 15 years. how would you like that?
Schutzbar - Human Warrior - Windrunner Alliance - World of Warcraft
Nihilanth - Kerra Paladin - Blackburrow - EverQuest II
XBL Gamertag - Eagle15GT
I will keep it civil, as you ask. Perhaps you could do the same by removing your highly political and religious remarks in your very own signature. I found those far more inflamatory than my suggestion that certain political groups are making political "hay" out of the tragic Shaivo case.
Anthrorob
A parents love knows no boundries. Her parents want to keep her alive and hope on the slim chance that she may recover. They are fighting tooth and nail against overwhelming odds to give her that chance.
A husbands love also knows no boundries. He want's to remove the tube to free her from her persistant vegitative state.He also is fighting overwhelming odds and sentiment. Many folks have sent him hate messages,death threats etc.
She has no higher brain functions. All movement and actions you see are just neural reflexes. Blinking,breathing etc are autonomus reflexes controlled by what is commonly called our "subconcious' brain.
The doctors say she is and will forever be in a vegetative state. That her chances of recovery to lead even a minimised lifestyle are exceddingly slim.
Yes there are cases of folks who have been in coma's for 20 years waking up suddenly. But again you are much more likely to win the lottery twice than of that happening.
It is no easy matter to weigh in one's mind the pro's and con's of a life such as her's and making a decision based both on logic (she is vegetative,unresponsive etc etc) and moralistic (it's my wife/daughter,there's always a small chance she could awake)
My wife was struck by a vehicle that slid on black ice while she was waiting at a bus stop. She broke many ribs, her hip and femur, along with both arms and 2 cracked vertabrae. Not to mention the 200ish stitches and staples. A few months ago after many many many surgeries, she developed an infection that led to a fever so high that it in effect she was boiling from the inside out. She ended up in a coma, in a vegetative state. She was on life support for the 2 weeks it took for everyone to say goodbye. Between her parents and I we decided to honor her wishes of not being forced to live that way.But I will tell you that every waking moment of my life,every time I look at our daughter I am reminded of her. But along with that comes the what if's. What if we had waited an extra week or 2? What if she hadn't been at that bus stop? etc etc. Do I regret abiding by her wishes and letting her go?I have regrets but I am happy in knowing this is what she wanted.
But the basis for all this rambling was to say that both sides in this dispute love her wholeheartedly. Her husband seeks to release her and her parents seek to keep her. IMO neither is in the wrong, as the decisions they both made are based on love.I personally would let her move on.
As with any issue that concern's the life of a human being there are many opposing views, and IMO the end all and be all of what is right or wrong isn't for the judges or state senate to decide but rather it comes down to what you as a person feels.
The tape that they show of her smiling and reacting to people was reportedly made 10 years ago shortly after her heart condition. She has supposedly deteriorated since then, but the parents keep wanting that video shown as it makes it seem like she's still a functioning human being.
What caused this condition is that her heart stopped for several minutes, depriving her brain of oxygen. They're not sure what caused this heart stoppage, though they believe it could have been a potassium deficiency. As part of this, her throat muscles got scarred preventing her from being able to swallow. This is why the feeding tube was put in, and why she CANNOT be fed through normal means.
Most doctors are in agreement that she cannot be rehabilitated. Plus she had communicated her wishes to her husband that she not be kept alive in this state. This would be a done issue, with everything settled quietly, except that her parents decided to make a media circus out of it, dragging as many people as possible into the ring. Hundreds of people make similar decisions every day, and it's the toughest decision that most families ever have to make. I can't imagine how much harder it would be if every case required federal government approval to continue.
I consider myself to be a fairly conservative Christian, but this case frustrates me greatly. The reason for it is these doctors, policiticians and family members are playing God. Technology is to a point where you could technically keep the body functioning nearly forever. In many cases this is a good thing - pacemakers keep heart patients alive for years, for example. However, there are many doctors and families that just won't let go. They are so afraid to deal with their own emotions that they fail to see the suffering their loved one is going through.
Death is a natural part of life and part of God's plan, and you'd think that in the week of Easter, that would be even more readily obvious to these supposed "Christians". It's nothing to be afraid of, and her life should be celebrated and allowed to pass, rather than drug on through years of needless misery. It's her turn to go - God or nature or whatever you belive in has made it so. I don't think its our responsibility to go "above" God and make the decision for ourselves.
As a fairly conservative Christian myself, I am also frustrated with the desire by many to play God, or at least make decisions based upon the specious logic of, "I wouldn't want to live that way." That may be well and good, but we're not talking about how you or I would choose to be treated in such a situation, and to suggest that her life is not worth as much as someone else's is to take that first precarious step onto a slippery slope to where the federal courts start deciding whose life is worth living.
Terri Schiavo cannot feed herself. Neither can a newborn child. Nor can a severely retarded teenager. Where do we set the limit as to whose life has quality, value and/or meaning? And who gets to make such a decision? Doesn't refusing to feed a person who is on no other form of life support qualify as making the decision to let her die? Would you feel similarly if the husband of an octogenarian Alzheimer's patient made similar claims about his wife's wishes and then stopped feeding her until she died? It's one thing to make a decision to turn off a ventilator and quite another to stop providing nourishment.
Some in this thread can't resist displaying their bigotry by calling conservatives "brain dead" in a rather tasteless analogy. The fact is that both sides have legitimate concerns. The issues raised here go beyond one woman, not to trivilialize her life.
What angers me is the actions of the federal government - all three branches. To subpoena a brain dead woman in an effort to circumvent a federal court order is really irresponsible and shows a lack of respect for the power wielded by those in Congress. Conversely, to use the federal bench to override state law is equally irresponsible. Whatever happened to the tenth amendment?
Conservatives who have been complaining for years that the SCOTUS should never have ruled on Roe v. Wade are now trying to use the federal government to muscle through their agenda on Terri Schiavo. Liberals, who have encouraged legislation from the bench for years, are now using their typical histrionics about how this will destroy democracy. There's enough hypocrisy to go around here.
Personally, I don't think the feeding tube should be removed. I know the husband has said Terri told him she didn't want to live this way, but there's no documentation of such and he's now with another woman and it all smacks of him wanting to do what's best for him, not Terri. There are family members who are willing to care for her and to absolve him of any responsibility, so I do not understand why he is so resolute about killing the woman. I think the feud between the husband and the parents has now gotten into a contest about who can win. The saddest thing is I'm not sure either side has Terri's best interest as their chief concern, and that is truly tragic.
-----
Old timer.
Terri Schiavo cannot feed herself. Neither can a newborn child.
Good point, but a newborn child is certainly expected to take care of that responsibility in ten years. At any rate, the last place this should show up is at the federal level. I do question the husband's character, myself, not because I deserve to question him but because this is a situation in which it very well requires it.
There are family members who are willing to care for her and to absolve him of any responsibility, so I do not understand why he is so resolute about killing the woman.
If he's telling the truth then he's doing the right thing in fighting to kill her (or let her die), but then again this all comes down to a question of trust. I think things might be less complicated (at least here) if there were no rumors of sources of information showing that he's been unfaithful in any way to his wife. Anyone have an update on her condition?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Well, there was a nurse on last night that overheard her husband (a while back) asking something along the lines of "when is this b***h going to die?" She was also learning to speak when she was at one place getting therapy, but her husband pulled her out of there. There is also the speculation that he is the one who caused her condition.
I don't know about anyone else, but the fact that you can't even give her water through normal means without being arrested just strikes me as something that just couldn't happen in America. That is far beyond keeping someone alive through artificial means, that is depriving someone of even a chance of survival through normal means. That would be like pulling someone off the resperator to let them die, and then putting a plastic bag over their head and depriving them of breathing air on their own if pulling the plug didn't kill them.
Well I think the whole "when is the bitch gonna die" thing is bullshit. I can't remeber exactly how Terry got into this state but I know it had to do with an eating disorder as well as some medical foulplay. Anyways the husband sued the place that made the medical mistake on Terry(really wish I could remeber what it was) because they said it contributed to her condition. He got $750,000 for it. And you know what? Almost all of it has been spent on caring for Terry. I think that shows he's does care for her and truly in his heart wants the best.
I hear alot about the feeding tube being removed is infringing on her rights. But don't people have the right to die as well? Her case has recived way more special attention than any other cae of this kind so she has surely recieved due process of law. She has been in this state for 15 years and shows no signs of consistent awareness. I understand where a lot of you guys are coming from but I just have to disagree. If one good thing comes out of this it's that fact that people will now be filling out living wills so we don't have another case like this.
Stuff like this makes me wish i was a horse.....
"I'm very sorry he has a broken back and cannot move anything ever again and will be in pain until he dies.... we will...."
1. if A horse..........put him down to spare the suffering.
2. if A human........keep him alive for as long as we can.
*Edit - never right anything just after you wake up sry *blinks*
Actually, after recieving the judgement, he pulled her out of the treatment where she was showing progress and spent the money to cover his legal fees to let her die.
Also, there was no medical evidence of a medical condition, but there were marks on her neck that had them actually call in the police and start the investigation off as a homicide case.
The big problem I have is not that they are pulling the feeding tube, but they won't allow here to return to the treatment that worked or even allow here to try to learn to be fed normally. They won't even allow her a sip of water while she is dying.
why the heck are Terri's parents not able to see her when shes going to die in just a couple of days?
they are banned from seeing their daughter...??
"Anyways the husband sued the place that made the medical mistake on Terry(really wish I could remeber what it was) because they said it contributed to her condition. He got $750,000 for it. And you know what? Almost all of it has been spent on caring for Terry. I think that shows he's does care for her and truly in his heart wants the best."
Strange I heard that the 750k was actually used because he was hiring lawyers for some reason or another and that only 50k is left! They said that the doctor suggested therapy and treatments for her and he did not enroll her in any of the therapies. I am a Conservative Christian and I fully agree with Koltrane's point of view. Why should we make the decision of when to end a human life? Teri has been following people around the room with her eyes....it almost seems like her condition may be improving some. I personally have no respect for her "husband" since he has a whole other family now. Why does he suddenly want her dead? Is he trying to hide something in case she does in fact get better? Or is it that he wants to be only with his other family and forget about all this mess?
If it HAS to be in the decision of someone, I would say it should be dealt with by her parents, not her "husband"
If it HAS to be in the decision of someone, I would say it should be dealt with by her parents, not her "husband"
I agree. Her parents, the ones who gave her life to begin with, should be the first to determine whether she continues in that life or forfeits it. Then it should be herself and then her mate.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Religion has no place in our government or courts, thanks. The whole issue at hand here is if she has the right to die, and the husband has the right to make that decision. I say yes, myself, as if I were as unfortunate as this poor woman not to get my desire down in writing (which years ago when I first heard this case, I had it put in writing), I certainly wish that this whole situation wouldn't happen. Instead, we have some self-righteous parents saying she's showing signs of improvement (which I find hard to believe since doctors have said the damage is so severe she'll never recover), and trying to use religion as a reason to go to court, get the state to change their laws, and when that failed, trying to get the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to change it's laws. Seriously now, if it was an average family that wasn't Christian (either another religion OR agnostic/athiest) there wouldn't be as big of a story about this. The parents would have filed suits quietly, and that'd have been the end of it. Instead, you have some conservative christians, backed by our moron of a president, who feel religion should be tied to government (which our constitution says there MUST be a clear seperation between the two), and have been trying to change federal and state laws (yes I know I'm repeating myself) over ONE LIFE. Seriously, if it were like a whole hospital of people in this situation, I'd understand. If there were scientific PROOF to back their arguement, I'd understand. Hell, if they could get one of her doctors to say they thought she'd get better, I'd be a little more sympathetic to the parents, but since NONE of these has happened, I say leave the poor husband alone. Yes, I have heard he's found someone else and they have their own family, but after 15 years, wouldn't you have moved on too, reguardless of religion? She's basically dead already, so I cannot blame him.
completely disagree with the last post. You can't choose your parents you can choose your mate.
To me that alone suggests the mate being more suitable to make decisions on behalf of the woman. Think about it, with whom are you more honest? your parents or your significant others. If you were talking to someone about whether you would want to be kept alive in a certain kind of state with whom would you share that info most likely: A your parents or B your mate.
Personally I vote B I've had conversations with significant others about not wanting to live if certain things happened to my body... Never have I had a conversation like that with parents.
Parents are also less willing to "let" a child die even if it's for the best I think. A mate (in my opinion) would have an easier time thinking about what they would have wanted.
EDIT: its actually the post before the last post... someone posted as I was typing this:)
Hell, if they could get one of her doctors to say they thought she'd get better, I'd be a little more sympathetic to the parents
I've heard they already have. I heard that one doctor was with her for ten hours and said she could get better with time and effort and then another that was with her for 45 minutes (?) and said there was no hope.
I would say that if she was taken out of therapy (which I've also heard that she was) then she should not be showing signs of healing but rather degradation; especially now that they're starving and dehydrating her.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050323/hl_nm/rights_schiavo_videotape_dc
There's my proof about doctors. About the only people saying she could get better are some neurologists for the FLORIDA Adult Protective services. However, the article will tell you more. I(f you still disagree with me after reading that article, please tell me why.
Happydan, I agree with you in part and so here's my take on it.
As I've said, those who have given you life should be the ones that determine whether or not you should continue living or die. Sound harsh? Let me clarify. Just as a sculptor has the right to destroy or fashion his own creation, so the creator has the right to support or tear down their creation; the creator being the parents and the creation being children.
This right should only be forfeit if the parents have abused their power to create life (ie. a prostitute having multiple children and then having also multiple abortions). Yes, I believe that someone's mate should have some say in the matter and should advise the parents in their decision and should even have the power to decide their fate if (as said above) one or more of the parents have abused their power and the person in question is incapable of ruling their own fate.
Parents are also less willing to "let" a child die even if it's for the best I think. A mate (in my opinion) would have an easier time thinking about what they would have wanted.
Never being a parent or mate to another, myself, I wouldn't know for sure about this. I do believe that a mate would likely have as much or more love (or at least feeling) for their mate than a parent would have for their child (seemingly not in this case however). I know that sometimes feelings cloud people's judgement, but I disagree with your implication that love hinders one's judgement to best choose for their loved one. Emotions cloud one's judgement. True love I think allows one to decide what is best for another - whether to let them go or save them.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Consider also, she has been this way for a long time... as time goes on the odds of negating the effects of brrain damage decreases. Heres why: The brain is not compartmentalised very well. It borrows from just about every function it has to do mosts tasks (in other words to read something... you arent just using your eyes).
The longer your brain has a segment that is damaged it degrades sections that also use it... which degrade sections that depend on those... this (slow) process continues and as it does its FAR less likely to recover.
If one of your hands stop working it degrades what your entire arm does as situations in which you can use the arm greatly decrease. This affects you overall as well. That is not to say you cant compensate, but we arent talking about an arm in terry's case we are talking about vital functions. If the body could compensate for vital functions they would not be vital:P
Christians have always preached that God takes care of everyone.
lol. Let me first say that I believe myself to be "born-again" so-to-speak (what one may title as a Christian) and I would disagree with that claim if that is truly what Christians are preaching. I believe he ultimately looks out for the best of those who love him (whether in life after death and/or this life), but there are numerous accounts of his judgement and justice on those who have abused what had originally been a "good" world (from my perspective).
Anyway, let this not turn into a debate on religion (though religion is strongly tied to it). I have my views and you have yours so that's cool. I'll try only to preach my views when they need to be defended and perhaps even conform to truth if it is anything contrary to what I currently believe in.
As for your article, Brian, I do see a lot of supporting evidence for your claim so at the moment I'd have to say that I'm with you on this one. But neither of us knows what's truely going on in her head which is, yes, tragic.
If one of your hands stop working it degrades what your entire arm does as situations in which you can use the arm greatly decrease.
Which is why I would have supported her being in an extended treatment session. I have a great grandmother who has suffered from a stroke and is now in a nursing home. She lost the ability to speak, the use of her legs and one of her arms. She now has regained, I would say, 70% of her ability to speak and the use of her two legs and her right arm which a doctor had doubted she would ever accomplish. She did this in the space of 2-3 months if my memory proves correct.
Physical and mental training can accomplish much, but I'm not sure how bad off Terri was at first so I couldn't say whether or not she had originally any chance of recovering.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain