PDA

View Full Version : How hard is this Terry Shiaivo thing?


Taco John
03-18-2005, 01:04 AM
I don't understand how this is even an issue... If she doesn't have a legally binding document that says to let her die if she is incapacitated, why aren't they giving her every opportunity to fight back?

Word of mouth from your spouse shouldn't be grounds enough to donate organs, let alone remove a feeding tube. Life should be given the benefit of a doubt, unless she has a legal document showing that her choice is otherwise.

And what a terrible death sentance... To pull a feeding tube.

Taco John
03-18-2005, 01:10 AM
President Bush said after the U.S. Senate vote that Schiavo's case "raises complex issues" but added: "Where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life.


Exactly.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 06:39 AM
President Bush said after the U.S. Senate vote that Schiavo's case "raises complex issues" but added: "Where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life.


Exactly.

Well said

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 06:51 AM
It really seems hard to believe to me that the court would accept the hearsay as official and compelling evidence, especially when the person making the statement can't defend herself. and the fact that hear say is typically not admitted in the court of law. :hmmm:

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 07:08 AM
It's dreadfully hard because she's become a political pawn by the usual suspects...

for instance, Michael Savage last night insisting it was 'dirty liberals' who want to kill Terry Schiavo. I personally know no liberal who is supporting Michael Schiavo's request because of the more than reasonable doubt about the legitimacy and the believability of it.

Thus, in this case, as should be in ALL CASES, the merits of her wishes, her health, and her life need to be weighed on the individual case and not on preconceived political party or political philosophical lines.

There are people offering to pay for her care, Michael would be off the hook, and he fought for her and his conscience could be clear...

to let her die for slowly and for weeks with so much doubt after Michael changed his story would be to victimize this woman for the second time. The first being having suffered such a horrible illness at such a young and vibrant age.

MOhillbilly
03-18-2005, 07:10 AM
My girl asked me about this and how i felt and i told her on one hand i dont like state sponcered murder. govt should stay the **** out and on the other hand i wouldnt want to put the burden of my family having to kill me either.


She said YEAH but your really not killing them.

i told her it still has a heartbeat.

shes pro-choice
im not.

Radar Chief
03-18-2005, 07:11 AM
for instance, Michael Savage last night insisting it was 'dirty liberals' who want to kill Terry Schiavo. I personally know no liberal who is supporting Michael Schiavo's request because of the more than reasonable doubt about the legitimacy and the believability of it.


Consider your source, Denise. That dude’s a raving lunatic.

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 07:15 AM
It's dreadfully hard because she's become a political pawn by the usual suspects...

for instance, Michael Savage last night insisting it was 'dirty liberals' who want to kill Terry Schiavo. I personally know no liberal who is supporting Michael Schiavo's request because of the more than reasonable doubt about the legitimacy and the believability of it.

Thus, in this case, as should be in ALL CASES, the merits of her wishes, her health, and her life need to be weighed on the individual case and not on preconceived political party or political philosophical lines.

There are people offering to pay for her care, Michael would be off the hook, and he fought for her and his conscience could be clear...

to let her die for slowly and for weeks with so much doubt after Michael changed his story would be to victimize this woman for the second time. The first being having suffered such a horrible illness at such a young and vibrant age.

I think you need to replace the 'dirty liberals' with 'scumbag', :banghead: that is what Mr Schiavo is. but that is just my opinion

Radar Chief
03-18-2005, 07:16 AM
My girl asked me about this and how i felt and i told her on one hand i dont like state sponcered murder. govt should stay the **** out and on the other hand i wouldnt want to put the burden of my family having to kill me either.


She said YEAH but your really not killing them.

i told her it still has a heartbeat.

shes pro-choice
im not.

Mrs. Radar and I have talked ‘bout this often and she’s of the opinion that if it we her, she’d prefer that I end it even if it meant starving to death.
I’m a little torn on the subject. I’m not sure I could do that.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 07:21 AM
Word of mouth from your spouse shouldn't be grounds enough to donate organs, let alone remove a feeding tube. Life should be given the benefit of a doubt, unless she has a legal document showing that her choice is otherwise.

WHY THE HELL NOT?!?!?!!!

If we cant trust someone's husband or wife, who can we trust?

I dont see why this should be an issue at all either. We are not China or Japan here, where the parent's will reigns supreme, our culture has always elevated and respected the institution of marriage, and when it comes to the medical care decisions of your wife or husband, when they cant speak for themselves, your word trumps everything.

No other arrangement makes any sense, and if you dont like it, dont get married.

The ONLY reason why some idiotic conservatives in my party are throwing a hissy-fit over this sad dead shell that used to be a human being 15 years ago, is because they think Michael is a dirtbag for not swearing an oath of chastity.

His wife has basically been dead for 15 years now, he's moved on but he respected his dead wife's wishes so much, that he is willing to fight to carry them out.

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 07:26 AM
WHY THE HELL NOT?!?!?!!!

If we cant trust someone's husband or wife, who can we trust?

I dont see why this should be an issue at all either. We are not China or Japan here, where the parent's will reigns supreme, our culture has always elevated and respected theinstitution of marriage, and when it comes to the medical care decisions of your wife or husband, your word trumps everything.

No other arrangement makes any sense, and if you dont like it, dont get married.

If the marriage was going south like it appeared like theirs was, would you still take his word for it. and what if there was a huge insurance policy was purchased for the wife. Would that cloud one's opinion and make one not so believable..... I think it would...

MOhillbilly
03-18-2005, 07:26 AM
Mrs. Radar and I have talked ‘bout this often and she’s of the opinion that if it we her, she’d prefer that I end it even if it meant starving to death.
I’m a little torn on the subject. I’m not sure I could do that.


yeah its one of those things i still regret after my father had his brain hemorage when the doc asked ME if i wanted to disconect life support i said yes even though i didnt want to.

I miss him.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 07:26 AM
Consider your source, Denise. That dude’s a raving lunatic.

Agreed. But in his lunacy he illustrates the point...

for many, this issue is not about Terry Schiavo at all. It's about the 'right to life' or the 'right to die' and Terry is merely the flavor of the week. I believe she has BOTH rights. I also believe it's quite possible, indeed probable, that she told MS that she would not want to be kept alive in a vegetative state and would want to die. But therein lies the rub. She's NOT IN A VEGETATIVE state. And if she can give and receive love and has thinking processes and can change her mind even if she cannot verbalize, vocalize, or otherwise express her wishes then we have no right to honor the guy's heresay.

The points of this case are not black and white enough to be treating them as such. But that is all the political ideologues want to seem to do with this and many such cases.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 07:29 AM
If the marriage was going south like it appeared like theirs was ir-freaking-relevant. He's her husband, he makes the decisions, end of story. Unless you can prove abuse, etc. They have already tried that, and Michael was cleared, the heresay is the charges of abuse themselves.

what if there was a huge insurance policy was purchased for the wife. Would that cloud one's opinion and make one not so believable..... I think it would... Again, totally irrelevant, but that doesnt apply in this case, because the charge that Terri had a huge insurance policy was as flat-out LIE. She had a medical judgement awarded to her for a lawsuit long ago once. He is now using that money to help carry out her wishes.

If she wanted to die in this condition, which is an opinion that a huge majority would also hold for themselves, then this is a valid use of those funds. Michael is not profiting off of this at all.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 07:33 AM
She's NOT IN A VEGETATIVE state.

WRONG!

She is a vegetable, period. Her doctors confirmed it, and a team of independant court-appointed doctors verified it as well.
Vegetables might respond mindlessly to stimuli like brightness in a room, just like a vegetable might respond to sunlight in the garden, but Terri's parents look at her mindless reactions and they see what they want to see, regardless of reality. She has only the lower brain functions needed to breath and have a pulse. The rest of her brain is essentially liquid.

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 07:48 AM
http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/medaffdav/Green.pdf

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/medaffdav/Heron.pdf

Here are a couple of statements from professionals stating that she isn't in the PVS..... :hmmm:

If you don't have a consensus of the state she is in, how can you say for sure she is in PVS

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/Hammesfahrexam.htm

Alertness: The patient was alert throughout essentially the entire exam.

Responsiveness: The patient would immediately respond to sound, tone of voice and to touch and pain. With respect to responding to those around her, she had limited responsiveness to me personally until approximately 45 minutes into the exam. She started to look at me, against her traditional right gaze preference, about the same time that we started getting significant relaxation in her contracted left arm

(the arm that had been contracted for several years.) She appeared to identify the sound of my voice, with the relaxation of the arm. From that point, she would generally look toward the sound of my voice when heard, attempt to find me visually, then track the sound of my voice in its movements, or track me if I was within approximately one foot of her eyes. Prior to that time, she did not track me, or try to locate me visually. When playing music, she had a clear preference to the
specific sound track played, and would listen to piano music, but change levels of listening depending on the track played. Her attention to the music would not wander during the track she preferred. She would pick out her mother's voice or her father's voice separate from the music or other voices or sounds in the room, and re-fix her gaze to those people. She would tend not to blink when watching those people. She ignored her husband's loud foot-tapping that went on for approximately five minutes at one point. She also ignored his voice and did not try
to seek him out visually when he would at times interject comments during the exam or immediately afterwards.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 08:10 AM
WRONG!

She is a vegetable, period. Her doctors confirmed it, and a team of independant court-appointed doctors verified it as well.
Vegetables might respond mindlessly to stimuli like brightness in a room, just like a vegetable might respond to sunlight in the garden, but Terri's parents look at her mindless reactions and they see what they want to see, regardless of reality. She has only the lower brain functions needed to breath and have a pulse. The rest of her brain is essentially liquid.

:shake: :rolleyes:

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:11 AM
I don't understand how this is even an issue... If she doesn't have a legally binding document that says to let her die if she is incapacitated, why aren't they giving her every opportunity to fight back?

Word of mouth from your spouse shouldn't be grounds enough to donate organs, let alone remove a feeding tube. Life should be given the benefit of a doubt, unless she has a legal document showing that her choice is otherwise.

And what a terrible death sentance... To pull a feeding tube.


I don't know all the ins and outs of this case, but I think guardianship passes to the spouse in cases of incapacitation. I know they've tried changing the law, but for some reason the court system deemed it unconstitutional.

What's sick is that there's an active group out there trying to rip the feeding tube out. That's their agenda. And, yes, they're liberals. Why the fringe wants to be the party of ripping out feeding tubes I don't know. Although I'm sure there are some that find the idea of existing in a vegatative state for fifty years to be equally horrifying.

I think I'm more on your side Taco...especially since the woman is supposedly responsive, she looks around and smiles. Maybe it's all reflexive actions, but like Bush said...err on the side of life.

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:17 AM
Agreed. But in his lunacy he illustrates the point...

for many, this issue is not about Terry Schiavo at all. It's about the 'right to life' or the 'right to die' and Terry is merely the flavor of the week. I believe she has BOTH rights. I also believe it's quite possible, indeed probable, that she told MS that she would not want to be kept alive in a vegetative state and would want to die. But therein lies the rub. She's NOT IN A VEGETATIVE state. And if she can give and receive love and has thinking processes and can change her mind even if she cannot verbalize, vocalize, or otherwise express her wishes then we have no right to honor the guy's heresay.

The points of this case are not black and white enough to be treating them as such. But that is all the political ideologues want to seem to do with this and many such cases.


Let me preface by saying that I don't disagree with your proposition that Terri Schiavo is being used by both sides in the right to die argument. But can you tell me of any conservatives who have gone to court and/or advocated the pulling of her feeding tube? It seems to me that it's the usual liberal groups (PFAW, ACLU, etc.) that can't get that tube out of her quick enough.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 08:26 AM
http://hyscience.typepad.com/hyscience/2005/02/the_video_micha.html

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 08:30 AM
I don't see why its such a big deal. I'm going to make sure I have it written down that if i'm in a state like she is, pull the tube.

SBK
03-18-2005, 08:35 AM
I feel horrible for her family. I could see pulling a respirator, but a feeding tube, that's disgusting.

Donger
03-18-2005, 08:36 AM
I don't see why its such a big deal. I'm going to make sure I have it written down that if i'm in a state like she is, pull the tube.

KCWolfman posted a such a form a few weeks back.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 08:43 AM
I feel horrible for her family. I could see pulling a respirator, but a feeding tube, that's disgusting.

In three separate surveys, over 80% of the American public said they would want food and fluids removed if they were in PVS

I guess 80+% of the American people are "disgusting"

alnorth
03-18-2005, 08:49 AM
http://hyscience.typepad.com/hyscience/2005/02/the_video_micha.html

Unfortunately for them, they have also done numerous brain scans on Terri. She has no upper-level brain activity at all, it might as well be physically removed as a useless organ at this point.

Vegetables will sometimes react spontaneously to their environment, but their reactions are NOT reproducable. One day a vegetable may react to a stimuli, the next day they might not.

All the false hope in the world can not get beyond the fact that even coma patients have some low level of upper brain activity which Terri lacks. Not all Vegetables have zero brain activity, sometimes they will have a very small amount and sometimes those folks may come out of it, but we have NEVER seen ANYONE without exception, recover when the scans show no upper-level brain activity in a PVS patient.

Several teams of doctors did not sit in court to testify that Terri has no hope of recovery just for the hell of it. their word is good enough for me regarding her diagnosis.

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:50 AM
I feel horrible for her family. I could see pulling a respirator, but a feeding tube, that's disgusting.

Depending on her body fat it could take weeks before respiratory failure occurs. In the interim her body will consume itself.

My question is what do they do if she starts displaying signs of discomfort...do they put the tube back in?

alnorth
03-18-2005, 08:52 AM
Depending on her body fat it could take weeks before respiratory failure occurs. In the interim her body will consume itself.

My question is what do they do if she starts displaying signs of discomfort...do they put the tube back in?

If she showed reproducable and valid signs of discomfort, then it would immediately invalidate her diagnosis as a vegetable.

Since she is a vegetable and since she has zero upper-level brain activity, she will not be aware of anything at all.

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:53 AM
Unfortunately for them, they have also done numerous brain scans on Terri. She has no upper-level brain activity at all, it might as well be physically removed as a useless organ at this point.

Vegetables will sometimes react spontaneously to their environment, but their reactions are NOT reproducable. One day a vegetable may react to a stimuli, the next day they might not.

All the false hope in the world can not get beyond the fact that even coma patients have some low level of upper brain activity which Terri lacks. Not all Vegetables have zero brain activity, sometimes they will have a very small amount and sometimes those folks may come out of it, but we have NEVER seen ANYONE without exception, recover when the scans show no upper-level brain activity in a PVS patient.

Several teams of doctors did not sit in court to testify that Terri has no hope of recovery just for the hell of it. their word is good enough for me regarding her diagnosis.


All valid points, but what do you do if you have a child with extreme retardation who can't feed himself? What do you do with that person when they turn 18? What if his/her parents are scum and no longer want to be bothered by this person.

It just feels wrong...

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:56 AM
If she showed reproducable and valid signs of discomfort, then it would immediately invalidate her diagnosis as a vegetable.

Since she is a vegetable and since she has zero upper-level brain activity, she will not be aware of anything at all.

Thanks for posting this because I really didn't know whether discomfort would be waived off as some kind of unrelated reaction or not. It's hard to make the case that she's operating in reality if she's wearing a big grin minutes from starvation.

That said, my earlier point about where this road leads remains...

alnorth
03-18-2005, 08:57 AM
None of this changes the strong probability that if Michael had sworn an oath of chastity, and ignored all women for the last 15 years, no one would be having a problem right now. We'd see her parents as a bunch of fruit-loops and demand that Terri be allowed to pass on, but since some people view Michael as a dirtbag for wanting to move on and respect his dead wife's wishes simultaneously, then we are willing to believe all kinds of wild charges, regardless of the lack of evidence, that failed to fly in court.

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 08:59 AM
None of this changes the strong probability that if Michael had sworn an oath of chastity, and ignored all women for the last 15 years, no one would be having a problem right now. We'd see her parents as a bunch of fruit-loops and demand that Terri be allowed to pass on, but since some people view Michael as a dirtbag for wanting to move on and respect his dead wife's wishes simultaneously, then we are willing to believe all kinds of wild charges, regardless of the lack of evidence, that failed to fly in court.

I don't know enough about the guy to comment on his motivation. But, again, what does it say about this issue and our soceity if we allow guardians to off their spouses and/or children when they become inconvenient?

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 08:59 AM
If you believe in some sort of post-life existence I hope you run into this lady and she kicks you in the nuts for leaving her staring at a ceiling for decades because, to quote RINGLEADER, "it just felt wrong".

Like it or not she didn't write down her wishes so now her wishes are to be expressed through the will of her husband. He has cleared numerous court hurdles and those courts have sided with him. It's time to let go.

Just as an aside, I wouldn't pull the feeding tube, I'd dope her up until her heart and lungs stopped. Starvation is a sick way to go no matter what kind of shape you're in.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:00 AM
That said, my earlier point about where this road leads remains...

Well, even the most profoundly retarded child will respond to commands. If you do not respond to commands, the brain scan shows no upper brain activity, AND if you do not reliably respond to stimuli in a reproducable way, then your not really human anymore, your just a living shell.

If the parents cant be bothered with a retarded child, then the child should become a ward of the state.

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 09:02 AM
None of this changes the strong probability that if Michael had sworn an oath of chastity, and ignored all women for the last 15 years, no one would be having a problem right now. We'd see her parents as a bunch of fruit-loops and demand that Terri be allowed to pass on, but since some people view Michael as a dirtbag for wanting to move on and respect his dead wife's wishes simultaneously, then we are willing to believe all kinds of wild charges, regardless of the lack of evidence, that failed to fly in court.


so your definition of PVS equals death???? :hmmm:

You dicredit the doctor's who state that she isn't in the PVS state??? What degree do you have to make that kind of medical diagnosis??? :hmmm:

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:02 AM
Just as an aside, I wouldn't pull the feeding tube, I'd dope her up until her heart and lungs stopped. Starvation is a sick way to go no matter what kind of shape you're in.

It would be nice if that were possible, but that treatment would not be legal. Starvation is the only method available. If we want a new law allowing drug-induced death narrowly tailored only to PVS patients where a couple teams of doctors testify that theres no hope of recovery, then wed have to write and pass that law.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:05 AM
You dicredit the doctor's who state that she isn't in the PVS state??? What degree do you have to make that kind of medical diagnosis??? :hmmm:

I do, his credibility does not rise to the level of the independant court-appointed doctors. Some doctor that Terri's parents hired, perhaps he lacks the expertise, or perhaps he has ulterior motives.

The independant court-appointed doctors have no direct interest in this case, and they have all ruled that she's a PVS. Why do you believe that the independant court-appointed doctors are wrong?

IN SPITE of the brain scan evidence that SHOWS in black and white, no level of upper brain activity?!

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 09:07 AM
There are people offering to pay for her care, Michael would be off the hook, and he fought for her and his conscience could be clear.
You can't be serious. If someone I loved expressed to me that they wanted to die rather than remain on extended life support the cost would be irrelevent. They wanted to die and I'd be damned if I wouldn't give them that last wish come hell or high water.

I can't believe you think this is about money. If it was about money he would have been better off giving up on this LONG ago.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:08 AM
If you believe in some sort of post-life existence I hope you run into this lady and she kicks you in the nuts for leaving her staring at a ceiling for decades because, to quote RINGLEADER, "it just felt wrong".

No s***, who the hell wants to live like this?

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 09:11 AM
I do, his credibility does not rise to the level of the independant court-appointed doctors. Some doctor that Terri's parents hired, perhaps he lacks the expertise, or perhaps he has ulterior motives.

The independant court-appointed doctors have no direct interest in this case, and they have all ruled that she's a PVS. Why do you believe that the independant court-appointed doctors are wrong?

IN SPITE of the brain scan evidence that SHOWS in black and white, no level of upper brain activity?!


So the doctor's that her husband had examine her, should be dicredited also because of the same reasons??

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:12 AM
So the doctor's that her husband had examine her, should be dicredited also because of the same reasons??

If you want, sure.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 09:17 AM
Agree with several comments above. If I starved a dog or cat to death a lot of people would want to put me away from animal cruelty. And yet we have people here campaigning to do it to a human being.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 09:20 AM
Agree with several comments above. If I starved a dog or cat to death a lot of people would want to put me away from animal cruelty. And yet we have people here campaigning to do it to a human being.
If your cat or dog was in that condition, you'd euthanize it. Perhaps they should just do that instead of starving her to death. That'd be much more humane.

SBK
03-18-2005, 09:27 AM
I guess 80+% of the American people are "disgusting"

Have you seen any video of her. She's not a vegetable. My grandmas brother had a massive stroke last Thanksgiving, I sat with him in hospice. He was a vegetable. His body was alive but his brain wasn't.

Terri Shaivo is not a veggie. Video of her smiling, she responds to her mother and father, that isn't a veggie.

SBK
03-18-2005, 09:28 AM
Have you seen any video of her. She's not a vegetable. My grandmas brother had a massive stroke last Thanksgiving, I sat with him in hospice. He was a vegetable. His body was alive but his brain wasn't.

Terri Shaivo is not a veggie. Video of her smiling, she responds to her mother and father, that isn't a veggie.

If she WAS in fact in a veggie state this wouldn't be an issue. The plug is pulled on folks like that every day and there isn't a big battle over it. It's because she ISN'T a veggie that this huge battle is being fought.

RINGLEADER
03-18-2005, 09:29 AM
If you believe in some sort of post-life existence I hope you run into this lady and she kicks you in the nuts for leaving her staring at a ceiling for decades because, to quote RINGLEADER, "it just felt wrong".

Like it or not she didn't write down her wishes so now her wishes are to be expressed through the will of her husband. He has cleared numerous court hurdles and those courts have sided with him. It's time to let go.

Just as an aside, I wouldn't pull the feeding tube, I'd dope her up until her heart and lungs stopped. Starvation is a sick way to go no matter what kind of shape you're in.


But if she's truly brain dead then she won't remember looking at the ceiling for a couple of decades.

Sorry.

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 09:31 AM
But if she's truly brain dead then she won't remember looking at the ceiling for a couple of decades.

Sorry.
So you believe her soul won't remember those years?

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 09:32 AM
Now we are just getting REDICULOUS!

Cochise
03-18-2005, 09:32 AM
If your cat or dog was in that condition, you'd euthanize it. Perhaps they should just do that instead of starving her to death. That'd be much more humane.

Yeah, I wouldn't agree to euthanizing her, unless she had a binding document somewhere, but it would indeed be much more humane than starving her to death.

I mean, give me a break, she's going to suffer the same fate as those skeletal people in the films from Auschwitz. Haven't we progressed as a culture any further than this?

I would also note that euthanization by injection, like we give to animals and those death row, is also much more humane.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 09:37 AM
Yeah, I wouldn't agree to euthanizing her, unless she had a binding document somewhere, but it would indeed be much more humane than starving her to death.

I mean, give me a break, she's going to suffer the same fate as those skeletal people in the films from Auschwitz. Haven't we progressed as a culture any further than this?

Why would they starve her, rather than just not hydrating her? Wouldn't that make it quicker?

The argument i've heard is that she wouldn't notice she was starving. I say, if you are going to starve her, you might as well euthanize her. Much quicker, more humane, etc...

I don't care either way, really. I just know if I were in her state, a VEGETABLE, I wouldn't want to live. She may respond to some stimuli, but she isn't getting any better, and she won't. I just can't imagine someone who would want to continue living like that.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:37 AM
Here's a very nice summary from a blogger I read sometimes. He does not take either side, the purpose of his blog is to discuss and explain the legal issues of the case.

A lot of misinformation is flying about, to the point where youd think that the family and Michael hated each other from day one, with Michael just itching to pull the plug and the family leading the holy crusade against Michael.

Thats not the case at all. Michael and Terri's nutty family were allied in their hope for a recovery for a long time after Terri collapsed. Michael provided care and rehabilitation efforts, even living with his in-laws for a while, in the hopes of seeing Terri come out of it. Eventually he lost hope and Terri's doctors confirmed to him that she was a veggie.

You're left with a woman who suffered a heart attack 15 years ago, who essentially died but was resuscitated, though not entirely. Her brain had suffered enormous damage from the heart attack. As time passed, her brain further deteriorated -- to the point where much if not most of her cerebral cortex (the portion of the brain that controls conscious thought, among other things) was literally gone, replaced by spinal fluid. Doctors hired by Terri's husband say the deterioration of Terri's brain left her without thoughts or feelings, that the damage is irreversible, and that Terri's life-like appearance is merely the result of brain stem activity -- basically involuntary reflexes we all have. An independent doctor hired by the court reached the same conclusions. Doctors hired by Terri's parents did not dispute the physical damage done to Terri, but they claim there are new therapies that could improve her condition. In two separate trials, the trial court found such claims of potential improvement to be without merit. Terri's body continues to function without her cerebral cortex. She is sustained by a feeding tube surgically inserted into her stomach. She cannot eat through her mouth without a strong likelihood of choking to death.

You're left with a husband who lived with his in-laws following Terri's heart attack, who apparently provided care and therapy for years but who later came to believe Terri would never recover. He believes she would not have wanted to be kept alive in this brain-degenerated condition by a surgically implanted tube. He is apparently willing to continue his fight to achieve what he believes Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.

You're left with parents who were once allied with Terri's husband in an effort to care for Terri and restore her but, unlike Terri's husband, they never lost hope. They believe Terri reacts to them and has conscious thoughts. They believe Terri would not want, and does not want, her feeding tube removed, and that some cognitive function could be restored through new therapies. Terri's parents are willing to continue their fight to achieve what they believe Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.

You're left with judges who have been placed in the utterly thankless position of applying Florida law to this impassioned situation. Florida law calls for the trial court to determine what Terri would chose to do in this situation, and after a trial hard fought by Terri's husband and her family, where each side was given the opportunity to present its best case about what Terri would do, the court determined the evidence was clear and convincing that Terri would chose not to continue living by the affirmative intervention of modern medicine -- that she would chose to have her feeding tube disconnected. In a second trial, brought about by Terri's family's claims new therapies could restore her and that the existence of such a therapy would make her "change her mind," the trial court again heard evidence from all sides and determined that no new therapy presented any reasonable chance of restoring Terri's brain function. The propriety of these decisions -- from the sufficiency of the evidence to the appropriateness of the procedures used -- has been unanimously upheld on appeal each time.

You're left with a public that is much confused. Some see video clips of Terri moving, appearing to make eye contact, and making sounds, and they assume such are the product of conscious thought -- that Terri's "in there." Some believe Terri's husband has been motivated by money. Some believe that no heart attack occurred -- instead, Terri's husband beat her nearly to death and has been trying to end her life ever since. Some believe he is a bad person because he has taken up with another woman and has children with her. Some believe Florida's judiciary is corrupt or inept, to the point where death threats have been made against the trial judge. Some are sad that families would fight like this. Some believe that removing Terri's feeding tube would cause her pain and is inhumane (I'm no doctor, but the medical information I've seen on this subject uniformly says the opposite.) Some are disappointed that the law does not allow someone in Terri's condition to be kept alive perpetually if a family member is willing to care for him or her. Some believe no life should be permitted to reach an unnecessary end unless irrefutable proof, or at least written proof, shows the person wanted things that way.

All of these positions are understandable in some sense, though if you've read my posts over the years you know I am particularly sensitive to the judiciary's position of following the law correctly and yet being so horrifically misunderstood by many.

Is there hope? Well, if you mean hope to keep Terri alive any longer, there is some. Terri's family continues to launch new legal battles, and to appeal old ones, in hopes a court somewhere will give them another chance to prove Terri would not want to discontinue her feeding tube, or in hopes they can win the authority to care for Terri themselves. There is a new legislative measure under consideration that could prove to be a repeat of 2003's "Terri's Law." How long can these efforts forestall the tube's removal? Can they stop it altogether? I can't say. But I don't think anyone with knowledge of how the legal system works would have foreseen several years ago that Terri would be with us in 2005, yet here she is.

I continue to hope that when this saga ends it will be the ending that Terri would have wanted.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 09:41 AM
I really don't understand the parents position either. My parents wouldn't keep me alive in that situation.

Also, the argument was made that the husband understands his wife and knows his wife better than the parents. I agree with that.

KCFalcon59
03-18-2005, 09:44 AM
You can't be serious. If someone I loved expressed to me that they wanted to die rather than remain on extended life support the cost would be irrelevent. They wanted to die and I'd be damned if I wouldn't give them that last wish come hell or high water.

I can't believe you think this is about money. If it was about money he would have been better off giving up on this LONG ago.

I think it is about money. Her settlement that is supposed to cover her care is running out, thanks to the judge ordering the lawyers be paid out of it. Her husband doesn't want to have to spend his money from his settlement. He is a bastard in my book.

bkkcoh
03-18-2005, 09:46 AM
I really don't understand the parents position either. My parents wouldn't keep me alive in that situation.

Also, the argument was made that the husband understands his wife and knows his wife better than the parents. I agree with that.

It would be very difficult being the parents in this case. I know what it is like when one of my kids is just sick with a cold. But being like this, I would be driven nuts. I am sure a part of them is to try some type of rehabilitation to see if there is any improvements at all. Has there been any type of physical rehab tried?? I don't think there has been.

Shouldn't society be very careful as to set a precedent like this, if it hasn't already been set in another case similar. (But I haven't heard of that)

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:52 AM
I think it is about money. Her settlement that is supposed to cover her care is running out, thanks to the judge ordering the lawyers be paid out of it. Her husband doesn't want to have to spend his money from his settlement. He is a bastard in my book.

Shortly after Terri collapsed, Michael sued Terri's doctor for malpractice, claiming that the doctors should have been able to diagnose Terri's Bulemia (sp?) eating disorder, which led to her disastrous heart attack. The jury ruled on Michael's favor for $1 million.

In July 1991, Michael had Terri transferred to a nursing facility to begin an aggressive physical and speech therapy, to which Terri never responded.

Seven years later, in 1998 Michael files petition for a court to determine whether Terri's feeding tube should be removed, contending that Terri would want it removed. A full-blown trial was held allowing both sides to present their case, and the court ruled that Terri would want the tube removed.

A second trial was ordered when her parents argued that Terri "would change her mind" if she knew about new therapy they wanted to try. The court ruled that this arguement was without merit, the new therapy would not improve Terri's condition.

Michael is not receiving a red cent of Terri's award, and if Michael couldnt afford her treatment, he wouldnt have had to pay anyway.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 09:53 AM
Has there been any type of physical rehab tried?? I don't think there has been.

False. After 7 years, no responce. Michael and Terri's doctors believe, especially in light of the fact that Terri's upper brain has literally deteriorated to spinal fluid, that she wont ever recover.

Brock
03-18-2005, 09:55 AM
So you believe her soul won't remember those years?

WTF?

BIG_DADDY
03-18-2005, 09:56 AM
Somebody please freakin kill me if you ever see me like that.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 09:57 AM
WTF?

No chit. If you take the traditional connotation of the word 'soul', they are eternal anyway, so a year is less than the blink of an eye to a soul.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 10:00 AM
Let me preface by saying that I don't disagree with your proposition that Terri Schiavo is being used by both sides in the right to die argument. But can you tell me of any conservatives who have gone to court and/or advocated the pulling of her feeding tube? It seems to me that it's the usual liberal groups (PFAW, ACLU, etc.) that can't get that tube out of her quick enough.

Seems to me the conservatives in Congress are about to skirt the constitution since the court has not ruled in their favor...

which brings up an interesting conundrum for the CONS. If we allow the Federal government to intervene in this case (which I fear is the only way she will live) then are we really ready to set the precedent of saying that the government's wishes or whims take precedent over BOTH state courts or laws (states rights) AND the spouse or partner (marital rights) in civil manners? And what happened to the CONS wanting less government intervention in the people's lives?

It seems to me this is a very dangerous precedent and as much as I want Terry Schiavo to live, I don't think the unintended consequences of keeping her alive are worth it.

Basically, if this is the only way to keep her alive then her options are over. And it's a disgrace. She dies not because she 'wanted' to die but for the sake of the 'greater good'...

victim once again. :shake: :banghead: :cuss:

alnorth
03-18-2005, 10:02 AM
Seems to me the conservatives in Congress are about to skirt the constitution since the court has not ruled in their favor...

which brings up an interesting conundrum for the CONS. If we allow the Federal government to intervene in this case (which I fear is the only way she will live) then are we really ready to set the precedent of saying that the government's wishes or whims take precedent over BOTH state courts or laws AND the spouse or partner? And what happened to the CONS wanting less government intervention in the people's lives?

It seems to me this is a very dangerous precedent and as much as I want Terry Schiavo to live I don't think the unintended consequences of keeping her alive are worth it.

Basically, her options are over. And it's a disgrace.

This is what really frightens me and why I'm very agitated at this point. I have my opinions on Terri, but if her parents succeed in keeping a vegetable alive until she finally dies of infection, I wont lose sleep.

If some of the conservatives in my party lose their freaking minds and change the laws so that you cant determine your spouse's care if they fall into a coma, that big daddy government rules all in those situations.... well, lets just say thats a bad thing. (tm)

MOhillbilly
03-18-2005, 10:42 AM
Somebody please freakin kill me if you ever see me like that.

Me and my brother have a pact to sneak up on each other w/ a hammer and put the lights out if we ever get that ****ed up.

the Talking Can
03-18-2005, 11:11 AM
What kind of life does she have?

Seems to me this circus is about everyone but her.

It would be humane to let her die.

the Talking Can
03-18-2005, 11:12 AM
Me and my brother have a pact to sneak up on each other w/ a hammer and put the lights out if we ever get that ****ed up.

No ****ing joke, my mother made me promise to pull the plug if she ever ends up brain dead and hooked up to a bunch of god damned machines. I feel the exact same way.

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 11:26 AM
No ****ing joke, my mother made me promise to pull the plug if she ever ends up brain dead and hooked up to a bunch of god damned machines. I feel the exact same way.
This thread should make it obvious that your mother needs to put that in writting in triplicate, on video, have them both noterized, and have a mental health professional clear her before and after all of that.

Of course none of that would help since part of the argument for Terry is "she would have changed her mind if only she knew..."

:shake:

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 11:29 AM
This is what really frightens me and why I'm very agitated at this point. I have my opinions on Terri, but if her parents succeed in keeping a vegetable alive until she finally dies of infection, I wont lose sleep.

If some of the conservatives in my party lose their freaking minds and change the laws so that you cant determine your spouse's care if they fall into a coma, that big daddy government rules all in those situations.... well, lets just say thats a bad thing. (tm)

Well, it's a damn shame that Terry's lawyers did not file for a divorce sooner. Let Michael Schiavo argue that he wants to stay married to this woman and care for her...

the minute the mistress became known the papers should have been filed.

Calcountry
03-18-2005, 11:29 AM
WHY THE HELL NOT?!?!?!!!

If we cant trust someone's husband or wife, who can we trust?

I dont see why this should be an issue at all either. We are not China or Japan here, where the parent's will reigns supreme, ...

.

This is not the "Iron Chef" either. :shake:

alnorth
03-18-2005, 11:31 AM
This thread should make it obvious that your mother needs to put that in writting in triplicate, on video, have them both noterized, and have a mental health professional clear her before and after all of that.

Of course none of that would help since part of the argument for Terry is "she would have changed her mind if only she knew..."

It goes further. According to interviews in court records, Terri's parents have said that even if she had told them that she would not want to be alive in this condition, they would refuse to honor that request, believing they know whats good for her better than she does.

You could make an arguement that Terri's parents are f***ing nuts.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 11:39 AM
This is not the "Iron Chef" either. :shake:
They have Iron Chef america now.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 11:39 AM
Well, thats new, I hadnt heard of Michael cheating on her before. (since she essentially died after 1990, Michael's current actions are not adulterous)

If he was cheating on her, why did Terri's parents welcome Michael with open arms, allied together to try to help Terri recover, for 7 long damned years?

As soon as he decides that there no longer is hope, we suddenly have wild charges of abuse, all vetted in court and shown to be utterly without merit.

Folks, most of her upper brain has literally turned into liquid! To have thoughts, or emotions, you AT LEAST need the physical organs necessary for those functions. There is no hope of recovery, because there is physically nothing left for her to recover to.

Even 10-year coma patients have upper-level brain activity, Terri has none. If she did recover, it would be nearly the equivalent of the dead coming back to life. Those rare cases where someone wakes up after years of sleep simply do not apply here as a remote possibility because her upper brain has physically deteriorated into nothing more than fluids.

Unless you seriously believe that you can store thoughts and emotions into a fluid, its time to let her go.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 11:56 AM
Well, thats new, I hadnt heard of Michael cheating on her before. (since she essentially died after 1990, Michael's current actions are not adulterous)

If he was cheating on her, why did Terri's parents welcome Michael with open arms, allied together to try to help Terri recover, for 7 long damned years?

As soon as he decides that there no longer is hope, we suddenly have wild charges of abuse, all vetted in court and shown to be utterly without merit.

Folks, most of her upper brain has literally turned into liquid! To have thoughts, or emotions, you AT LEAST need the physical organs necessary for those functions. There is no hope of recovery, because there is physically nothing left for her to recover to.

Even 10-year coma patients have upper-level brain activity, Terri has none. If she did recover, it would be nearly the equivalent of the dead coming back to life. Those rare cases where someone wakes up after years of sleep simply do not apply here as a remote possibility because her upper brain has physically deteriorated into nothing more than fluids.

Unless you seriously believe that you can store thoughts and emotions into a fluid, its time to let her go.

Sorry, as long as he's married and she's alive it's adultery...I'm sure you've heard of 'until death do us part'. Death being not living. She's alive. If he wanted to be free of the marital bond then he should have surrendered his rights in a divorce. As it is, he's had all the cards and had his cake and eaten it too. Disgraceful. :shake:

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 11:59 AM
You could make an arguement that Terri's parents are f***ing nuts.
I'd say selfish and possibly dilusional. Selfish because they fear losing child even if it was that child's will, and dilusional for not realizing they've already lost that child.

It is rich that they keep talking about all these things they want to do with her like taking her to the mall, yet they never seem to get around to them. Instead she's just lying there rotting in a nursing home...

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:01 PM
I'd say selfish and possibly dilusional. Selfish because they fear losing child even if it was that child's will, and dilusional for not realizing they've already lost that child.

It is rich that they keep talking about all these things they want to do with her like taking her to the mall, yet they never seem to get around to them. Instead she's just lying there rotting in a nursing home...

Uh, to my knowledge they do not have the right to remove her. NOT that they don't want too. :rolleyes:

alnorth
03-18-2005, 12:02 PM
Sorry, as long as he's married and she's alive it's adultery...I'm sure you've heard of 'until death do us part'. Death being not living. She's alive. If he wanted to be free of the marital bond then he should have surrendered his rights in a divorce. As it is, he's had all the cards and had his cake and eaten it too. Disgraceful. :shake:

She may be "alive" in that her heart beats, but she doesnt have a brain! LITERALLY! (aside from the lower brain that covers the necessary functions.

If you honestly believe that all the moral and ethical issues of adultery apply in such a case, then your opinion is simply idiotic. If you want to argue that somehow, she is still a thinking human being in spite of her lack of the necessary organs, then fine.

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 12:05 PM
Sorry, as long as he's married and she's alive it's adultery...I'm sure you've heard of 'until death do us part'. Death being not living. She's alive. If he wanted to be free of the marital bond then he should have surrendered his rights in a divorce. As it is, he's had all the cards and had his cake and eaten it too. Disgraceful. :shake:
If he's committing adultery and she's alive why isn't she kicking his ass? So by your rules he has two options:

1. Remain celebate until a person on life support, the whole purpose of which is to keep her alive, dies.

2. Divorce her, giving up his rights as her husband, and lose any ability to assist his wife in getting the end she expressed to him.

I'm almost a little disappointed in the fact that he hasn't just walked in and whacked her so that all of this would go away.

KCFalcon59
03-18-2005, 12:09 PM
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006442

'Don't Kick It'
If Terri Schiavo is killed, Republicans will pay a political price.

Friday, March 18, 2005 1:37 p.m. EST

It appears we've reached the pivotal moment in the Terri Schiavo case, and it also appears our politicians, our senators and congressmen, might benefit from some observations.

In America today all big stories have three dimensions: a legal angle, a public-relations angle and a political angle. In the Schiavo case some of our politicians seem not to be fully appreciating the second and third. This is odd.

Here's both a political and a public-relations reality: The Republican Party controls the Senate, the House and the White House. The Republicans are in charge. They have the power. If they can't save this woman's life, they will face a reckoning from a sizable portion of their own base. And they will of course deserve it.

This should concentrate their minds.

So should this: America is watching. As the deadline for removal of Mrs. Schiavo's feeding tube approaches, the story has broken through as never before in the media.


There is a passionate, highly motivated and sincere group of voters and activists who care deeply about whether Terri Schiavo is allowed to live. Their reasoning, ultimately, is this: Be on the side of life. They remind me of what Winston Churchill said once when he became home secretary in charge of England's prisons. He was seated at dinner with a jabbery lady who said that if she were ever given a life sentence she'd rather die than serve it. He reared back. No, he said, always choose life! "Death's the only thing you can't get out of!"

Just so. Life is full of surprise and lightning-like lurches. The person in a coma today wakes up tomorrow and says, "Is that you, mom?" Life is unknowable. Always give it a chance to shake your soul and upend reality.

The supporters of Terri Schiavo's right to continue living have fought for her heroically, through the courts and through the legislatures. They're still fighting. They really mean it. And they have memories.

On the other side of this debate, one would assume there is an equally well organized and passionate group of organizations deeply committed to removing Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. But that's not true. There's just about no one on the other side. Or rather there is one person, a disaffected husband who insists Terri once told him she didn't want to be kept alive by extraordinary measures.

He has fought the battle to kill her with a determination that at this point seems not single-minded or passionate but strange. His former wife's parents and family are eager to care for her and do care for her, every day. He doesn't have to do a thing. His wife is not kept alive by extraordinary measures--she breathes on her own, is not on a respirator. All she needs to continue existing--and to continue being alive so that life can produce whatever miracle it may produce--is a feeding tube.

It doesn't seem a lot.

So politically this is a struggle between many serious people who really mean it and one, just one, strange-o. And the few bearded and depressed-looking academics he's drawn to his side.

It is not at all in the political interests of senators and congressmen to earn the wrath of the pro-Schiavo group and the gratitude of the anti-Schiavo husband, by doing nothing.

So let me write a sentence I never thought I'd write: Politicians, please, think of yourselves! Move to help Terri Schiavo, and no one will be mad at you, and you'll keep a human being alive. Do nothing and you reap bitterness and help someone die.

This isn't hard, is it?

At the heart of the case at this point is a question: Is Terri Schiavo brain-dead? That is, is remedy, healing, physiologically impossible?

No. Oddly enough anyone who sees the film and tape of her can see that her brain tells her lungs to breathe, that she can open her eyes, that she seems to respond at times and to some degree to her family. She can laugh. (I heard it this morning on the news. It's a childlike chuckle.) In the language of computers she appears not to be a broken hard drive but a computer in deep hibernation. She looks like one of those coma cases that wind up in the news because the patient, for no clear reason, snaps to and returns to life and says, "Is it 1983? Is there still McDonald's? Can I have a burger?"

Again, life is mysterious. Medicine is full of happenings and events that leave brilliant doctors scratching their heads.

But in the end, it comes down to this: Why kill her? What is gained? What is good about it? Ronald Reagan used to say, in the early days of the abortion debate, when people would argue that the fetus may not really be a person, he'd say, "Well, if you come across a paper bag in the gutter and it seems something's in it and you don't know if it's alive, you don't kick it, do you?" No, you don't.

So Congress: don't kick it. Let her live. Hard cases make bad law, but let her live. Precedents can begin to cascade, special pleas can become a flood, but let her live. Because she's human, and you're human.

A final note to the Republican leadership in the House and Senate: You have to pull out all the stops. You have to run over your chairmen if they're being obstructionist for this niggling reason and that. Run over their egos, run past their fatigue. You have to win on this. If you don't, you can't imagine how much you're going to lose. And from people who have faith in you.

Bill Frist and Tom DeLay and Jim Sensenbrenner and Denny Hastert and all the rest would be better off risking looking ridiculous and flying down to Florida, standing outside Terri Schiavo's room and physically restraining the poor harassed staff who may be told soon to remove her feeding tube, than standing by in Washington, helpless and tied in legislative knots, and doing nothing.

Issue whatever subpoena, call whatever witnesses, pass whatever emergency bill, but don't let this woman die.



Makes sense to me.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:10 PM
If he's committing adultery and she's alive why isn't she kicking his ass? So by your rules he has two options:

1. Remain celebate until a person on life support, the whole purpose of which is to keep her alive, dies.

2. Divorce her, giving up his rights as her husband, and lose any ability to assist his wife in getting the end she expressed to him.

I'm almost a little disappointed in the fact that he hasn't just walked in and whacked her so that all of this would go away.


Yep. You don't run out and find a mistress and start having kids a mere 3-5 years into your wife's illness. If that is the case, you divorce her and forfeit your say in the matter. I know people (granted they are from two generations ago but the point remains) who never married or even dated after their spouse died...and they were in the 40's or 50's when they died. If he wanted to have a functioning wife and a family then he needed to give up his rights with his current wife.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 12:11 PM
Yep. You don't run out and find a mistress and start having kids a mere 3-5 years into your wife's illness. If that is the case, you divorce her and forfeit your say in the matter.
Illness? Its not like she has a cold or something here. She is basically dead.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 12:13 PM
meme, if she literally doesnt have a brain, then she lacks the ability to think or have emotions. In that case, she is dead and we are waiting for the formality of starvation or an infection, depending on how it works out in court.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:14 PM
meme, if she literally doesnt have a brain, then she lacks the ability to think or have emotions. In that case, she is dead and we are waiting for the formality of starvation or an infection, depending on how it works out in court.

Tell me, if she doesn't have a brain then how are her heart and organs functioning?

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:15 PM
Illness? Its not like she has a cold or something here. She is basically dead.

Basically dead? Isn't that kind of like 'alittle pregnant'? :hmmm:

Duck Dog
03-18-2005, 12:16 PM
Anyway you look at this situation it's still cruel and barbaric to starve someone to death.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 12:18 PM
Tell me, if she doesn't have a brain then how are her heart and organs functioning?

The lower brain controls the heart and breathing, automatic functions that keep her ticking like a robot running on batteries.

The upper brain controls thought and emotions. She has no upper brain anymore, it has deteriorated into liquid. therefore she is dead.

To disagree with that is to say in a way, thats its barbaric to dismantle a robot.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:21 PM
The lower brain controls the heart and breathing, automatic functions that keep her ticking like a robot running on batteries.

The upper brain controls thought and emotions. She has no upper brain anymore, it has deteriorated into liquid. therefore she is dead.

To disagree with that is to say in a way, thats its barbaric to dismantle a robot.

OK, If she is already dead then why doesn't Michael Schiavo just walk away and let her be dead in her present state?

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 12:24 PM
Meme,

Let's say your husband told you he didn't want to be kept alive on life support. Then, 3 years later, he is in a terrible accident that leaves him in a condition that requires life support. After years of trying therepy, nothing has worked and the doctors are telling you he'll never recover.

Your answer is to cut and run, leaving him on the life support that he told you he didn't want? Add that to the long list of reasons I'm glad I'm not married to you.

alnorth
03-18-2005, 12:26 PM
OK, If she is already dead then why doesn't Michael Schiavo just walk away and let her be dead in her present state?

If he was a selfish ass who didnt care about Terri, then thats exactly what he would do.

His chosen course of action is utterly thankless, he is going to be hated for the rest of his life and will not profit at all. The $1 million judgement went to Terri's care, and the insurance policy is a phantom.

I never want to be in his position, and if I were, I dont know if I would have the courage he has shown. I'd probably buckle under the pressure myself.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:39 PM
Meme,

Let's say your husband told you he didn't want to be kept alive on life support. Then, 3 years later, he is in a terrible accident that leaves him in a condition that requires life support. After years of trying therepy, nothing has worked and the doctors are telling you he'll never recover.

Your answer is to cut and run, leaving him on the life support that he told you he didn't want? Add that to the long list of reasons I'm glad I'm not married to you.

I can't answer this question because we have children and their wishes would be considered primary to my own...but if I were in Michael Schaivo's situationand if his family wanted to care for him and I wanted to move on in my life then I would give his mother the opportunity to care for him knowing that she brought him into the world and would be the other person most concerned with his well being on the entire planet.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 12:41 PM
If he was a selfish ass who didnt care about Terri, then thats exactly what he would do.

His chosen course of action is utterly thankless, he is going to be hated for the rest of his life and will not profit at all. The $1 million judgement went to Terri's care, and the insurance policy is a phantom.

I never want to be in his position, and if I were, I dont know if I would have the courage he has shown. I'd probably buckle under the pressure myself.


He's been a selfish ass. He's lived on and is trying to control the death of a woman who he should no longer be considered her husband.

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 12:47 PM
I can't answer this question because we have children and their wishes would be considered primary to my own...but if I were in Michael Schaivo's situationand if his family wanted to care for him and I wanted to move on in my life then I would give his mother the opportunity to care for him knowing that she brought him into the world and would be the other person most concerned with his well being on the entire planet.
Wow, the wishes of your children (not adults, I'm assuming) would take precedence over the wishes of your husband, who is the one who is most affected by the situation? Then, knowing full well that he requested to die in that situation, you would abandon him and put his future in the hands of someone that has expressed an adamant desire to ignore his wishes?

In my book that is cold. If I tell my wife something it is her duty to me to ensure those wishes are carried out, come hell or high water. For instance, my wife doesn't want to be an organ donor. I don't understand why and she can't explain it to me, but so help me God I'd kill any mother-f**ker that tried to harvest one of her organs. Why? Because I love her and I will respect her wishes above my own desires or the desires of anyone else.

4th and Long
03-18-2005, 01:18 PM
From what I've read on this today, the U.S. Senate and House committees issued subpoenas for Schiavo, her husband, Michael Schiavo, and her caregivers to appear at a heari on March 25 and March 28. Under US law, you cannot cause harm to any person uder such a subpoena. However, a Florida judge doesnt see it that way.

http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/4297126/detail.html

Judge Orders Schiavo's Tube Removed, Despite Congressional Subpoenas

Unclear When Brain-Damaged Woman's Feeding Tube Will Come Out

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. -- A Florida judge now says Terri Schiavo's feeding tube can be removed.

The presiding judge in the case ruled Friday that the feeding tube keeping the brain-damaged woman alive can be removed despite efforts by congressional Republicans to have her appear at congressional hearings.

Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer refused a request from U.S. House attorneys to delay the removal, which he had previously ordered to take place at 1 p.m. EST.

Greer determined that it should go forward about an hour after another judge issued a temporary delay blocking the tube's removal.

The delay came after U.S. Senate and House committees in the Republican-controlled Congress issued subpoenas for Schiavo, her husband, Michael Schiavo, and her caregivers to appear at hearings on March 25 and March 28, which would in effect keep her alive for the time being.

The Pinellas Park hospice where Schiavo lives received a subpoena late Friday morning, spokeswoman Louise Cleary said. Officials there did not say who was subpoenaed or disclose their next steps.

There was no immediate word on when the tube might be removed.

Michael Schiavo has waged a yearslong court battle with his parents-in-law, contending his wife, who has been in a persistent vegetative state since 1990, would not want to live that way.

The tube has been removed twice in the past and then reinserted as the battle continued.

"It is a contempt of Congress to prevent or discourage someone from following the subpoena that's been issued," David Gibbs, the attorney for her parents, said Friday morning. "What the U.S. Congress is saying is, `We want to see Terri Schiavo."'

"The family is prayerfully excited about their daughter going before the United States Congress for the whole world to see how alive she is," Gibbs said.

Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Florida office, had said Friday morning that his group's attorneys were working with Michael Schiavo's attorneys to determine the effect of the subpoenas.

"This is clearly an effort to circumvent a lawful court order by a state judge," Simon said. "I am not sure how a subpoena, which is ordinarily done to produce records or somebody to testify, can essentially have the effect of an injunction overriding the orders of a court."

Terri Schiavo's father, Bob Schindler, went into the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park at about 9:30 a.m. to visit his daughter. Outside, about three dozen people prayed and wept.

"What can wash away our sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus," they sang. Messages on protest signs included "Impeach Greer.com," a reference to a judge in the case, and "Execution - It's Not Just for the Guilty Anymore."

In Tallahassee, the Florida House on Thursday passed a bill 78-37 to block the withholding of food and water from patients in a persistent vegetative state who did not leave specific instructions regarding their care. But hours later, the Senate defeated a different measure 21-16. The sponsor of another state Senate didn't bring it for a vote because it didn't have enough support.

As part of the last-minute flurry of activity, the Florida judge who approved the withdrawal of the feeding tube denied a request from the state to keep her alive. The state appealed that decision to the Florida Supreme Court, which promptly dismissed it. The U.S. Supreme Court also denied another appeal.

At the White House, President George W. Bush left little doubt where he stands, saying, "those who live at the mercy of others deserve our special care and concern." His brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, long has supported the parents' efforts and urged lawmakers to act before it was too late.

Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped because of a chemical imbalance, and court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband says she told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, and say she could get better.

DanT
03-18-2005, 01:48 PM
President Bush said after the U.S. Senate vote that Schiavo's case "raises complex issues" but added: "Where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life.


Exactly.

EXACTLY!

DanT
03-18-2005, 02:01 PM
The lower brain controls the heart and breathing, automatic functions that keep her ticking like a robot running on batteries.

The upper brain controls thought and emotions. She has no upper brain anymore, it has deteriorated into liquid. therefore she is dead.

To disagree with that is to say in a way, thats its barbaric to dismantle a robot.

Do you believe that each of us has a soul?

DanT
03-18-2005, 02:04 PM
None of this changes the strong probability that if Michael had sworn an oath of chastity, and ignored all women for the last 15 years, no one would be having a problem right now. We'd see her parents as a bunch of fruit-loops and demand that Terri be allowed to pass on, but since some people view Michael as a dirtbag for wanting to move on and respect his dead wife's wishes simultaneously, then we are willing to believe all kinds of wild charges, regardless of the lack of evidence, that failed to fly in court.


My opinions on this matter don't have anything to do with the behavior of the husband toward other human beings in the time since his wife has been on a feeding tube. I doubt that I am alone in this regard. Your conjecture isn't accurate.

Cochise
03-18-2005, 02:04 PM
Noonan:


On the other side of this debate, one would assume there is an equally well organized and passionate group of organizations deeply committed to removing Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. But that's not true. There's just about no one on the other side. Or rather there is one person, a disaffected husband who insists Terri once told him she didn't want to be kept alive by extraordinary measures.

He has fought the battle to kill her with a determination that at this point seems not single-minded or passionate but strange. His former wife's parents and family are eager to care for her and do care for her, every day. He doesn't have to do a thing. His wife is not kept alive by extraordinary measures--she breathes on her own, is not on a respirator. All she needs to continue existing--and to continue being alive so that life can produce whatever miracle it may produce--is a feeding tube.

It doesn't seem a lot.

Taco John
03-18-2005, 02:13 PM
I hope someone can save this woman...

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 02:37 PM
I hope someone can save this woman...
Do you have a time machine for them to use? They'll have to get back to some time in 1990...

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 02:39 PM
As much as we hate to think it, at what cost are we keeping her alive? How much are we willing to spend on this? All of the people who are willing to pay to keep her alive, wouldn't that money be better spent on starving children? How many hundreds of people could be cared for or have their lives made better from the money it will take to keep Terri alive?

As for Noonan's quote: "He has fought the battle to kill her with a determination that at this point seems not single-minded or passionate but strange". That's what you do for someone you love. You go the extra distance.

Taco John
03-18-2005, 02:40 PM
Neg rep. That's weak.

Simplex3
03-18-2005, 02:47 PM
Neg rep. That's weak.
1 women, with potentially little to no brain functions, starving in the US takes precidence over dozens or hundreds of children, all of whom are absolutely feeling the starvation pains, around the world? Yeah, that is weak.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 02:57 PM
Wow, the wishes of your children (not adults, I'm assuming) would take precedence over the wishes of your husband, who is the one who is most affected by the situation? Then, knowing full well that he requested to die in that situation, you would abandon him and put his future in the hands of someone that has expressed an adamant desire to ignore his wishes?

In my book that is cold. If I tell my wife something it is her duty to me to ensure those wishes are carried out, come hell or high water. For instance, my wife doesn't want to be an organ donor. I don't understand why and she can't explain it to me, but so help me God I'd kill any mother-f**ker that tried to harvest one of her organs. Why? Because I love her and I will respect her wishes above my own desires or the desires of anyone else.

If it's my word and his and he has told no one else and his family and his children want him to live then I take into consideration their wishes because they know and love him too. There is nothing 'cold' here. Why would he tell only me if it's something he truly wanted? It seems to me that if he truly wanted this he would tell not only me, but his family (in preparation for such an event) and even his friends. If he's told ONLY me then I have a duty to consider the feelings of the others who he did not share this wish with.

I'm sorry but MS lost the ability to 'speak' for this woman the day he started shacking up and if not then certainly the day he created another family with another woman while his wife is on her 'death' bed.

Taco John
03-18-2005, 03:17 PM
That's what you do for someone you love. You go the extra distance.



Sounds like that's what her parents want to do...

I think you are off the argument anyway. This is about the right of life in a situation where there is no clear legally binding intent. You can't pull feeding tubes on heresy. That's ridiculous.

Taco John
03-18-2005, 03:18 PM
1 women, with potentially little to no brain functions, starving in the US takes precidence over dozens or hundreds of children, all of whom are absolutely feeling the starvation pains, around the world? Yeah, that is weak.



Yep. That's the way rights work.

Baby Lee
03-18-2005, 03:28 PM
As much as we hate to think it, at what cost are we keeping her alive? How much are we willing to spend on this? All of the people who are willing to pay to keep her alive, wouldn't that money be better spent on starving children?
Like clockwork, the "shouldn't you be locking up murderers?" response to getting a speeding ticket raises it's head.

Baby Lee
03-18-2005, 03:30 PM
You can't pull feeding tubes on heresy.
Yep. Them heretics are a self nourishing lot.

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:17 PM
Someone wanted this posted on this thread.

A living will. If your intent is to not have medical care provided, fill them out now and don't put unfair and unnecessary guilt and burden on your family.

The form will suffice in most states, and while I am not a lawyer, I play one on TV



Living Will

Declaration Of A Desire For A Natural Death As Set Forth In The Right To A Natural Death Act

I, ________________________________________________________, being of sound mind, desire that, as specified below, my life not be prolonged by extraordinary means or by artificial nutrition or hydration if my condition is determined to be terminal and incurable or if I am diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state. I am aware and understand that this writing authorizes a physician to withhold or discontinue extraordinary means or artificial nutrition or hydration in accordance with my specifications set forth below.

Initial any of the following as desired:

If my condition is determined to be terminal and incurable or if I should lapse into a persistent vegetative state, I authorize the following:

______My physician may withhold or discontinue extraordinary means only.

______ In addition to withholding or discontinuing extraordinary means, if such are necessary, my physician may withhold or discontinue either artificial nutrition or hydration, or both.

If my physician determines that I am in a persistent vegetative state, I authorize the following:

______My physician may withhold or discontinue extraordinary means only.

______In addition to withholding or discontinuing extraordinary means, if such are necessary, my physician may withhold or discontinue either artificial nutrition or hydration, or both.

This the ______day of ____________________, year_______________

Signature ___________________________________________________ I hereby state that the

Declarant,___________________________________________________ , being of sound mind, signed the attached declaration in my presence; and that I am not related to the Declarant by blood or marriage; and that I do not know or have a reasonable expectation that I would be entitled to any portion of the estate of the Declarant under any existing will or codicil of the Declarant or as an heir under the Intestate Succession Act if the Declarant died on this date without a will. I also state that I am not the Declarant’s attending physician or an employee of the Declarant’s attending physician or an employee of a health facility in which the Declarant is a patient or an employee of a nursing home or any group-care home where the Declarant resides. I further state that I do not now have any claim against the Declarant.

Witness:__________________________________________________

Witness:__________________________________________________

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:19 PM
1 women, with potentially little to no brain functions, starving in the US takes precidence over dozens or hundreds of children, all of whom are absolutely feeling the starvation pains, around the world? Yeah, that is weak.
The problem is that docs are in disagreement with how much brain function she truly has. What a pity that we are too stupid to err on the side of caution.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 05:19 PM
Does that have to be notarized?

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:20 PM
Does that have to be notarized?
Not legally, but it can be fought more diligently without.

Better to go ahead and spend the two bucks to have it done.

Donger
03-18-2005, 05:20 PM
Thanks KCWolfman.

DenverChief
03-18-2005, 05:22 PM
Yep. Them heretics are a self nourishing lot.
ROFL

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:25 PM
On a related note. I read a blurb in the Wednesday KC Star about a woman in Houston whose newborn child was being taking off life support against her will as the docs had determined the baby probably won't live. If anyone can find a link, I would appreciate it.

Thanks alot, Mr. Big Government for deciding for us who is supposed to live and die.

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 05:26 PM
I'll have to fill that out sometime. Preferably before the accident.

Thanks, Russ. :)

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 05:27 PM
Not legally, but it can be fought more diligently without.

Better to go ahead and spend the two bucks to have it done.

Forget the two bucks...

take it to your bank. They should have a Notary on site and provide the service for free. Or check with your life insurance agent as they should have one as well. You might even check with your company's human resource department to see if they have a Notary on staff then ask them if they might be able to witness the signatures...off company time.

MMI
Notary

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 05:28 PM
On a related note. I read a blurb in the Wednesday KC Star about a woman in Houston whose newborn child was being taking off life support against her will as the docs had determined the baby probably won't live. If anyone can find a link, I would appreciate it.

Thanks alot, Mr. Big Government for deciding for us who is supposed to live and die.

The baby died, with little fanfare, the same evening...

black infant, single Mother, less hoopla. :hmmm:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/15/lifesupport.baby.ap/

Saulbadguy
03-18-2005, 05:28 PM
I'll get it done at my girlfriends place of work, the UPS store. Her boss is a notary. It better be free.

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:29 PM
The baby died, with little fanfare, the same evening...

black infant, single Mother, less hoopla. :hmmm:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/15/lifesupport.baby.ap/
Sons of bitches.

I truly hope they have to suffer the same decision for their own families one day.

memyselfI
03-18-2005, 05:32 PM
Sons of bitches.

I truly hope they have to suffer the same decision for their own families one day.

Yep.

Regarding the other 'RTL' case...

I find myself wanting to disinfect after being on the same side of an issue as Tom Delay and sometimes wonder if I'm wrong because I am. But my gut tells me that Michael Schiavo is FOS and so I'm holding my nose and trying to ignore the crowd I'm standing amongst.

BIG_DADDY
03-18-2005, 05:38 PM
The baby died, with little fanfare, the same evening...

black infant, single Mother, less hoopla. :hmmm:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/15/lifesupport.baby.ap/

Can't go too long without posting the evil white male conspiracy theory can we?

Baby Lee
03-18-2005, 05:43 PM
The baby died, with little fanfare, the same evening...

black infant, single Mother, less hoopla. :hmmm:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/15/lifesupport.baby.ap/
The term 'hoopla' got me thinking. Maybe we need to return to the days where ol' Swearengin took care of these matters, and Wu's pigs chomped on the sequelae.

KCWolfman
03-18-2005, 05:49 PM
The term 'hoopla' got me thinking. Maybe we need to return to the days where ol' Swearengin took care of these matters, and Wu's pigs chomped on the sequelae.
Hey, I know what that means now.

I am in the pop-culture loop!!!!

|Zach|
03-18-2005, 06:22 PM
Me and my dad were talking about this kind of thing the other day. I cant remember what brought it up...but he told me if he was ever at a point where he wasn't even himself at all and couldn't experience life that he wouldn't want me to keep him going like that.

I am not sure if that is written out though...

That would be tough if I was in that situation and knew his wished yet there was no legal binding document.

craneref
03-18-2005, 08:19 PM
I can't believe that I am agreeing with the Taco here on anything, but he has hit the nail right on the head. If they are using the feeding tube as a reason to let her starve to death, then why why Christopher Reeves starved to death, he was on a feeding tube for a looooong time, and Terri has tons more physical mobility than Reeves did. I still think that the husband needs her to be dead for some reason, maybe to even hide a crime. I find it interesting how Terri's ESTRANGED husband (who is already tapping somebody else, waiting for the death like a vulture so he can remarry) won't let Terri outside, have photographs or video's taken or even have the window opened. If I had a dog that was run over and decided to starve it to death becasue it could never be the same, the SPCA would rightly string me up to the cheers of throngs of Americans, yet where is the outcry for the starving murder of Terri Shiaivo, because a judge says that a husband without any written proof has the right to do so. This is the danger of Judges who think they have the power over life and death and think that eh laws belong to them. This Judge should be ashamed, and we as Americans should be also if we let this happen.

stevieray
03-19-2005, 07:07 PM
I don't understand how this is even an issue... If she doesn't have a legally binding document that says to let her die if she is incapacitated, why aren't they giving her every opportunity to fight back?

Word of mouth from your spouse shouldn't be grounds enough to donate organs, let alone remove a feeding tube. Life should be given the benefit of a doubt, unless she has a legal document showing that her choice is otherwise.

And what a terrible death sentance... To pull a feeding tube.

abortion.

Simplex3
03-19-2005, 07:13 PM
abortion.
Come on now, I'm sure the fetus has already signed the legal documentation saying "if my mother decides she doesn't want to be inconvenienced by her irresponsibility then go ahead and kill me despite the fact that I would otherwise be out of this 'condition' in less than 9 months, not the 16 years they gave Terri S."

stevieray
03-19-2005, 07:18 PM
Come on now, I'm sure the fetus has already signed the legal documentation saying "if my mother decides she doesn't want to be inconvenienced by her irresponsibility then go ahead and kill me despite the fact that I would otherwise be out of this 'condition' in less than 9 months, not the 16 years they gave Terri S."

it's easy to be selective about giving certain "life" the benefit of the doubt, huh?

don't worry, by the time the baby boomers clog down the health system, the act of killing "unwantables" will have become even more socially acceptable.

Simplex3
03-19-2005, 07:23 PM
it's easy to be selective about giving certain "life" the benefit of the doubt, huh?

don't worry, by the time the baby boomers clog down the health system, the act of killing "unwantables" will have become even more socially acceptable.
As selfish and self-centered as the baby boomers are in general I'm afraid the majority of them won't be able to accept death and we'll be strapped to death with beddridden old codgers. Death may never come to some of them.