The Terri Schiavo Case

[dlndavid]

hey... could this be a.... TROLL???

Yah, I'm a troll, guilty, but please let me read on to this thread, it may make me a better troll. Can a troll become human, someday?

 

[H2Andy]

...and don't side with the kill the innocent and spare the guilty

well... you do know that if this was happening in Texas it wouldn't be an issue?

a certain ex-governor (who then went on to become US president) signed a law
there that would allow doctors and the legal guardian to end feeding at their
discretion. even worse, a hospital can decide to terminate life support WITHOUT
the legal guardian's consent. of course, they have to give the guardians
10 days to find another hospital.

you are aware of this, right?

some info: http://uspolitics.about.com/b/a/2005_03_21.htm

btw, the first "victim" was a baby, who died almost instantly upon disconnection,
in Houston. his mom DID NOT want his treatment to end. the hospital, with
the approval of the ethics board, took her to court, and discontinued treatment.

(note: i don't want to speculate as to intent here; i'm talking end results)

 

[dlndavid]

My wife, bless her heart, she isn't following this, but she just told me, please don't kill me, and I would not kill you. I'll have to think about that.

 

[flashover604]

It seems strange to me that only after Michael got the settlement, which he was going to use to go to school to learn how to care for Terri, did he remember that "she said she wouldn't want to live like this." I'm pretty sure I'd remember my wife saying that. It seems strange that he would demand no therapy at all. No movement of her limbs so the muscles wouldn't atrophy, nothing. It seems strange that she hasn't been allowed to have a "swallow test" done, for fear that she would CHOKE. We'll starve her to death, but we don't wan't her to choke, kinda like using the alcohol pad on the arm of the guy getting the lethal injection. There may be a lot I don't know about this case, but my gut tells me that there's something Michael isn't tellin'...I'm not real impressed.....

 

[dlndavid]

It seems strange to me that only after Michael got the settlement, which he was going to use to go to school to learn how to care for Terri, did he remember that "she said she wouldn't want to live like this." I'm pretty sure I'd remember my wife saying that. It seems strange that he would demand no therapy at all. No movement of her limbs so the muscles wouldn't atrophy, nothing. It seems strange that she hasn't been allowed to have a "swallow test" done, for fear that she would CHOKE. We'll starve her to death, but we don't wan't her to choke, kinda like using the alcohol pad on the arm of the guy getting the lethal injection. There may be a lot I don't know about this case, but my gut tells me that there's something Michael isn't tellin'...I'm not real impressed.....

Tell that to the " oh gee, you're not murdering this woman group"...
they must be proud.

 

[Foo]

Babies can't feed themselves either, should they be denied help to eat and drink, too? Or is their promise of a brighter future more important? What about a baby who's future doesn't have that same promise?

My daughter gave birth to a daughter who was certain to die, diagnosed 5 months prior to her full-term birth via sonogram. She was born with anencephaly, a very sad birth defect that allows the baby to live as long as he/she is in the mother's womb. Shortly after birth, they begin to die. For us it was a very emotional and difficult time, throughout the pregnancy especially. However, my son in law and daughter felt that they wanted to give their beautiful daughter the best life that they could, no matter how short, although for many of you that is very hard to understand. The baby (named Faith) lived a bittersweet 4 hours. She only knew peace and love in her short life, and touched more people than many of us will in a lifetime. Who are any of us to decide which life is worth living, and which is not?

When does life begin? Seems to me that this is the simplest question of all, very easy to understand. Is that first plant or animal cell living? If the cell is alive, then the organism that it helps comprise is alive. Duh. Kill the cells, kill the organism. Of course, for many of us, "alive" is a relative term- for those millions of people who believe in an afterlife.

Again, as long as the family is willing to take responsibility for her, I wish Michael would allow her to live. Only Terri knows what the right answer is. Conscious thought is not the only indicator of life, and none of us know exactly how the spirit/soul/body communicate. Simple brain waves, spiritual voyage, or communicating on an astral plane with spasms and blinking- who knows?

I do know that I wouldn't trade all the agony of the knowledge that my first grandchild would be born to die, for the sweet, short time that she was alive. After all, don't we all start dying as soon as we're born? Just some of us longer or shorter than others.

My heart and prayers go out to all involved.

Foo

 

[Maya]

It seems strange to me that only after Michael got the settlement, which he was going to use to go to school to learn how to care for Terri, did he remember that "she said she wouldn't want to live like this." I'm pretty sure I'd remember my wife saying that. It seems strange that he would demand no therapy at all. No movement of her limbs so the muscles wouldn't atrophy, nothing. It seems strange that she hasn't been allowed to have a "swallow test" done, for fear that she would CHOKE. We'll starve her to death, but we don't wan't her to choke, kinda like using the alcohol pad on the arm of the guy getting the lethal injection. There may be a lot I don't know about this case, but my gut tells me that there's something Michael isn't tellin'...I'm not real impressed.....

You don't have the facts. Terri went through years of intensive therapy - in California and in Florida. She's had numerous swallow tests. Therapy and further tests were stopped only after all doctors treating her said that there was no hope of recovery and that further therapy was pointless. This is all public record! Why do people insist only upon believing what's in the media or on the internet?? If you're going to judge at least have the facts straight.

 

[Maya]

Babies can't feed themselves either, should they be denied help to eat and drink, too? Or is their promise of a brighter future more important? What about a baby who's future doesn't have that same promise?

When does life begin? Seems to me that this is the simplest question of all, very easy to understand. Is that first plant or animal cell living? If the cell is alive, then the organism that it helps comprise is alive. Duh. Kill the cells, kill the organism. Of course, for many of us, "alive" is a relative term- for those millions of people who believe in an afterlife.

Again, as long as the family is willing to take responsibility for her, I wish Michael would allow her to live. Only Terri knows what the right answer is. Conscious thought is not the only indicator of life, and none of us know exactly how the spirit/soul/body communicate. Simple brain waves, spiritual voyage, or communicating on an astral plane with spasms and blinking- who knows?

I do know that I wouldn't trade all the agony of the knowledge that my first grandchild would be born to die, for the sweet, short time that she was alive. After all, don't we all start dying as soon as we're born? Just some of us longer or shorter than others.

My heart and prayers go out to all involved.

Foo

Blessings to you and your family and my deepest sympathy on the loss of your precious grandchild.

But...babies have the capacity to swallow their food. Terri doesn't even have the mental capacity to do that. It's not as if she is just paralyzed and cannot put the food to her mouth.

And once again...it is NOT Michael Schiavo who is making this decision. He wanted to make this decision, 7 years ago. Her parents did not agree. EVEN THOUGH her parents had no legal right to make this decision, Michael petitioned the court to decide, because of the strong feelings of the parents. Legally, Michael did not have to consider her parents wishes, as he is her next of kin and legal guardian.

The courts (after countless hours of testimony, video, etc.) have made this decision. It has been upheld by every single judge who has heard the case (over 15 different ones). Even if Michael Schiavo resigned as her guardian today and said he didn't want anything more to do with the case, the successor guardian would be required by law to carry out the court's order.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Let's see, is that the Dr who got a congressman to nominate him for a Nobel prize?
BTW Members of congress are not able to officially nominate people for a Nobel prize.
So the Dr is lying about his qualifications, what else is he lying about?

I have seen a Dr that was retained by the parents who said he wanted to see signs that she was responsive but didn't.
Besides, this have been tested, reviewed and litigated.
what did the people who ACTUALLY SAW THE EVIDENCE decide?

I don't know anything about who nominated him and it wasn't him who brought up the nomination. I would assume though that he is licensed to practice medicine and works in that field. I hear this morning that she was examined by a neurologist from the mayo clinic who also does not agree with the PVS diagnosis. He said she is minimaly conciouse, responsive and feels pain. And...she will feel a lot of pain while dying from dehydration and starvation.

It does come down to the rule of law. Rule of law means that you follow the law and don't just jump to change the rules when you don't like what the proper court decided.

We can't have anarchy but our system does allow for changes to the law when the current law isn't achieving the desired results. Also these days we see a lot of the judicial system tampering in legislative duties where they don't belong.

Didn't the Bush gang keep saying to not change the rules in the middle during an election a few years ago? Why are they trying to change the rules in the middle of this?

What I don't get is how anyone can claim to be so in favor of life that we should ALWAYS error on the side of life but then turn around and sign death warrants?
They seem to think the courts have failed completely in this case but those same courts are incapable of error in a death penalty criminal case.

We could probably have a great discussion on the consistancy of politicians, the merit of capitol punishment or war but I don't see how any of that relates to this.

Poly = many
tic = blood sucking creature
politicians = many blood sucking creatures

A judge is a politician that sits on a bench and doesn't need a vote to get his way

On top of that we now have a state agency threatening to kidnap Terri in direct opposition to the courts order.
We have gone back completely to might makes right and the rule is out the window.

The states often take custody of abused or neglected people. Children and elderly are taken everyday and sometimes the former responsible parties are charged with crimes. To me personally this looks like a case of severe neglect and abuse. Maybe it's an issue for the welfare folks?

Once again, can anyone tell me why THIS woman is so important? Feeding tubes are removed every day in this country. People are denied needed medical treatment every day in this country. People die, who shouldn't, every day in this country. None of that is important but this one woman gets legislators in session in the middle of the night to try and subvert the law for what? An issue that is not their business in the first place.

I don't think she's any more important than any one else. I can tell you that if she was my daughter I would do whatever I had to do to prevent her x-husband from killing her off and if I could make legeslators jump in the middle of the night they would be jumping all the way to the moon.

I'd also guess that there are hundreds or thousands of similar cases around the country so maybe this is the one that will get people to take another look at how they are handled.

Besides it's nice to see a few legeslators who show up for work. LOL

 

[Kennedydive]

How many of you would want to be kept "alive" after spending 15 years in a hospital bed? 15 years people. Even if I weren't brain dead, Brain Damaged I would not want to remain in this position. It's not like it's only been days or months. You can't compare something like babies or a similar situation that lasted weeks to something that has lasted this long.
For all of those who have been through any tough situations like this weather it was pro death or pro life, just think what your feelings would be if a family member was bringing in politics and courts to try to over rule your decision and digging up dirt on you that may question your integrity.
There is much more here than meets the eye and you can't rely on the media to give you the correct story.
JK