Terri Schiavo

[Arm]

Sorry kid, the brain stem does not control recognition and emotions.

Correct. I should menction that now was a typo for not.

[3RA1N1AC]

guess your not following the story, he is already screwing someone else, which is why I believe he is wanting so badly to have this over

it's easy to throw stones at the man from afar, but how many of the people saying how bad he is would be willing to prove their own goodness by marrying and remaining faithful to a drooling turnip for 15 years? we're having quite enough trouble remaining faithful to spouses who CAN feed themselves and hold a semblance of a conversation.


more to the general topic:
it seems to me that the "save terri schiavo's life" argument depends very much on framing this as an act of killing, or an act of deprivation, when the action is really in creating this food-tube, sticking it in her, filling and refilling it. neglecting to feed her is inaction, as ugly as the results may be since euthanasia is such a taboo in the u.s.

it's sad and grotesque, the extent we'll go to nowadays to keep a person barely hanging onto a minimal quantity of life (a pulse, the ability to digest food that's pumped in through a tube) without any of the real qualities that distinguish human life from the plant kingdom. at any other point in human history people would have said "terri is severely and irrepairably brain-damaged, immobile, oblivious, unable to eat... she's dying and she'll soon be dead." but in the modern period we say "let's stick a tube in her and keep her in a perpetually catatonic condition," and we have this new appendix to "life" (as commonly understood).

perhaps if we as a whole society were to take up the practice of writing living wills, make sure that everyone knows that they can write them and knows how to write them clearly & unambiguously, and treat living wills with all seriousness and respect in the legal & medical fields (perhaps keep them filed confidentially in people's medical records?)... then there'd be much less controversy, and much less reason to make it the government's business. "if this should happen to me, then yes i'd like to be tube-fed, plugged into a machine, whatever's necessary, and kept that way for as long as possible" or "no, i don't consider that 'life' and i want to be unplugged or euthanized if i show no potential for recovery after x amount of time"... something along those lines.

edit: most u.s. states do have laws regarding living wills, but it seems there's still a lot of openness-to-interpretation and hemming & hawing when it comes to actually using these wills.

[Busyman]

I wonder how many people there are that say, "If I'm a vegetable, keep me that way."

I know none.

[RPerry]

it's easy to throw stones at the man from afar, but how many of the people saying how bad he is would be willing to prove their own goodness by marrying and remaining faithful to a drooling turnip for 15 years? we're having quite enough trouble remaining faithful to spouses who CAN feed themselves and hold a semblance of a conversation.

You have to ask yourself why after 15 yrs is he all of a sudden saying his wife didn't want to live this way. thats a hell of a long time to wait I know this is a hot topic on several forums, its also hot at work, and even amongst family members too. there all all kinds of idea's going around about what happens with insurance money, etc. All I'm sayingis that there is probably more to this that it appears

[3RA1N1AC]

All I'm sayingis that there is probably more to this that it appears

i can't disagree with that. surely there must be a lot that we don't know about these people.

[vidcc]

You have to ask yourself why after 15 yrs is he all of a sudden saying his wife didn't want to live this way. thats a hell of a long time to wait I know this is a hot topic on several forums, its also hot at work, and even amongst family members too. there all all kinds of idea's going around about what happens with insurance money, etc. All I'm sayingis that there is probably more to this that it appears

It didn't take 15 years, it has been in the courts over 7 years. that leaves the time it takes to accept reality in that she isn't going to get better and the the medical and family discussions that led to the courts needing to be involved.

The husband stands to gain absolutely nothing from this. He has turned down an offer of millions of dollars to stop his pursuit and any money that was received in damages (I'm not sure why) has gone long ago. He doesn't have to worry about the cost of keeping her alive either. All of this does make me think he "probably" is telling the truth when he said she told him she wouldn't like to be kept like this.

All that said I think he should have lost his rights as husband when he took up with the other woman. This is not a moral judgement suggesting he should have been loyal (despite my views on loyalty) I just think that you are either a spouse for better or worse or you are not a spouse.
@ all
I understand fully how her parents feel. Your children will always be just that and a parent should never have to bury their child.
I don't believe Terri knows she is breathing, by all accounts the only part of her brain that is working is the bit that tells the body to breathe etc. and harsh as it may sound the feeding tube is no different in reality to a life support machine.
But as a parent that sees their child visually appear alive rationality and reality of a situation like this mean nothing.
A while ago we had a thread asking if we would give our lives to save a loved one and while I was reading the thread I was looking at my youngest daughter. I couldn't imagine not giving up my life for her. If anyone has seen John Q you will know what I am talking about.
I don't know if this is instinct protecting my children or just selfishness on my part because of the fact that my heart would stop beating if I ever lost them (figuratively speaking).

I don't believe Terri would have asked to be kept this way however as I believe that "she died" when the brain was damaged I don't see that she would suffer if the organs are fed. If her parents can pay to sustain the body they should be allowed to.

This body stopped being Terri 15 years ago.

[UKResident]

A point not mentioned here is the way Terri is now being 'put to death'. She is not being given an injection to end her life, she is being starved to death. If this were to happen to a murderer on death row there would be outrage.

This is an excerpt from an article in today's Guardian, the full story is here.

It happens to be a good day for contemplating how we die and watch others die as the US courts finally let Terri Schiavo go. She has been 15 years a-dying in a persistent vegetative state, probably beyond pain, though not beyond reflex responses. But if there is still suffering to be had, now in her seventh slow day without water or food, the law inflicts death by slow dehydration in the name of "ethics". It's a shocking spectacle that could be stopped with one merciful injection.....

... What kills you in the end if you have cancer or other terminal diseases? Not often the cancer itself. Nor the morphine that people innocently imagine will one day waft them away on a cloudy pillow of dreams to some opium-fuelled nirvana. What people actually die of, like Terri Schiavo, is dehydration when they can no longer swallow enough water to live - and it takes time. Enough morphine to die quickly is very rarely administered these days.

[RPerry]

A point not mentioned here is the way Terri is now being 'put to death'. She is not being given an injection to end her life, she is being starved to death. If this were to happen to a murderer on death row there would be outrage.

This is an excerpt from an article in today's Guardian, the full story is here.

Don't get used to it, but you have finally said something I totally agree with

[Busyman]

Well then...

I hope whoever feels this unjust that they don't bullshit around and agrees that EVERYONE should be kept alive that is brain damaged.

Furthermore, even a person that wishes to go has to be labeled part of euthanasia if death is carried out.

Have it one way or the other. No bullshitting. No outrage because this is "popular" in the media.

[RPerry]

Well then...

I hope whoever feels this unjust that they don't bullshit around and agrees that EVERYONE should be kept alive that is brain damaged.

Furthermore, even a person that wishes to go has to be labeled part of euthanasia if death is carried out.

Have it one way or the other. No bullshitting. No outrage because this is "popular" in the media.

And why should I agree with anything you just ranted ? I take all issues I look at on a one by one basis. If I saw any kind of proof, and I mean proof, not hear-say, that Terri wanted this, I might feel a bit differently. I might even feel differently if Terri was hooked up to life support, but I feel totally different when a person is starved to death.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7287950/


This might make you think a little, even if you don't believe it with 100% accuracy