Breaking: Vincent Lambert Frances' Terri Schiavo dies after 9 days without food and water

[emilynghiem]

WHICH next of kin Penelope
what about the OTHER next of kin who believed otherwise?

Imagine a "democratic vote" where the court sides
with one vote and throws out all the rest.

This is a matter of SPIRITUAL BELIEFS,
as there was no written directive specifying what
the man wanted. Any decision would be based on faith.

If you don't believe in imposing religious beliefs
through govt, how can you justify taking one person's
belief and forcing the rest of the family to compromise theirs!

As long as the rest of the family is willing to get financial support to
pay for the care, why not let them exercise their religious beliefs?

If the one family member and the state don't want to pay the costs,
LET OTHER PEOPLE PAY WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE THAT ON.

Very strange Penelope.

We wouldn't tolerate Jihadists killing off people they don't believe in letting live
under their regime.
Go let them live someplace else that AGREES to let them live!

His next of kin wanted it:

The 42-year-old had sustained severe brain damage following a car accident in 2008 and had been living in a vegetative state.
Medical experts had determined that his situation was irreversible.
For more than five years, legal battles have raged between his family members over whether he should be kept alive, igniting a watershed debate in the country and drawing in international bodies, the French President and even Pope Francis.
In May, that fight appeared to have finally reached its end, with a judicial ruling that allowed doctors to take Lambert off life support.

That decision, in line with the wishes of his wife and siblings, followed a similar conclusion from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It prompted doctors to begin the process of "passive" euthanasia, which is legal in France.
Vincent Lambert : France right-to-die patient dies after years-long life support battle - CNN

 

[Godboy]

Saw a video of Vincent crying when he found out food and water would be withheld.

Let that sink in

Post that video?

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Starving is bad but people in this situation do not die of starvation. They die of dehydration which is much quicker. Dehydration is an agonizing death. It isn't laying down and peacefully closing your eyes. As the mucus membranes dry they crack and bleed. The victim bleeds from the genitals, anus, nose, ears and eyes. They eyeballs themselves shrink. Gums dry and draw back from the teeth exposing roots and nerves. Muscles cramps are so severe they can break bones. Teri Schiavo and this poor man were murdered in one of the slowest and most torturous deaths known.

So you would of been ok with it if they gave him morphine to stop his breathing so he wouldn't have to die of dehydration?

Beheading is more merciful than death by dehydration. We would not execute prisoners by dehydration. It is slow it is unutterably painful. It is death by torture. If the state has made a determination that an innocent person, guilty only of the crime of being sick, is to be put to death that death should be painless. We do it for animals. Once we give the state the power of life and death over all of us do we have to let the state choose the most painful death possible?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I remember Terri Schiavo...the woman that the STATE tried to take the husband's right to make life/death decisions from.

Yeah..

Why shouldn't a husband have the right to kill his wife?

The state had no interest in this case. It was her parents that took this to court.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Vincent Lambert was inhumanely murdered. He was far better off than Terri Schiavo. He didn't need a feeding tube. He could eat, drink, swallow and breathe on his own. He was not on any kind of life support.

He was killed like this woman was killed

Doctor in Netherlands 'asked family to hold down euthanasia patient'

She was held down kicking and screaming.

 

[emilynghiem]

Saw a video of Vincent crying when he found out food and water would be withheld.

Let that sink in

Post that video?

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

Dear Godboy
regardless of his conscious ability, where are you even getting
that the STATE has any authority to make a SPIRITUAL life/death decision
instead of his family?

As stated before, if the STATE and the people paying or providing services
don't want to take that responsibility, why not pass it to others who want to take over responsibility?

How should the STATE have authority to decide for a family in dispute?
Shouldn't the family be ORDERED to resolve their dispute:
either agree who should pay for or provide the services needed,
or agree to TRANSFER the patient to those who agree to take this on.

Why is it necessary to KILL SOMEONE to relinquish responsibility?

Do you kill elderly people or children if the parents don't want or can't handle responsibility for care?

NO -- common sense and civilized society would transfer people requiring greater care
to OTHER people or programs that can provide those services.

Why not in this case?

If the one family member doesn't want to take care or responsibility,
what is wrong with letting the OTHER family members take over care?

Why is killing the patient the only solution?

???? Godboy

 

[buttercup]

I remember Terri Schiavo...the woman that the STATE tried to take the husband's right to make life/death decisions from.

Not all "decisions" are equal or humane, you piece of shit! Her family was at odds with an abusive husband who wanted her dead despite the family pleading for Terri to be released to them.
Try telling the whole story sometime.

^^^ THIS.

 

[emilynghiem]

BREAKING: Vincent Lambert, France’s Terri Schiavo, dies after 9 days without food and water
July 11, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Vincent Lambert, the disabled man a court ordered to be starved to death in a French hospital, died this morning. After nine days without food and fluids, showing a remarkable will to live despite the cruel death of thirst that doctors had prepared for him, France’s Terri Schiavo departed from this earthly life at 8:24 a.m. on Thursday, July 11. He died of heart failure induced by the malfunction of his kidneys in Reims University Hospital in the room where he had been kept under lock and key for the last six years. Talk about totally in humane bs,, But you better not crack that eagles egg you better not be white... Oh that's why they let it happen the guy was white.
But you UK a holes will pay for a few jihadist take your jobs rape your women your sick

Just so long as this person wasn't starved to death behind an anchor fence caged off area. Then liberals might really get mad.

View attachment 268913 View attachment 268914

What does she have to do with this case, nothing that is what.

Dear Penelope
It has to do with YOUR perception of this case with a LIBERAL BIAS.

 

[Penelope]

Vincent Lambert was inhumanely murdered. He was far better off than Terri Schiavo. He didn't need a feeding tube. He could eat, drink, swallow and breathe on his own. He was not on any kind of life support.

He was killed like this woman was killed

Doctor in Netherlands 'asked family to hold down euthanasia patient'

She was held down kicking and screaming.

So why didn't the parents feed him?

On Monday, his parents, Pierre and Viviane Lambert, said they are “resigned” to his death after they exhausted all options to save his life. Reports indicate the aging couple stayed beside their son’s hospital bed Sunday as doctors removed his food and water tubes.

“We have nowhere else to turn and now it’s too late. Vincent is dying,” his parents Pierre and Viviane Lambert said in a statement. They said his condition now is “medically irreversible.”

Pierre, who is 90, criticized the courts and doctors for killing his son, saying it is “madness” to starve a disabled man to death.

“It’s murder in disguise, it’s euthanasia,” he told reporters Sunday outside Sebastopol Hospital in Reims, France.
Vincent Lambert's Father Slams Hospital Starving His Son to Death: “It’s Murder in Disguise” | LifeNews.com

 

[Penelope]

WHICH next of kin Penelope
what about the OTHER next of kin who believed otherwise?

Imagine a "democratic vote" where the court sides
with one vote and throws out all the rest.

This is a matter of SPIRITUAL BELIEFS,
as there was no written directive specifying what
the man wanted. Any decision would be based on faith.

If you don't believe in imposing religious beliefs
through govt, how can you justify taking one person's
belief and forcing the rest of the family to compromise theirs!

As long as the rest of the family is willing to get financial support to
pay for the care, why not let them exercise their religious beliefs?

If the one family member and the state don't want to pay the costs,
LET OTHER PEOPLE PAY WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE THAT ON.

Very strange Penelope.

We wouldn't tolerate Jihadists killing off people they don't believe in letting live
under their regime.
Go let them live someplace else that AGREES to let them live!

His next of kin wanted it:

The 42-year-old had sustained severe brain damage following a car accident in 2008 and had been living in a vegetative state.
Medical experts had determined that his situation was irreversible.
For more than five years, legal battles have raged between his family members over whether he should be kept alive, igniting a watershed debate in the country and drawing in international bodies, the French President and even Pope Francis.
In May, that fight appeared to have finally reached its end, with a judicial ruling that allowed doctors to take Lambert off life support.

That decision, in line with the wishes of his wife and siblings, followed a similar conclusion from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It prompted doctors to begin the process of "passive" euthanasia, which is legal in France.
Vincent Lambert : France right-to-die patient dies after years-long life support battle - CNN

Well since they are such believers and believe in heaven, why not let him go to the Lord. Why are they so forlorned after he, 11 years of a being a quad and depending on a feeding tube. His Dad is 90, and his mother it didn't say, so when they pass who is to care for him? He needs round the clock assistance for bathing, incontinence, ROM (one can see he is had contractures of his hands, and most likely all his joints. Along with that his muscles are atrophied, and he has osteoporosis, after years of being bedridden.

Are they suppose to let him live so his parents can die before him, and what about his wife, she did not cause the accident ??

He has brain damage as well. If his brain was ok, he'd be like Hawking, able to communicate. But no, he has irreversible brain damage and is a quad.

Before the 1800's people died from not be able to feed oneself.

 

[theHawk]

Saw a video of Vincent crying when he found out food and water would be withheld.

Let that sink in

Post that video?

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

They killed a man who was conscious, whether or not he cried is irrelevant. That was inhumane.

 

[Penelope]

Saw a video of Vincent crying when he found out food and water would be withheld.

Let that sink in

Post that video?

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

They killed a man who was conscious, whether or not he cried is irrelevant. That was inhumane.

So would you be willing to pay for his care , out of your taxes??

Even the state of Texas has a (and one can't get more red than this state)

Texas Advance Directives Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Advance Directives Act)

Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care by the treating medical team.

Although it is often stated that the act is officially named as the 'Futile Care Law' or the 'Futile Care Act', that is in fact incorrect and the statute has never legally had that title.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

I remember Terri Schiavo...the woman that the STATE tried to take the husband's right to make life/death decisions from.

oh man. THIS JUST IN:
"TRUMP REINSTATES ALL HUSBANDS RIGHT TO MAKE LIFE AND DEATH DECISIONS"

 

[theHawk]

Post that video?

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

They killed a man who was conscious, whether or not he cried is irrelevant. That was inhumane.

So would you be willing to pay for his care , out of your taxes??

Even the state of Texas has a (and one can't get more red than this state)

Texas Advance Directives Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Advance Directives Act)

Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care by the treating medical team.

Although it is often stated that the act is officially named as the 'Futile Care Law' or the 'Futile Care Act', that is in fact incorrect and the statute has never legally had that title.

Of course I would support tax dollars to support someone in his condition to live. Nothing wrong with supporting people that are unable to support themselves physically. However medical insurance should cover it as well.

If we pay taxes to keep murderers in jail, I think we can pay for food and water for people like this.

 

[theHawk]

What is the next argument from liberals?

Let orphan babies die because they can’t feed themselves?

 

[emilynghiem]

WHICH next of kin Penelope
what about the OTHER next of kin who believed otherwise?

Imagine a "democratic vote" where the court sides
with one vote and throws out all the rest.

This is a matter of SPIRITUAL BELIEFS,
as there was no written directive specifying what
the man wanted. Any decision would be based on faith.

If you don't believe in imposing religious beliefs
through govt, how can you justify taking one person's
belief and forcing the rest of the family to compromise theirs!

As long as the rest of the family is willing to get financial support to
pay for the care, why not let them exercise their religious beliefs?

If the one family member and the state don't want to pay the costs,
LET OTHER PEOPLE PAY WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE THAT ON.

Very strange Penelope.

We wouldn't tolerate Jihadists killing off people they don't believe in letting live
under their regime.
Go let them live someplace else that AGREES to let them live!

His next of kin wanted it:

The 42-year-old had sustained severe brain damage following a car accident in 2008 and had been living in a vegetative state.
Medical experts had determined that his situation was irreversible.
For more than five years, legal battles have raged between his family members over whether he should be kept alive, igniting a watershed debate in the country and drawing in international bodies, the French President and even Pope Francis.
In May, that fight appeared to have finally reached its end, with a judicial ruling that allowed doctors to take Lambert off life support.

That decision, in line with the wishes of his wife and siblings, followed a similar conclusion from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It prompted doctors to begin the process of "passive" euthanasia, which is legal in France.
Vincent Lambert : France right-to-die patient dies after years-long life support battle - CNN

Well since they are such believers and believe in heaven, why not let him go to the Lord. Why are they so forlorned after he, 11 years of a being a quad and depending on a feeding tube. His Dad is 90, and his mother it didn't say, so when they pass who is to care for him? He needs round the clock assistance for bathing, incontinence, ROM (one can see he is had contractures of his hands, and most likely all his joints. Along with that his muscles are atrophied, and he has osteoporosis, after years of being bedridden.

Are they suppose to let him live so his parents can die before him, and what about his wife, she did not cause the accident ??

He has brain damage as well. If his brain was ok, he'd be like Hawking, able to communicate. But no, he has irreversible brain damage and is a quad.

Before the 1800's people died from not be able to feed oneself.

Dear Penelope
That's fine but that's not your business or the govt to decide
FOR other families.

That's great if you want to counsel families to make such decisions
based on your suggestions or beliefs.

Do you agree that's not the GOVT or COURT'S place
to FORCE THOSE BELIEFS ON OTHERS WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.

You can urge and convince them, but it's still their choice.

BTW with the people I've discussed this with over the years
and shared personal experiences, people HAVE HAD LOVED ONES
LET GO ON THEIR OWN by making spiritual peace and closure
among the other family members. After they reach agreement,
it's happened where the person lets go on their own. Naturally.

Isn't it even BETTER to have natural death rather than forcing
it on someone?
And isn't it better if the FAMILY decides on their own
and not have the GOVT make and FORCE that decision on them?

 

[Penelope]

WHICH next of kin Penelope
what about the OTHER next of kin who believed otherwise?

Imagine a "democratic vote" where the court sides
with one vote and throws out all the rest.

This is a matter of SPIRITUAL BELIEFS,
as there was no written directive specifying what
the man wanted. Any decision would be based on faith.

If you don't believe in imposing religious beliefs
through govt, how can you justify taking one person's
belief and forcing the rest of the family to compromise theirs!

As long as the rest of the family is willing to get financial support to
pay for the care, why not let them exercise their religious beliefs?

If the one family member and the state don't want to pay the costs,
LET OTHER PEOPLE PAY WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE THAT ON.

Very strange Penelope.

We wouldn't tolerate Jihadists killing off people they don't believe in letting live
under their regime.
Go let them live someplace else that AGREES to let them live!

His next of kin wanted it:

The 42-year-old had sustained severe brain damage following a car accident in 2008 and had been living in a vegetative state.
Medical experts had determined that his situation was irreversible.
For more than five years, legal battles have raged between his family members over whether he should be kept alive, igniting a watershed debate in the country and drawing in international bodies, the French President and even Pope Francis.
In May, that fight appeared to have finally reached its end, with a judicial ruling that allowed doctors to take Lambert off life support.

That decision, in line with the wishes of his wife and siblings, followed a similar conclusion from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It prompted doctors to begin the process of "passive" euthanasia, which is legal in France.
Vincent Lambert : France right-to-die patient dies after years-long life support battle - CNN

Well since they are such believers and believe in heaven, why not let him go to the Lord. Why are they so forlorned after he, 11 years of a being a quad and depending on a feeding tube. His Dad is 90, and his mother it didn't say, so when they pass who is to care for him? He needs round the clock assistance for bathing, incontinence, ROM (one can see he is had contractures of his hands, and most likely all his joints. Along with that his muscles are atrophied, and he has osteoporosis, after years of being bedridden.

Are they suppose to let him live so his parents can die before him, and what about his wife, she did not cause the accident ??

He has brain damage as well. If his brain was ok, he'd be like Hawking, able to communicate. But no, he has irreversible brain damage and is a quad.

Before the 1800's people died from not be able to feed oneself.

Dear Penelope
That's fine but that's not your business or the govt to decide
FOR other families.

That's great if you want to counsel families to make such decisions
based on your suggestions or beliefs.

Do you agree that's not the GOVT or COURT'S place
to FORCE THOSE BELIEFS ON OTHERS WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.

You can urge and convince them, but it's still their choice.

BTW with the people I've discussed this with over the years
and shared personal experiences, people HAVE HAD LOVED ONES
LET GO ON THEIR OWN by making spiritual peace and closure
among the other family members. After they reach agreement,
it's happened where the person lets go on their own. Naturally.

Isn't it even BETTER to have natural death rather than forcing
it on someone?
And isn't it better if the FAMILY decides on their own
and not have the GOVT make and FORCE that decision on them?

Well the legal guardian made the choice for the husband. Sometimes the medical ethics committee does as evidenced by the
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999)

And by the way , he did die a natural death.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Look how well the women work stuff out

 

[Penelope]

Yeah, i want to see this video. I suspect that is a complete lie.

I don't give two shits what you suspect. I said I saw it days ago and don't remember what site.

Call me a liar again we'll have problems Goofboy

I dont believe they killed a man who was conscious enough to cry when he was told he would be starved to death. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Where is your proof?

They killed a man who was conscious, whether or not he cried is irrelevant. That was inhumane.

So would you be willing to pay for his care , out of your taxes??

Even the state of Texas has a (and one can't get more red than this state)

Texas Advance Directives Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Advance Directives Act)

Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999), also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, describes certain provisions that are now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. Controversy over these provisions mainly centers on Section 166.046, Subsection (e),1 which allows a health care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment ten days after giving written notice if the continuation of life-sustaining treatment is considered futile care by the treating medical team.

Although it is often stated that the act is officially named as the 'Futile Care Law' or the 'Futile Care Act', that is in fact incorrect and the statute has never legally had that title.

Of course I would support tax dollars to support someone in his condition to live. Nothing wrong with supporting people that are unable to support themselves physically. However medical insurance should cover it as well.

If we pay taxes to keep murderers in jail, I think we can pay for food and water for people like this.

House and around the clock care for him? He could not drink food and water to sustain him.

 

[emilynghiem]

Well the legal guardian made the choice for the husband. Sometimes the medical ethics committee does as evidenced by the
The Texas Advance Directives Act (1999)

Penelope
1. Which case are you talking about? In Texas?
2. It depends if the legal guardian has a conflict of interest
or history of abuse. If parents abuse a child should they be
given unquestioned authority to make decisions for their children?
3. It also makes a difference if there is a written directive,
or if the beliefs of the guardian are being contested
as inconsistent with the beliefs of the person.
If these beliefs do not match, and there is nothing
in writing to prove what the person believes,
then it becomes a battle of SPIRITUAL beliefs, which the
courts/govt should not have any business deciding.

So legal guardianship is fine if everyone whose relations are affected agrees
to the decisions regarding spiritual matters. But if this is contested due to conflicts of interest or beliefs,
people have a right to defend themselves from violation of their own beliefs.

Ironic Penelope that so many women I've heard from on the
case of Terri Schiavo didn't question the idea of the husband or EX husband
"making decisions for his wife or EX wife" that he wanted dead so he
could marry and start a family with a woman he was already living with.

One woman called into my bf radio show and asked
Where are all the FEMINISTS that don't want men
imposing their will on women and abusing their wives?

If men abuse or neglect their wives, they should have
the right to do so because they are the husbands?
And the women are like their property?

If parents abuse their children and people contest it,
usually people understand to end custody and
grant protection to the children under different guardians
who offer to take care of the child.

(Another thing Penelope, your perception and mine
are going to differ here, because I have done research
and have friends who have used spiritual healing to
cure people and return them back to normal health
after doctors thought it was impossible. So I would
still recommend that patients AND THEIR FAMILIES
go through spiritual healing to eliminate all preventable
causes of these kinds of disorders and unhealthy conditions.
Until you do the same research and see the same results
that others have, maybe you wouldn't understand there
is a better way to resolve such conflicts to free people
from those situations instead of killing them unnaturally.
They can either be cured, or they will die on their own,
but death does not have to be forced against anyone's will
or it isn't natural.)