Micheal Schaivo Cleared To Remove Feeding Tube

[SmarterThanYou]

First off,we don't know that there was a promise-which is the problem.

at least two other people have confirmed that this is indeed the wish of terri. Michaels brother and his sister in law.

I don't know first hand of course,what their relationship was,but I do know that it isn't normal for a man that loves a woman,or child whatever the case,to not even TRY rehabilitation.

placing labels on normality again? If I, or my wife, were in a similar situation and doctors said that theres no hope, I would abide by her wishes not to let her live like that(if that was her wish) just as I hope she would do the same for me.

You're assuming ethical, honest and moral people are involved. That's an unwarranted leap. Where a human life hangs in the balance, we need more than the word of an individual who, in this case, has a great deal to gain from his wife's death.

So lets do away with centuries of precedent where the spouse has rights and obligations because some people are suspicious of this particular individuals motives.

What I think is a bunch of crap is that this has been going on for over 10 years and you would think that if there was ANYTHING remotely close to being evidentiary against him he would have been investigated by the authorities already.

 

[theim]

Just put yourself in this position:

Your daughter has had an accident. She is in a coma. She never wrote down what her wishes were if this situation should come to pass. The doctors do not know when, or if, she will recover. But your daughter is alive.

Your daughter's husband leaves her. He gets another girlfriend. He is told he stands to gain about $1 million in insurance if your daughter dies. So he wants to pull the plug.

Got that? Her husband has another lover and wants to off your daughter. Now the courts are just going to let him. How could you handle that?

 

[Avatar4321]

Let me get this straight, If I were in a similar situation(being kept alive by some means other than my own physical bodily functions) and my wife said my wishes were to not let me be kept alive by any artificial means, you think it would be A-OK for the government to step in and deny my wishes to my wife because I didn't pay a lawyer to write up and have notarized a document stating such?

Pardon me, but thats just wrong.

The government has every right to step in and stop murder. its a crime. Should the government not stop drug dealers simply because they want to sell drugs? the whole idea is rather assinine.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

The government has every right to step in and stop murder. its a crime. Should the government not stop drug dealers simply because they want to sell drugs? the whole idea is rather assinine.

Thats an absolutely ridiculous comparison. worse than apples and oranges. It doesn't even apply and trying to compare it is intellectually dishonest.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Just put yourself in this position:

Your daughter has had an accident. She is in a coma. She never wrote down what her wishes were if this situation should come to pass. The doctors do not know when, or if, she will recover. But your daughter is alive.

Your daughter's husband leaves her. He gets another girlfriend. He is told he stands to gain about $1 million in insurance if your daughter dies. So he wants to pull the plug.

Got that? Her husband has another lover and wants to off your daughter. Now the courts are just going to let him. How could you handle that?

I never said it doesn't suck, did I? but then again, thats not the point.
we can do the 'wear the persons shoes' argument in every situation, but doing so like alot of the so-called conservatives on this board are doing is slowly implementing the big-brother government. You are effectively removing spousal responsibility.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I never said it doesn't suck, did I? but then again, thats not the point.
we can do the 'wear the persons shoes' argument in every situation, but doing so like alot of the so-called conservatives on this board are doing is slowly implementing the big-brother government. You are effectively removing spousal responsibility.

weak.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

that is a good point. was that before or after numerous doctors said that she would never recover?

After. But why did he argue that he needed money for a lifetime of a care and then remember "oh yeah, she didn't want to be kept alive"?

 

[Hobbit]

at least two other people have confirmed that this is indeed the wish of terri. Michaels brother and his sister in law.

Wrong. I just heard his sister in law on the radio the other day and she practically hates him for what he's doing.

placing labels on normality again? If I, or my wife, were in a similar situation and doctors said that theres no hope, I would abide by her wishes not to let her live like that(if that was her wish) just as I hope she would do the same for me.

You're assuming those are her wishes and that "doctors" say there's no hope. Only one doctor says that, and you don't rely on one doctor alone for stuff like that. You need a second opinion.

So lets do away with centuries of precedent where the spouse has rights and obligations because some people are suspicious of this particular individuals motives.

Why don't we go along with centuries of precedent that say it's wrong to murder someone.

What I think is a bunch of crap is that this has been going on for over 10 years and you would think that if there was ANYTHING remotely close to being evidentiary against him he would have been investigated by the authorities already.

Shiavo's under investigation for spousal abuse by the State of Florida. The judge ruled the investigation irrelivant to the case and went ahead with the order.

 

[theim]

I never said it doesn't suck, did I? but then again, thats not the point.
we can do the 'wear the persons shoes' argument in every situation, but doing so like alot of the so-called conservatives on this board are doing is slowly implementing the big-brother government. You are effectively removing spousal responsibility.

I'm for limited government, but not so limited that it lets people get away with killing someone for cash. Removing spousal responsibility? I fail to see how. The spouse has a responsibility to either keep her alive or just do the honorable thing and divorce her.

 

[krisy]

I never said it doesn't suck, did I? but then again, thats not the point.
we can do the 'wear the persons shoes' argument in every situation, but doing so like alot of the so-called conservatives on this board are doing is slowly implementing the big-brother government. You are effectively removing spousal responsibility.

I would rather "big brother" step in for something useful, like stopping a woman from being starved to death,than them taking half of my paycheck in taxes,or interfering with the way I live.

From another post you made about normality. My belief is normality is not wanting to see someone you supposedly loved at one time starved to death. Normality is wanting to see the poeple closest to you thrive in any way possible. Not only is that normality,it's called being kind to humanity!!!

 

[SmarterThanYou]

weak.

not.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Wrong. I just heard his sister in law on the radio the other day and she practically hates him for what he's doing.

Then I'd say that everyone needs to sit down and get their stories straight. I'm damn tired of hearing 15 differrent versions of this.

You're assuming those are her wishes and that "doctors" say there's no hope. Only one doctor says that, and you don't rely on one doctor alone for stuff like that. You need a second opinion.

Do you, or anyone else, have anything else to go on?

Why don't we go along with centuries of precedent that say it's wrong to murder someone.

You are either completely for life or not, but if you are then you should be out there protesting the death penalty as well. To not do so is hypocritical.

Shiavo's under investigation for spousal abuse by the State of Florida. The judge ruled the investigation irrelivant to the case and went ahead with the order.

ONLY at the last minute behest of the parents. There has been NO ongoing investigation when this happened 13 years ago.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I'm for limited government, but not so limited that it lets people get away with killing someone for cash. Removing spousal responsibility? I fail to see how. The spouse has a responsibility to either keep her alive or just do the honorable thing and divorce her.

So if you're spouse was entirely reliant upon machines for everything, couldn't talk, move, swallow, or even blink you would be for keeping her alive that way?? what quality of life is there in that?

If you indeed support that then I feel sorry for your spouse for you wishing that kind of cruelty upon her/him.

 

[Merlin1047]

I never said it doesn't suck, did I? but then again, thats not the point.
we can do the 'wear the persons shoes' argument in every situation, but doing so like alot of the so-called conservatives on this board are doing is slowly implementing the big-brother government. You are effectively removing spousal responsibility.

Oh please. Your argument is weak and now you want to put out the smoke screen by diverting the discussion to a question of big government.

All I want is a VERIFIABLE means of determining the person's wishes. If you think that's asking too much, then you apparently have more regard for so-called "spousal responsibility" than the sanctity of a human life. In which case I would suggest that your priorties need to be re-ordered.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I would rather "big brother" step in for something useful, like stopping a woman from being starved to death,than them taking half of my paycheck in taxes,or interfering with the way I live.

From another post you made about normality. My belief is normality is not wanting to see someone you supposedly loved at one time starved to death. Normality is wanting to see the poeple closest to you thrive in any way possible. Not only is that normality,it's called being kind to humanity!!!

Normality is also not wanting to see your spouse live on with zero quality of life dependent upon others for all of your basic needs.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Normality is also not wanting to see your spouse live on with zero quality of life dependent upon others for all of your basic needs.

Why did he want the money? Her wishes never came up till after he was paid.

 

[krisy]

Normality is also not wanting to see your spouse live on with zero quality of life dependent upon others for all of your basic needs.

That is after the fact! She may not have to if he would have tried to rehablitate in the first place. I,and yes this is my opinion,do not believe he is dragging this whole damn thing out this far because he wants to respect her wishes...please!

And why should anyone for Terry Schaivo protest the death penalty? Those people are murderes that took a life. She is an innocent woman that could have possibly had a decent life.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Oh please. Your argument is weak and now you want to put out the smoke screen by diverting the discussion to a question of big government.

All I want is a VERIFIABLE means of determining the person's wishes. If you think that's asking too much, then you apparently have more regard for so-called "spousal responsibility" than the sanctity of a human life. In which case I would suggest that your priorties need to be re-ordered.

don't suggest anything, especially about my priorities. You don't know me, you don't know a damn thing about me, and to make that kind of remark shows you to be an egotistical idiot who thinks you know everything about right and wrong when NOBODY knows everything, especially you.

All YOU want is verifiable proof yet their marriage, beginning or end, is NOT any of your damn business, personally, because if you think it is then put your OWN marriage under public scrutiny as well. Would you actually prefer that the government concern itself with your marriage?

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Why did he want the money? Her wishes never came up till after he was paid.

I said you had a good point, tell me WHY the courts haven't started investigating THAT. It's not like Florida is a bastion of liberal judiciary, right?

 

[Merlin1047]

don't suggest anything, especially about my priorities. You don't know me, you don't know a damn thing about me, and to make that kind of remark shows you to be an egotistical idiot who thinks you know everything about right and wrong when NOBODY knows everything, especially you.

Well, let's say that based on that statement I think you're an arrogant ass who can't stand losing a discussion, and instead resorts to personal attacks.

If you're that sensitive, maybe it wasn't such a good idea for you to come back here.

Guess I'll go have a discussion with someone who is capable of rational replies. One more suggestion - change your board name. You're not smarter than anybody.