Courts in Florida knock down "Terry's Law"..

[Bonnie]

This case isn't about euthanasia. This woman would be dead if it wasn't for the machines keeping her alive. Jeb Bush and the religious right accuse doctors of "playing God" by removing feeding tubes, etc and letting people die. Isn't keeping someone who otherwise would be dead alive by means of a machine "playing God"?

acludem

Well for someone who is only kept alive with machines, she certainly looks alert and is moving around and even eating on her own with the help of her parents............

I applaud Jeb for doing whatever he has to, this is more important then the law, it is about human life....

 

[Avatar4321]

This case isn't about euthanasia. This woman would be dead if it wasn't for the machines keeping her alive. Jeb Bush and the religious right accuse doctors of "playing God" by removing feeding tubes, etc and letting people die. Isn't keeping someone who otherwise would be dead alive by means of a machine "playing God"?

acludem

You know it always amazes me how you continue to claim you are an advocate for the rights of people but never seem to have a problem when people are stripped of their most basic natural right. The right to live.

maybe i ought to write a paper on liberals...it will have to happen sometime when i have time i suppose.

 

[Gem]

Merlin,

Fascinating, I disagree with an opinion of yours and you label me in a demeaning way. Very interesting. Because it has relevance to this conversation I happen to be a moderate conservative, registered republican...which is why I think that what Jeb Bush did is wrong.

Seperation of Powers is a very crucial issue to keeping the Government OUT of the most personal aspects of our lives. I do NOT want President Bush, his brother, his mother, or his third cousin making personal decisions about my life. It was not what the men who wrote our Constitution had in mind for our nation...Gov't stepping in to issues that had already been decided by the courts...and it sets a dangerous precedent.

I am willing to concede that Jeb Bush got involved in this issue because of his big ol' heart (although one might wonder why his big ol' heart was only touched when the cameras were turned on...and not years earlier since the case had been decided months earlier...he only seemed to note on the issue when the media picked up on the case...but hey, I'm sure he knew about it all along and was just busy till then....right??? )

Yes, I agree with everyone here...it is truly a statement on how important a living will is. But therein you hit upon a problem.

Imagine, all of you who are screaming about a man trying to kill his wife for money (a man, so desperate for money that he stayed involved with this woman for years and years and years with nothing...doesn't exactly seem like the most brilliant scheme ever, huh?)...imagine that Terry Schiavo desperately felt that living in a vegetative or semi-vegetative state would be the worst kind of hell. That being a burden in that way to her family would be the most awful thing she could do. Imagine that she told her husband this, thinking, as many Americans do, that that would be enough, since he has power of attorney, the right to "turn off machines," that she had done enough...now imagine that this poor woman who DIDN'T want to live this way is now forced to...becase people are refusing to allow her choice to be heard.

I agree, we do not have a living will to fall back on. But while we are imagining her husband as a money-grubbing evil bastard, I think we should also imagine the absolute horror of having to live like this if you had specifically stated that it was the very thing you had stated you did not want.

 

[krisy]

There is another aspect to her life as well. Her husband never let them even try rehablitation on her. For all we know,she could have been truly rehabilitated. Now,that raises questions in my mind. If something like that happened to my husband,you can damn well bet that I would want rehabilitation to be tried and considered no matter what. Why in the world would he not even want them to try? If she would have had it when the incident first occured,she may be a lot different now. He fromthe beginning didn't want anything done. Now,isn't that the reason rehabilitation happens,to save a life or improve the quality? Most people I know would want to try.

I don't know what his motives are deep down,but I do know starving someone to death,that you supposedly love or care about,doesn't make any sense to me. And as far as Jeb Bush goes,maybe he stepped in simply because he is pro life and believes in the right to live. He didn't just come out when the cameras found this story. It's been in the media for a long time. I read about it some years ago in a magazine.

 

[Bonnie]

Merlin,

Fascinating, I disagree with an opinion of yours and you label me in a demeaning way. Very interesting. Because it has relevance to this conversation I happen to be a moderate conservative, registered republican...which is why I think that what Jeb Bush did is wrong.

Seperation of Powers is a very crucial issue to keeping the Government OUT of the most personal aspects of our lives. I do NOT want President Bush, his brother, his mother, or his third cousin making personal decisions about my life. It was not what the men who wrote our Constitution had in mind for our nation...Gov't stepping in to issues that had already been decided by the courts...and it sets a dangerous precedent.

I am willing to concede that Jeb Bush got involved in this issue because of his big ol' heart (although one might wonder why his big ol' heart was only touched when the cameras were turned on...and not years earlier since the case had been decided months earlier...he only seemed to note on the issue when the media picked up on the case...but hey, I'm sure he knew about it all along and was just busy till then....right??? )

Yes, I agree with everyone here...it is truly a statement on how important a living will is. But therein you hit upon a problem.

Imagine, all of you who are screaming about a man trying to kill his wife for money (a man, so desperate for money that he stayed involved with this woman for years and years and years with nothing...doesn't exactly seem like the most brilliant scheme ever, huh?)...imagine that Terry Schiavo desperately felt that living in a vegetative or semi-vegetative state would be the worst kind of hell. That being a burden in that way to her family would be the most awful thing she could do. Imagine that she told her husband this, thinking, as many Americans do, that that would be enough, since he has power of attorney, the right to "turn off machines," that she had done enough...now imagine that this poor woman who DIDN'T want to live this way is now forced to...becase people are refusing to allow her choice to be heard.

I agree, we do not have a living will to fall back on. But while we are imagining her husband as a money-grubbing evil bastard, I think we should also imagine the absolute horror of having to live like this if you had specifically stated that it was the very thing you had stated you did not want.

You have no way - nor the right to imagine anything about the quality of life for Terry......Maybe she is happy to see her parents come into that room to sit with her everyday. Yes technically what Jeb did was wrong, but comepletely right and moral to do whatever it takes to save a human life that comes before the law!!! Why would her husband even care whether she lives or dies as long as Terry's parents are willing to assume responsibility and cost for her care....it's not costing him anything, and he already has a new woman in his life, If not for money then what logical reason could he have for wanting her dead?????? And don't tell me it's the principal of the thing because that's bullshit!!! And who gives a rats ass why Bush did it? the end result is she is still alive and her parents who obviously are the only ones who care about her now get to see her everyday. Have you seen pictures of her? she is moving around, hardly the picture of someone laying there completely brain dead? Since when is the law more important than human life????

 

[William Joyce]

You know you're living in a dying society when everybody gets a law named after them.

America: Pull the plug on this ******.

 

[krisy]

You know you're living in a dying society when everybody gets a law named after them.

America: Pull the plug on this ******.

\
That is uncalled for and if this was your sister or wife(if you could find a nice black woman to marry) you wouldn't be so cold. There are lots of old peopel that can't eat on their own,should they starved to death too? Give me a break.

:soul:

 

[5stringJeff]

You know you're living in a dying society when everybody gets a law named after them.

America: Pull the plug on this ******.

How commpasionate. I wish I had your worldview... NOT!

 

[Annie]

Spoken like a true imbecile! Can't believe you actually claim to be a lawyer.

Anyone agree that the plug should be pulled on Joycie?

:clap1: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[krisy]

Spoken like a true imbecile! Can't believe you actually claim to be a lawyer.

Anyone agree that the plug should be pulled on Joycie?

:2guns:

 

[Gem]

You have no way - nor the right to imagine anything about the quality of life for Terry......

If this is true, Bonnie....than neither do you. This is a discussion site...hence my DISCUSSING the issue...if you feel that people should not be allowed to discuss things when they disagree with you, perhaps you need to find another message board. I here www.iamanazi.com is recruiting posters.

Maybe she is happy to see her parents come into that room to sit with her everyday.

Maybe she ISN'T happy, Bonnie. Maybe she is living in her own personal hell. Maybe the last thing on earth she could possibly imagine was living the way she is "living" now. Maybe she said to her husband, as he claims she did, "Do NOT let me exist that way. I DO NOT WANT TO LIVE LIKE THAT."

You do not know the truth of this matter any more than I do...hence why our country has courts...courts who have been given the duty by the Constitution to determine what is to happen in situations where two sides can not reach agreement.

To state that we should simply ignore the court system (as long as it is operating legally) when its decisions do not suit us is to basically say that the Constituation is crap and we should simply pick and choose what we like and don't like. (Very dangerous on the day when the people in charge decide that the "don't like" freedom of speech and due process....think about it...the rules are there for a reason, Bonnie)

Yes technically what Jeb did was wrong,

We should end this discussion right here. EXACTLY, BONNIE, EXACTLY!!! IT WAS WRONG...would you be here talking about how Bush did wrong but it was actually right if he did something you DISAGREED WITH??!? Because he felt it was morally wrong? This is why we have SEPERATION OF POWER, Bonnie...you can't simply dismiss it when it doesn't suit you.

Why would her husband even care whether she lives or dies as long as Terry's parents are willing to assume responsibility and cost for her care....it's not costing him anything, and he already has a new woman in his life, If not for money then what logical reason could he have for wanting her dead?????? And don't tell me it's the principal of the thing because that's bullshit!!!

Please forgive me if my typing isn't as clear in this section, but I'm simply laughing too damn hard.

Bonnie, what kind of idiotic assertion is the one you have just made here. You ask, answer, and dismiss the question in one swoop...

Why WOULD her husband care? He can drop Terry into the custody of her parents and skip off scot free to live with his new wife...but he hasn't...he has accrued legal fees (which will overshadow and "profit" he might have made as some have falsely claimed here), and the time, pain, and sufferring he has gone through during this lengthy process far outweigh any potential gains....you rightly assert that, Bonnie, way to go...

Then you lose it...He isn't doing it for money...he could just "scrape her off" and move on...but he doesn't...why not??!??

Well, by your own deduction, Bonnie...he's either sticking around because his wife asked him to do something for her and he is trying to abide by her wishes...or hes a psycho who is getting his jollies from destroying his life for several years in order to slowly starve a woman.

Hmm...one of these is probable...likely, logical...and one of them is crap. You believe the one that is crap, Bonnie.

And who gives a rats ass why Bush did it?

WOW...way to piss all over the laws and Constitution of the United States of America, Bonnie....thank God that not everyone in this nation shares your "hey, I'll do whatever I want just so long as I FEEL the end justifies the means..."

Since when is the law more important than human life????

Ummm....Abortion, Capital Punishment, Living Wills, Implied Consent, Do Not Rescuciate.....I can go on...


Bonnie, I understand where you are coming from...I really do. If I was this man I would be very tempted to say to Terry's parents that they can take care of her...that is, unless...my husband had said to me, "I DO NOT want to live that way." If he said that, it would be my duty to help him...

Completely seperate from this case, is your shocking willingness to ignore the laws of the nation, and the Constitutional perimeters of seperation of powers. They are there for a reason, Bonnie...and I would be positively fascinated to see how willing you would be to accept someone changing them in a way that you DIDN'T agree with...considering how ecstatic you are to change them to suit you.

 

[Zhukov]

I wonder, does it matter to any of the starve-her-to-death advocates here that the only reason removing her feeding tube will result in her death is because the husband has, over the course of the last several years, deliberately prevented the requisite rehabilative and evaluative procedures that may have allowed her to be fed in another fashion?

7. Terri has the absolute right to receive necessary services and rehabilitation. Fla. Stat. § 744.3215 (2002). Schiavo has affirmatively prevented Terri from receiving these services from her caregivers. Further, he has confined her to the “death row” of Hospice for over two years while the appeals in this case have been pending, instead of leaving her in a nursing facility where she would receive the services and rehabilitation required by law.[4]/

8. Instead of fulfilling his duty to develop Terri’s abilities, Schiavo has at every turn attempted to increase her incapacity through the denial of basic health and rehabilitative services such as range of motion therapy, other physical therapy, orthopaedic evaluations and treatment, speech therapy, standard diagnostic tests and procedures, gynecological care, dental care, rehabilitation evaluations and cognitive therapy, as testimony in the recent evidentiary hearing revealed.

9. Schiavo has systematically isolated Terri and deprived her of sensory input.[5]/ Terri has the absolute right to receive visitors and communicate with others. Fla. Stat. § 744.3215. This right has been unlawfully and cruelly restricted by Schiavo, who has prevented visitors of whom he does not approve from seeing Terri, according to his own capricious and unreviewed bent.

10. He has prevented the flow of non-verbal communication between Terri and her parents and siblings by instructing her caregivers to give no such information about Terri’s behavior to her family.


11. Terri has the right to receive “palliative care” which is the comprehensive management of the physical, psychological, social, spiritual, and existential needs of the patient. Fla. Stat. § 765.102. This right is not limited to those with incurable or progressive illnesses.

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/PetitiontoRemoveGuardian111502.htm


I find it absolutely appalling anyone could in good conscience advocate deliberately starving someone to death. How completely inhuman.

But it does provide a clear example of the subject of the Dennis Prager article Bonnie posted awhile back, that being too many ideological liberals prefer doing what is legal over doing what is right.

 

[William Joyce]

Great. So now I'm not "compassionate." When have I ever made a pretense of THAT? Love me or hate me, you know where I stand, and "compassionate" I ain't, at least for those who aren't my people. Would I let oldsters who can no longer eat starve to death? Well, would anyone gently suggest that maybe, just maybe, God doesn't intend for them to live much longer?

Just maybe?

 

[krisy]

Great. So now I'm not "compassionate." When have I ever made a pretense of THAT? Love me or hate me, you know where I stand, and "compassionate" I ain't, at least for those who aren't my people. Would I let oldsters who can no longer eat starve to death? Well, would anyone gently suggest that maybe, just maybe, God doesn't intend for them to live much longer?

Just maybe?

William,it's just that your comment was incredibly harsh. She did nothing to ask for this. And maybe,just maybe,God did intend for her to live a better,longer life until her husband said no to any rehabilitation. I don't beleive this woman is a vegetable. She isn't in comma,she isn't brain dead. Even the doctors are deadlocked on that. Because of that-it wouldn't be humane to stop feeding her. How could someone live with theirselves knowing she may be having thoughts? To call her a "******" was just plain mean.

 

[Bullypulpit]

So, tell me...Who oppose the court overturning "Terry's Law" have actually seen what happens to a person in a chronic vegatative state over time? None, I'd guess.

But more to the point, when all cognitive function is lost, all that is being done by placing a patient on life support is to preserve the empty shell of a human life. If the patient has previously stated that they do not wish to live in such a state, it behooves their loved ones to honor that request. If they have not made such a request, it then falls to the loved ones of the patient to make that decision.

It is then the duty of the medical establishment to provide the family of the patient with all of the information needed to make a sound decision, which is why many healthcare systems now have medical ethicists on staff to help address these issue with the family.

From a societal standpoint, we must come to understand that it is not the quantity of life that matters, but it's quality. And it would be wise for each of us to discuss end of life issue with our families so that our wishes are known before the need arises. But regardless of the choice made, it is not for the judicial or legislative branches of governement to interfere with that choice.

My family and I were faced with such a choice in the case of my father. He suffered severe and irreparable brain damage after a massive heart attack. Had he survived, he would have been in a state similar to that of Ms. Schiavo. We decided, since we all had discussed the issue over the years, to honor my father's wishes and terminate life support. We did this with out fear or guilt...the man who had been my father was gone...all that was left was the empty husk.

So, donnot judge Ms. Schiavo's husband until you have walked in his shoes.

 

[krisy]

i see your point,bully,but those who feel she shouldn't be kept alive still haven't addressed the issue of why he never wanted to even try rehabilitation. also,are her mother and father not her family? why can't they have a say in such a big decision? The husband has moved on and we have not proof she would have wanted this. this woman does not look like she is braindead to me. not to mention,don't any of you think starving her is cruel?

 

[Bullypulpit]

i see your point,bully,but those who feel she shouldn't be kept alive still haven't addressed the issue of why he never wanted to even try rehabilitation. also,are her mother and father not her family? why can't they have a say in such a big decision? The husband has moved on and we have not proof she would have wanted this. this woman does not look like she is braindead to me. not to mention,don't any of you think starving her is cruel?

From a legal standpoint, power for health care decisions reside with the spouse, followed by nearest blood relative. Also, the issue of whether or not Ms. Schiavo wanted to live in such a manner were addressed in favor of Ms. Schiavo and her husband before Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature turned the case into a political three-ring circus.

 

[Bullypulpit]

<blockquote>Living Will Form [Template - suggested language - you may print this out to fill in information]

To my family, doctors, and all those concerned with my care:

I, _______________________________, being of sound mind, make this statement to be followed if for any reason I become unable to participate in decisions regarding my medical care. I direct that life-prolonging procedures should be (check only one)

_____ provided

_____ withdrawn (i.e., removed, after being started)

_____ withheld (i.e., not started)

_____ withheld and/or withdrawn

if, in the opinion of my attending or treating physician and another consulting physician, I have a terminal condition - meaning:
(a) A condition caused by injury, disease, or illness from which there is no reasonable probability of recovery and which, without treatment, can be expected to cause death; OR
(b) A persistent vegetative state characterized by a permanent and irreversible condition of unconsciousness in which there is:

1. The absence of voluntary action or cognitive behavior of any kind; AND
2. An inability to communicate or interact purposefully with the environment.

Upon my death, I wish to donate any part of my body for the purpose of transplantation and/or experimentation. ___ Yes ___ No
Specifically, I wish to donate only certain parts of my body as follows:

____________________________________________________________________

Other personal instructions: _______________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

Surrogate (optional)
In the event that I have been determined to be unable to provide express and informed consent regarding the withholding, withdrawal, or continuation of life-prolonging procedures, I wish to designate as my surrogate to carry out the provisions of this declaration:

Name: _______________________________ Address: ______________________________

Phone: _______________________________ Relationship: ____________________________

I understand the full import of this declaration, and I am emotionally and mentally competent to make this declaration. These directions express my legal right to preserve my right of privacy and self-determination. Therefore, I expect my family, doctors, and all those concerned with my care to regard themselves as legally and morally bound to act in accord with my wishes.

Signed: ___________________________ Date _____________________________

Witness ___________________________ Witness ___________________________

Relationship ___________________________ Relationship ___________________________
NOTE: ONE WITNESS SHALL NOT BE A SPOUSE, BLOOD RELATIVE, OR SURROGATE</blockquote>

The above is a general template. Documents specific to each state can usually be found on line. Deal with these issue before the need arises, and you might avoid the legal traumas raised by the Schiavo case.

 

[Merlin1047]

This case isn't about euthanasia. This woman would be dead if it wasn't for the machines keeping her alive. Jeb Bush and the religious right accuse doctors of "playing God" by removing feeding tubes, etc and letting people die. Isn't keeping someone who otherwise would be dead alive by means of a machine "playing God"?

acludem

I believe that the only assistance required to keep her alive is a feeding tube. Her parents requested to keep her alive.

Why are you in such a rush to kill the woman? Could it be that you're letting your liberal bias control your thinking again and that you argue in favor of killing a human being simply to score debating points?

 

[Merlin1047]

But more to the point, when all cognitive function is lost, all that is being done by placing a patient on life support is to preserve the empty shell of a human life. If the patient has previously stated that they do not wish to live in such a state, it behooves their loved ones to honor that request. If they have not made such a request, it then falls to the loved ones of the patient to make that decision.

I don't really disagree with your point, but the problem is that it does not apply to the case under discussion. The "vegetative state" you describe is a comatose condition in which there are essentially no motor functions and no discernable cognitive abilities. If that were Terry Schaivo's condition, I would agree with your view completely. But in this case it appears that severe retardation is more likely a good descriptor.

Schaivo's parents have demanded that she be kept alive and they have agreed to bear the expense. I think that the husband's motives are extremely suspect and he should have no say in her disposition.