Terri Schiavo's Feeding Tube to be Removed on Friday

[krisy]

I feel so badly for her, her parents and family. This is just so horrible and sickening.

To say the least. I just cannot believe this is going on. I know I will be saying a prayer for her and her family tonight, and hope for a miracle.

 

[Bonnie]

To say the least. I just cannot believe this is going on. I know I will be saying a prayer for her and her family tonight, and hope for a miracle.

Same here, it's not over till it's over, and miracles do happen.

 

[krisy]

Look what I just found on Drudge...


http://www.drudgereport.com/

 

[Adam's Apple]

I just find it ironic that we can sentence a woman to death for not being able to feed herself, but we can't give her a lethal injection that would kill her quickly and painlessly...because that would be murder.

"

Very ironic indeed, but that's the way the system is working in this case.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I wonder, does anyone care if terri truly didn't want to live like this, that they are going to force her to anyway? wouldn't that be torturous also?

 

[dilloduck]

I wonder, does anyone care if terri truly didn't want to live like this, that they are going to force her to anyway? wouldn't that be torturous also?

Problem is that no one knows for sure---its created a moral and ethical ping pong ball for everyone else to smack back and forth. Comes down to the fact that a judge is gonna make a decision whether she lives as is or is starved. No one can change that.

 

[Zhukov]

I guess I haven't been paying enough attention to this particular piece of news....

What crime has this woman been convicted of again? It must have been particular heinous to warrant such a........cruel and unusual punishment.......to be dehydrated and starved to death over the period of about week? She must have done something awful.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I guess I haven't been paying enough attention to this particular piece of news....

What crime has this woman been convicted of again? It must have been particular heinous to warrant such a........cruel and unusual punishment.......to be dehydrated and starved to death over the period of about week? She must have done something awful.

let me get this straight. The wonderful GOP representatives have managed to make assisted suicide illegal and reduced the last attempt at a persons right to choose his/her own quality of life and whether they choose to live in it or not to be a slow agonizing death of starvtion and dehydration(which is certainly intolerable in the GOP's view) but since their is no real choice in the GOP's mindset, we'll force this person to live a poor quality of life that they didn't want to begin with? real logic there.

 

[Gem]

I think it is obvious that people care about whether or not Terri Shiavo would like to live like this or not based upon the wide variety of emotions people have in connection to this case. I have not encountered anyone who wasn't taken aback by how terrible this situation is, and how they can't imagine how terrible it would be for everyone involved, including Terri Shiavo.

Unfortunately, Terri's case entered a realm we hadn't truly encountered yet as a society. To be blunt, what do we do when a person who isn't quite as dead as we usually prefer has a husband saying she would want to die, and a family who says she wouldn't?

Prior to this, family members seemed to agree...or at the very least, keep quiet about whether or not to withhold food and water from their loved one so the decision was simple. Or, the person had a living will that discussed their preferences for health care in situations like this.

Terri's case is personally tragic...but it is also nationally important, setting the stage for how our country is going to handle personal responsibility in health care, euthanasia, etc. Unfortunately, just like "Jane Roe" got caught up in a national movement she could have never imagined, the Shiavo and Schindler families have gotten caught in the middle.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I seriously doubt that terri schiavo is the absolute first person that theres ever been a dispute between spouse and the in laws.

Given that, its ONLY because certain groups of people saw something they didn't like and made it into a public spectacle. If I were in terri's place I'd be ashamed of my parents right now.

 

[Zhukov]

we'll force this person to live a poor quality of life that they didn't want to begin with?

Says who?

The all-but-remarried husband? Anecdotally?

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Says who?

The all-but-remarried husband? Anecdotally?

so his word is no longer trustworthy or valid because he's all but remarried? Do you consider that logic or emotion?

 

[Gem]

I love how you scold everyone for not considering Terri's point of view...as if you have some insight that everyone else here doesn't have.

You choose to believe that Terri Shiavo wanted to die. Why? Because her husband decided to share that information with the world 7 years after she entered the hospital and because you support a person's right to choose when and how they will die.

Others choose to look at the fact that Michael Shiavo didn't bring up his wife's wish to die until after the large malpractice settlement was settled as suspicious. They look at the fact that Terri never really had appropriate rehab despite doctors stating that she would have been greatly helped by it as suspicious. They look at the fact that she never had an MRI or PET scan (considered standard operating procedure for diagnosing PVS) because her husband, with millions of dollars to use for her care, chose not to do them because they were expensive...despite the fact that numerous neurologists say that you can not accurately diagnose PVS without these tests. They look to the fact that the doctor who diagnosed her as PVS is a right-to-death activist who also fought to starve to death a man who could operate a wheel chair and interact meaningfully with people...saying he was in a PERSISTIVE VEGETATIVE STATE...as suspicious....

You obviously have an agenda in this conversation just as much, if not more so, as everyone else...yet you criticize others for looking at all the information and reaching a different conclusion...you even go so far as to insult her parents...sorry, but thats just obscene.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I love how you scold everyone for not considering Terri's point of view...as if you have some insight that everyone else here doesn't have.

Thats because I do and its an uncomfortable insight at its best.

You choose to believe that Terri Shiavo wanted to die. Why? Because her husband decided to share that information with the world 7 years after she entered the hospital and because you support a person's right to choose when and how they will die.

I put myself in the same position. Would I want to live in that condition and put that burden on whoever would be my caregiver? not a chance.

Others choose to look at the fact that Michael Shiavo didn't bring up his wife's wish to die until after the large malpractice settlement was settled as suspicious. They look at the fact that Terri never really had appropriate rehab despite doctors stating that she would have been greatly helped by it as suspicious. They look at the fact that she never had an MRI or PET scan (considered standard operating procedure for diagnosing PVS) because her husband, with millions of dollars to use for her care, chose not to do them because they were expensive...despite the fact that numerous neurologists say that you can not accurately diagnose PVS without these tests. They look to the fact that the doctor who diagnosed her as PVS is a right-to-death activist who also fought to starve to death a man who could operate a wheel chair and interact meaningfully with people...saying he was in a PERSISTIVE VEGETATIVE STATE...as suspicious....

suspicion is not proof, first off. But now that congress has intervened its irrelevant. Heres what I would like to see. Hold the hearings, talk to doctors and not just doctors that support only one point of view. Get the consensus, whatever that may be, and go from there. I'd be willing to bet that if all the evidence is gathered and it turns out that there is no future for terri's improvement, people still won't give it up.

You obviously have an agenda in this conversation just as much, if not more so, as everyone else...yet you criticize others for looking at all the information and reaching a different conclusion...you even go so far as to insult her parents...sorry, but thats just obscene.

It's also obscene that her parents would want her to live in a seriously debilitated state, but I addressed that from MY point of view as if they were my parents. If thats obscene to you then you need to thicken your skin. As to my agenda in this, its a personal issue that I won't discuss openly on this board.

 

[Zhukov]

so his word is no longer trustworthy or valid because he's all but remarried? Do you consider that logic or emotion?

I consider it not legally binding.

If in the event one falls into a state where one would wish to die but were not capable of voicing one's wishes, then one had better fill out a living will. What does your living will say?

If she wants to die, fine. I'd have no objection.

I don't oppose euthanasia. If you want to kill yourself, by all means do it.

The problem here is we simply do not know for sure, and this would set an awful precedence, in my opinion, where you can be killed simply because someone else says they heard you say that was alright by you.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

I consider it not legally binding.

If in the event one falls into a state where one would wish to die but were not capable of voicing one's wishes, then one had better fill out a living will. What does your living will say?

If she wants to die, fine. I'd have no objection.

I don't oppose euthanasia. If you want to kill yourself, by all means do it.

The problem here is we simply do not know for sure, and this would set an awful precedence, in my opinion, where you can be killed simply because someone else says they heard you say that was alright by you.

then how do we deal with the issue of required surgery? In all but emergency trauma cases the doctor(s) require permission from the spouse to operate. Without it, they don't.

I have no living will. I've entrusted my wishes to my spouse and since thats good enough for me, it should be good enough for the world.

 

[Zhukov]

then how do we deal with the issue of required surgery? In all but emergency trauma cases the doctor(s) require permission from the spouse to operate. Without it, they don't.

Emergency, i.e. life or death, they prefer to err on the side of life. What's the problem? Perhaps I don't understand your question.

I have no living will. I've entrusted my wishes to my spouse and since thats good enough for me, it should be good enough for the world.

The situation Terri, her husband, and her family, find themselves in ought to indicate to you that it's not always enough. If you don't want to sit in a vegetative state you had better write your wishes down somewhere.

Afterall, what if both you and your wife are together when it happens? Your wife is gone and you are in a persistent vegetative state. Then it falls to your children. It's probably not something you even want to discuss with your children, let alone a decision you want your children to have to contemplate.

It's best to write your wishes down somewhere.

 

[SmarterThanYou]

Emergency, i.e. life or death, they prefer to err on the side of life. What's the problem? Perhaps I don't understand your question.

because of this issue, what is happening is now you're removing spousal responsibility......forever. will the same apply in all medical situations?

The situation Terri, her husband, and her family, find themselves in ought to indicate to you that it's not always enough. If you don't want to sit in a vegetative state you had better write your wishes down somewhere.

again, what you're now advocating is removing spousal responsibility and forcing the government to intrude on the marriage sacrament by requiring legal and notarized documentation for ones final wishes. Perhaps you don't see a problem with this. I do. It is not the governments, nor anyone elses, responsibility to comply with my spouses requests.

Afterall, what if both you and your wife are together when it happens? Your wife is gone and you are in a persistent vegetative state. Then it falls to your children. It's probably not something you even want to discuss with your children, let alone a decision you want your children to have to contemplate.

It's best to write your wishes down somewhere.

on this, you have brought up a good point.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Mrs. Schiavo's parents believe that she knows them and is comforted by them. They believe they are communing with their daughter. Given my own experience with the gravely ill and the dying, I will take the parents' word over the doctors' any day.

And who dares say you have no right to commune with your gravely ill child? To comfort your child? To pray for your child? Who dares say you have no right to hope that she will recover no matter what the doctors say? Who dares say you have no right to comfort, commune with and pray for her even if you have given up hope? Yes, the woman is mortally ill. Who dares say that her life is therefore worthless, to be cut off at her husband's whim?

Perhaps you believe that those who are suffering, or choose death, or are wholly unconscious, have a "right" to die--but those arguments don't apply to Mrs. Schiavo. They are irrelevant here. Except--not quite irrelevant. After all, those are the arguments that have brought us, as a society, to a state where we contemplate killing Mrs. Schiavo before her parents' eyes, maybe (for all we know) as she smiles right at them.

The war against Judeo-Christian morality is a war of attrition.

For years, thoughtful people have argued that "reasons for taking a human life" should not be treated as a growing list. There are valid reasons to do it, and they have been agreed for millennia. If the list has to change, better to shorten than lengthen it.

Thoughtful people have argued: Once you start footnoting innocent human life, you are in trouble. Innocent life must not be taken, unless (here come the footnotes) the subject is too small, sick or depressed to complain. One footnote, people have argued, and the jig is up; in the long run the accumulating footnotes will strangle humane society like algae choking a pond.

Who would have believed when the Supreme Court legalized abortion that one generation later, only one, America would have come to this? Mrs. Schiavo's parents wanting her to live, pleading for her to live, the state saying no, and a meeting of the Legislature required to pry the executioner's fingers from the victim's throat?

I would never have made such an argument when the abortion decision came down, and I would never have believed it. I still can't believe it. Is this America? Do I wake or sleep?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004220

 

[sagegirl]

Everybody, this is a good time to learn a lesson. Sign and distribute a Healthcare Power of Attorney and a Healthcare Directive. Make sure that your family, whoever, including you physician, knows what you want done in case circumstances develop that require intervention. The legal documents prepared in advance can be presented to the court should any dispute arise. A video of you clearly stating your intentions is also a very good idea.
So you can say, "I want to be kept alive on tubes and machines for as long as is possible even though I have little or no quality of life, and little if any chance of recovery." Yippee
Or you can say, "I do not want any artificial means used to sustain my life if my condition is irreversible and I am unable to communicate this desire."