Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Terri Schiavo case

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Date: 3/24/2005 11:39:36 AM
Author: Feydakin
As I said before, there is a simple test for just how painful theis form of execution is.. Use it on convicted felons instead of lethal injection.. If it really is so painless, why not just starve these people to death instead of wasting the money on a good needle??

Painless, peacful, you just go to sleep..
Click to expand...
There''s a difference between those felons and Schiavo. Medical evidence exists to prove that when a brain is as deteriorated as Schiavo''s, individuals do not feel pain, do not feel hunger, are not aware. That is not the case with people whose brains are fairly normal be they felons or not. I''m an advocate of lethal injection for Schiavo out of compassion for her family whose emotions, understandably, are not soothed by medical evidence.
 
thank you, matata. very sanely said.

peace, movie zombie
 
Date: 3/24/2005 3:42:50 PM
Author: Feydakin
Why should we care more about a murderer than we do about someone that 'may' or 'may not' be suffering but has done absolutely nothing wrong??
Click to expand...

Well for one thing, in a healthy person that would be considered torture, and is in violation of international law. For another thing, a lot can be told about a society by how it treats it's prisoners; there's absolutely no REASON to torture a prisoner rather than give them a painless death, and in the long run starvation would probably me more expensive because it would take longer and require supervision. Not to mention that it's just repugnant.

As an aside, the death penalty as cost-saving measure makes no sense; the costs from conviction to execution are MUCH higher than the costs of keeping someone in prison for life. It's purely a retributive measure, which is, in part, why no other developed nation has the death penalty.
 
Don''t see why it''s so costly execute murderers... guillotines can be made quite cheaply, no? And they''re re-usable too.
 
Date: 3/24/2005 5:36:44 PM
Author: ForteKitty
Don''t see why it''s so costly execute murderers... guillotines can be made quite cheaply, no? And they''re re-usable too.
Click to expand...

But it isn''t the method of death that is so expensive, it is the number of appeals and trials that result from the death penalty that raises the cost of care. For every appeal, you have the salaries of the prosecuters, judges, courtroom staff to cover. Plus, most death penalty prisoners have run out of money for legal aid, so the public picks up the cost of the prisoner''s lawyers(s) as well. Death penalty prisoners are kept in a separate section of the prisons, which also cost more money.
 
Sorry to go off the prison/death penalty slant.....just wanted to also add to something Bertrand touched on earlier. In addition to a living will (which is not recognised in all states) consider getting a heathcare proxy/directive.

If, as in the case of Terri, you can be unconscious and cannot tell them where your living will is then your healthcare proxy has the legal form outlining your wishes and the legal right (except in Louisiana) to see that your directives are adhered to.
It is unfortunate but in some cases a living will can be hidden by a member of your family who does not agree with what you want done. The HCP will be in the hands of someone you trust to ensure that your wishes are carried out.

It seems that in honour of Terri, many of us are thinking and talking about this subject more with our spouses/partners/families.
 
and thank god we have those appeals etc. ever noticed how many people convicted of crimes have been let out in the last years as INNOCENT?! and some on death row for years....innocent all this time with the guilty person out on the streets free to commit more crime. believe it was florida in which there was a husband and wife convicted...unfortunately, he was murdered by the state before the system would believe they were innocent. and let''s not forget the LA police which have been notorious for problems, not limited to but including planting evidence. convicted does not necessarily mean guilty......

the schiavo case has nothing to do with felons, crime, etc. it does, however, have everything to do with personal and individual rights, the medical community, and using this case for political benefit. do you really want the state stepping in between you and your husband?

peace, movie zombie
 
NB: Not all states recognise living wills ..I believe PA is one.......
 
There is endless complaining from the ruling party in America that what happened in this case was wrong.

But Terri Schiavo is one of 30,000 people in a Persistent Vegetative state. Obviously we can''t call a special session of Congress over every one of them - none of the other buisness of government will ever get done.

The Republicans are complaining that this is the Democrats fault. Here''s their chance to propose new legislation about this issue. Rememer - they control Senate, Congress, the Oval Office and except for an 8 year period when Clinton was in office have controlled Federal Judicial appontments since 1981. They have the power to do what they want.

So the legislation I see coming from this could possibly include:

An assumption of what the "living will" would be for individuals where no written one can be found - since there is such a dispute whether we should take the word of the spouse I have to assume that the Republicans don''t want the word of the spouse to count in these cases. So they should put that in the law.

An assumption that other family members than the spouse should be able to participate in end of life decisions - and they should lay this out in the law as to how this should be done - majority vote among all living relatives weighted for proximity of kinship - with rules stating what efforts should be made to locate the next of kin would be one example.

A legal definition of Persistent Vegetative State and what is required in the evaluation of the patient. MRI or no MRI? Brain wave study? Two minutes observation of a videotape by a Cardiololgist such as Bill Frist?

And finally a set of rules to standardize withdrawal of care in these cases. This would be a huge help to family members who struggle daily with these decisions and agonize over them for long years afterwards.

Let''s be sure that federal law makes it illegal to pull a feeding tube in America ever again.
 
mostlywatching,

your blog was well researched and well stated. i hadn''t caught the part about the liquid brain before. her parents should be arrrested for being abusive.

peace, movie zombie
 
You have to register to read. Can you give a glimsp of what the article is about?
 
Thanks guys,

I don''t usually get this involved in this sort of thing, but this case really pulled me in. I don''t mind if people know the facts and then form an opinion, but I was getting really aggravated that so many facts were being ignored and/or distorted. I probably should revise the blog, but I don''t know if I have the energy.

It does make me angry that the President, who had never left vacation for official business before, left his ranch to rush to Washington to sign the Schiavo bill, at 1am; and now his administration is trying to say that he didn''t really want to sign the bill at all. He''s not fooling me. Just more infuriating political moves. I have to stop now...
 
Date: 3/28/2005 10:56:32 AM
Author: fire&ice
You have to register to read. Can you give a glimsp of what the article is about?
Click to expand...
Sorry about that.

Basically in a nutshell Tom Delay and his family made a private decision to take his father off of life support because of a terrible accident his father was in and later Delay and his family sued this company because of the injury the father got. This just shows what a hypocrite Delay is. Delay wants the Congress to step in and make decisions for other peoples family and he want to stop "frivolous lawsuits" which of course all lawsuit are not frivolous but he and his family can sue. It''s sickening!

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0327-01.htm
 
Pretty damning stuff. From the article, it''s not do as I do. It''s do as I say. I''ve never liked De lay.
 
First, and something I discussed with hubby tonight - he would never want to remove a feeding tube. He would obtain something to make me go to sleep forever........................................THAT''S ILLEGAL..............How do you I would feel - thinking that yes, there is an eternity .......when Hubby is in JAIL.

Fey. - it can''t be done.

We are going have to agree to disagree that this women has ANY chance of recovery. It''s been 15 years w/ a brain of mush.

You don''t think apples to apples. I do. And, policticians (albeit as naive as I am) have a higher plane of scrutiny of choices they make in their own life.

I know... I know.. THE LA Times???? but I think the interviews are quite telling.

Besides, personal opinion - I''ve NEVER like Tom De lay - and you know I don''t blanket via pol. parties.

At the end of the day, bless Terri.
 
Date: 3/29/2005 7:27:43 PM
Author: Feydakin
Except that his dad was NOT awake, and any life saving measures taken would not have worked anyway.. The man had minimal brain activity and was in a coma with a destroyed body.. Yep, real similar circumstances.. Oh yeah, his whole family agreed with the no extreme measures decision, there was no FIGHT by part of the family to keep him alive because there is still some doubt about just how bad off he really was..

Yup, real damning when you start to look at all of the facts isn''t it??

Here are some things that baffle me when you hear some people on the left talk -

Abortion is ok, but the death penalty is not
Removing a feeding tube and starving someone to death is ok, but giving her a shot to send her on her way is not

Not all people on the left, but a fairly larger percentage of them hold these views.. It doesn''t seem to make sense..
Click to expand...
Except that I think most people that you term ''on the left'' would not be averse to giving her a shot to end her suffering.

And abortion is only murder if you feel that life begins at conception, not at first breath. So, the death penalty is very different.

De Lay''s father was injured, badly, in an accident on a monorail that he and his brother built. He was in a MEDICALLY INDUCED coma, from reports that I read. Which is different than being brain dead.....and REQUIRES a ventilator due to the suppression of the breathing from the medications. If he had not been in an induced coma he very well might have been able to breathe on his own- and would have required only the feeding tube as a life support measure.

Minimal brain activity is NOT brain dead, it is basically a pre-cursor to a persistent vegitative state- if his body had held out long enough. His family stated ''we know he wouldn''t want to be a vegetable'' and ''we know he wouldn''t want to live like this''. They decided to not put him on dialysis when his kidneys started to fail due to infection, because even if he had regained kidney function and fought off the infections that he was dealing with, mentally he wouldn''t be there. So, basically they didn''t even give his body a chance to perform a ''miracle'' and get healthy...they decided that it was a lost cause and let him go..which I very likely would have done if i had been in their shoes.

What is hypocritical, is not the letting go of someone who is past the point of ''being'', but his stance that Terri''s life is so valuable and should be fought for so strongly....when he did not do the same for his own family member. His mother (his father''s WIFE) made the final decision, just as Terri''s HUSBAND is making this one. Just because someone in the family doesn''t agree with the decision, does not make it right for the government to step into the fracas.
 
I'm not so sure I would want the man who has taken up a life with another woman and has 2 kids, even if he is my HUSBAND, to make this type of decision on my behalf. I see some sort of conflict of interest?? No one knows FOR SURE what terri wanted. In my opinion why can't Michael consent to doing all he could to best represent what he believes would be her wishes and give gardianship back to her parents. if they want to keep her alive by raising funds etc. why not let them. Husbands come and go Parents are forever. I am in my 30's, been married 5 years and had never discussed what i would want hubby to do in the situation. Maybe Terri did, maybe she didn't. A living will has now become as important as life insurance in my book. if it were me, i wouldn't want to "live" that way, but that's me. This case has turned into a very bitter War of the Roses and it's so very sad to see Terri exploited this way.
 
Exactly as Mrs. Salvo is saying, husbands come and go. Most parents have their childrens best interest in mind and there are a few dead beats along the way. My main issue with this case is that the parents birthed this child into the world and should have say in her death and funeral. A man that has already moved on should not be deciding and there has been million+ awarded in this case and money has made it more complex. I would not want a man I knew for a few years making my decision over parents who have known me for my lifespan. Besides, why should parents have a lesser say in their own childs funeral??? If he gets to say how she dies, why can''t they have her funeral the way they wish??? This may be poorly written, but I am still very upset over this man controlling every tiny bit of this womans last bit of life and burial. He decide to cremate her upon her death and her family may not want that. Obviously living in the US is not all about choices. For the ppl that have been divorced, would you want your ex to decide your fate and funeral? Probably not. Hell, you may not want to have your ex even attend your funeral..........
 
i love my parents to death. i know that they would do anything for me. more often than not, they are wonderful parents. would i trust them to make the right decision at a time like this? absolutely NOT. a parent never wants to see a child die and always fights to protect him or her from anything they PERCEIVE as harmful. understandably, you always think you''ll die before your kids. i know how hard this must be for her parents. but personally, my husband-to-be is without a doubt the person whom i would want making my end of life decisions. even in terri''s case (from what we know of it) where her husband has moved on with his life. my bf, the closest person to me in the world, knows me better (and in a completely different way) than my parents ever can or will. there is a hugely different dynamic there.

IMO, her parents are being extremely selfish here. they refuse to let go. this woman no longer has a functional brain. her head is filled with cerebrospinal fluid. giving birth to a child does not give you the right to rule over his or her life forever. too many parents never seem to grasp this concept.

quoting mary schindler-

"Michael and Jodi, you have your own children. Please, please give my child back to me."

this just strikes me as so selfish; thinking of only herself. we''re not discussing someone who is a child. terri schiavo is a grown woman whom the courts have decided would not want to live in this state. she is not to be governed by her parents as if she were a child.

i hope that her parents gain some peace as their daughter is finally allowed to move on...
 
Icekid- you trust your BF to do what's best and i'm sure he would. I too would trust my hubby to make that type of decision if necessary. but if my hubby had kids with another woman I would no longer be able to trust he would have my best interest at heart. the problem I have in the timing. Michael waited 7 years to make the decision after $$$ became involved which is why much of his activity is suspious to me and I call into question his motives of what is in her best interest. Whether or not her family is being selfish is in the eye of the beholder. they want to keep her alive for various reasons, some are moral/religious ones. why does a man who has moved on care so much????? just divorce her...

it would be hard for parents to let go but many do all the time when they know their is no hope. this should be up to her parents b/c of the current relationship she has with her Husband, nothing more/nothing less.
 
Yellowfan & Icekid, I see both your perpectives. I agree with both of them. Though, I think I tend to fall with Icekid. The only disclaimer is that I''ve been married for 20 years. No one knows me better than my husband. I am a grown adult. *WE* (hubby & I) have been making our own decisions since adulthood.

I think I''m a little touchy about the burial thing. I would be so upset (from the grave) if my parents insisted on me being embalmed and go in the ground. I *absoultely* want to be cremated. I think the whole burial thing is a racket that takes up precious land. I''m a big believer in dust to dust. My parents are still alive. Needless to say my my father is absolutely mortified by my decision. He will pitch a fit. I have no doubt, even though I have expressed my wishes, he will be angry with my husband. And, we are 45 years old!

So, in the end, I''m unsure that the parents are acting in the best interest of the child or chasing their own wishes.

I have to share something personal. I''ve been personally involved with a decision regarding providing or withholding medical treatment from a loved one. Granted, each case is different. Here''s where I am coming from. My sister had a terminal illness. She could have had operation after operation after operation. All of which were life threatening w/ little to no chance of any improvement except putting off the enivitable death w/ much suffering to prolong her life. In other words, my parents decided they wanted my sister home rather than spend her final months in the hospital. We were one of the first cases of "Hospice" terminal care. There were no hospitals then -only a devoted core of medical professionsals (I understand that isn''t the rule now). She indeed died at home. The day before my then fiance gave her daisy''s (her fav. flower) & she was delighted, lucid & happy. The next morning, she did not awake. Even though my mother knew the end result, she was beside herself. At the time, she seriously questioned their decision. It was only until years later did she realize she gave my sister the quality of life not just quanity. I felt it was truly an act of selflishness by my parents. To not let her suffer anymore. To not let her be alone in a hospital room anymore.

Having witnessed this, while my heart goes out to the Shindler''s, I can''t help but think they are being selfish without realizing it. As an adult, I would not want to live like Terry. I would not want to be a burden. And, I know I wouldn''t want all this attention and my case (and face) to be broadcast all over. I''m a proud women. I wouldn''t want anyone pitying me. I know it''s not about me; but, that is the way I feel. I hope these feelings would override their wanting me to love.
 
Date: 3/30/2005 2:45:52 PM
Author: mrssalvo

just divorce her...
Click to expand...
I really don''t know this - but can he? I just remember years ago, my adopted Grandmother had a long time boyfriend (both in their 70''s) whose wife had been in constant care (severe brain damage) since her''s 40''s. He couldn''t divorce her for a few reasons. Admittedly, one being her becoming a ward of the state.
 
i read today that the pope is on a feeding tube as well...
 
The media thing relly bothers me....supposedly she had an eating disorder, which would suggest that no matter what she did, she was never pleased w/her own looks....how would she feel to be paraded in front of the cameras...whether she were to "live" or die, she needs to be treated with privacy and respect...I think it is inappropriate to show her image on TV and in print since she can''t give consent for that, either!!!
I am in the same boat w/ Fire and Ice....had to do something similar w/ my dad...of course he was older and not w/eyes open, but we knew he wouldn''t want to "live" the way he was...would have been totally paralyzed at the very least....I questioned the doctor, who assured me theer was nothing left but primitive brain cell for breathing and that was about it....I am confident he did not feel anything....
 
Date: 3/30/2005 3
6.gif
0
6.gif
3 PM
Author: mostlywatching
Try this article from CNN on why the husband gets to decide.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the aricle. It does help explain why he gets to decide. It just proves even more how we must put it in writing what our wishes would be and hope that it would eliminate a legal battle. It''s all just so very sad....
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top