Terri Schiavo

I haven't noticed anything here about this here is a link and some text to her parents web page. Terrisfight.org

Terri was 26 years old when she suffered brain damage from a sudden collapse. Terri receives her food and water by means of a feeding tube. Terri's other bodily functions are physically stable. Terri smiles, laughs and cries. Terri recognizes voices and responds. At times, she vocalizes sounds, trying in her best way to speak. Terri is not a brain dead vegetable as characterized by her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo nor a houseplant as implied by his attorney. Terri is not on a respirator or any artificial life support. She is a living human being and needs to be granted an opportunity to recover. Terri has not had any progressive rehabilitation or arousal therapy in more than ten years.

In a trial initiated by Michael Schiavo, Circuit Court Judge, George W. Greer, issued a verdict delivered on February 11, 2000. Judge Greer granted authorization to discontinue Terri's feeding tube. Judge Greer's verdict will cause Terri to die in 10 to 14 days. Terri's death will be by painful starvation.

Wit's... check this out... Fla. Gov. Orders Feeding Tube Reinserted .

FWIW... I was hoping this topic would not come up here on CPF. This is a hot issue and I know that I for one have VERY strong opinions about this. Before this even gets started, I'll warn everyone.... if this is a hot button for you, then you might want to consider staying away. That's my plan.

I can understand how this might "warm up a bit" but its getting chilly here and well-- I have been following this young ladys disasters, and I am having problems with my emotions on her case. I feel her husband is just wanting it over with so he can get the insurance. I can see her parents wanting to keep her alive as long as possible. I have seen miracles happen like people in comas for 10 and 15 years come out of a coma. I see she has reflexive actions and may not be able to respond on a level we can see but she is a living being and to terminate her life by slowly starving her to death smacks of aushwitz (SP) experimentation. If she had her wishes in print before the surgery it would be a different matter but we are to assume that her mate knows what her wishes were even though they weren't stated.I had to watch my parents be kept alive with machines and it was the worst thing I could imagine, but I could not and would not tell them to pull the plug. I would not want to be kept alive just to make the hospital richer. I have do not resuscitate papers written up so there will not be any ambiguities concerning my care.My parents did not.

I would agree with not wanting machines to keep me alive. But she doesn't have machines to keep her alive, her heart beats and her lungs breathe without assistance. Here is something more to stir things up a bit.
'Murder is legal if we say so'
I will point out this is Internet and WND isn't non biased but is there anyone here who is on the judges side in this?
I'd like to know why, any links would be welcome.

The judge made his decision after hearing all sides. I have to go with the judges decision. It is sad that this case is now being politicized.
oldgrandpajack

[ QUOTE ]
oldgrandpajack said:
The judge made his decision after hearing all sides.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, but keep in mind that the judge did not decide whether she should die or not, he just decided that it is (legally) up to her husband to decide. This is an important difference.

I personally think that it is not a good thing when someone with so much personal involvement (financial and otherwise) makes such a decision. If anybody, then a neutral person (or entity) should decide, someone who cannot gain or lose anything by her death.

Personally, I think that every human being has the right to decide whether he/she wants to die or not. She is currently not in the position to express her will, and others do not have the right to do so for her. Society may try to help her (feed her), this is human, but it should not decide whether she wants to live or not.

And don't forget: Her parents, siblings and friends are willing to care for her, and somebody else is spending tons of money on lawyers to end her life. This is absurd. Why doesn't her husband go for the divorce. He could then marry his new girlfriend as he wishes to do. But he would have to give up the money she was granted by the courts for her recovery. Makes you think, does it?

In many states her condition is not grounds for divorce. My ex's mother has been semi-vegative for 30 years and her father is unable to divorce her. This has created a financial burden on him that you can't believe....if he goes to work, the STATE takes his income to pay for her care.

as a medical professional, i have seen this sort of thing play out many times. i have also served on several medical ethics committies.

here is my opinion: this is a really tough case.

i have read that she had discussed this issue with her husband, and he states that she did not want to be kept alive in this type of state. you can argue for years over what she meant/wanted, since her wishes dont appear to be in writing. we do not know what transpired between them in private.
regardless, perhaps her husband is trying to carry out her wishes. in my opinion, if he is trying to carry out her wishes, he is entitled to do so, without intervention from anyone else. this is only my opinion. see the caveat below.

i have seen video of her on tv. she does move, and appears loosely responsive. whether she understands anything is up for debate. i have seen many in similar circumstances that vocalize and make many faces, sometimes in response to stimuli--with no apparent coherancy whatsoever.

i would be interested in the result of her neuro exams. there may not be much there, or, she may have some facilities intact. she did not appear to be "comatose" or necessarily in a persistent vegetative state--but i have not assessed her, nor seen the reports. she does, however, appear to be severely compromised.

her "life" may be full of problems (and perhaps some happiness as well). if she is truly laughing, this is wonderful. yet, it could also be a double edged sword: she may also feel negative emotions such as desperation, fear and pain.

problems? no matter how well she is cared for, there is a great probability that she will/has suffered: skin breakdown, irreversible muscle atrophy and tendon shortening, gi anomolies requiring corrective surgery, infections/pneumonia, gu infections necessitating surgical diversion, pressure ulcer reqiuring skin grafts/flaps, etc, etc, etc.

again, i dont know her case in particular, so i am unsure as to what complications she has/has not encountered. i am just pointing out that her road may very well be a painful one. i personally question the quality of her life.

people do occasionally spontaneously recover from coma, but the odds become worse as time goes on--and there may be neuro evidence of irreversible brain damage (though the brain can sometimes "reroute" to re-establish some brain function).

the caveat: i dont like the idea of her starving to death.

this is only my opinion:

1. i dont like the idea of her starving to death--it just seems inhumane.

2. i believe that IF her husband is acting on her behalf (i know--how do you prove this?), he should have the right to do so, without judicial intervention. being her husband and intimate partner, he should have the final say on her behalf--her family is a close second.

3. IMO, it is not anyone else's right to dictate what actions are to be taken (judges, religious groups, politicions).

4. i cannot judge the husband's motivations without learning all of the details--without spin. definitely not possible. all of the media will/has run with every juicy little tidbit--whether it is true or not.

perhaps he tried to allow her to heal, but when he saw it wasnt happening, decided to carry out her wishes.
or, maybe he is just an evil sap that wants her gone.

a complex case, indeed.

(in a Forrest Gump voice) and that is all i have to say about that...

Bob

There seems to be no absolutes in that we can't know what Terri wants. This is not black or white, it's a huge gray (matter) area.

What really bothers me is that she will suffer for many days if allowed to starve. Even executed criminals receive a swift death. (I'm against the death penalty because innocent people will die.)

If Terri was a vegetable requiring machinery to live, it may be more humane to turn off the equipment - this is not the case, here.

I stand by what I said earlier.

The only reason a judge was involved was because someone objected to the husbands initial decision. The judge heard everyone's thoughts on whether or not her husband could or should make the decision he made.

I have personally experienced this situation.

My youngest brother had a massive stroke at the age of 29. He would still be on a machine today if he wasn't allowed to pass on. Just because a person can be kept "alive" with modern technology, doesn't mean we should do it.

I was the primary care provider for my Mother. Mom had pancreatic cancer. She had a living will and made me her health care proxy. The doctor wrote a DNR and gave it to me. Mom decided to stay home. I took care of her for 7 weeks. There was no suffering involved. Hospice nurses were there everyday and when ever I called. She had all the morphine needed to keep her pain under control. One family member railed against me after Mom lost the ability to speak for herself. I carried out Mom's wishes. Mom passed away, peacefully, at home with family around her.

The lesson here is that we should all have a living will and assign someone as a health care proxy.

oldgrandpajack

PS: It is sinful that the politicians have gotten involved!

But Old grandpa Jack...

I listen to Glenn Beck a lot. I am not radical about it.

But it has been forbidden for anyone to even TRY to rehabiltate her. Maybe there IS a chance...

And besides. She is NOT ON A MACHINE!!!! She has a feeding tube ONLY. And so if she was to be killed, do you really think STARVING her was the right way???

It is SINFUL that people get "The Right to Die", and "The Right to KILL" mixed up!!!

[ QUOTE ]
oldgrandpajack said:
...The lesson here is that we should all have a living will and assign someone as a health care proxy.


[/ QUOTE ]

...The lesson here is that we should all have a living will and assign someone as a health care proxy.

Amen

Brightnorm

I saw last week or so the start of an interview where the sister of the victim had something to say. Unfortunately I did not have time to hear the interview, but I gathered from a sound bite that there is a lot of curiosity about the cause of injury (husband had something to do with the injury?) and the police and DA are not interested in pursuing the case.

If there is any truth to this, then a court just allowed the suspect to complete a homicide. Gov Bush then in a sense has commuted her sentence.

What exactly was damaged and what was the mechanism of that damage. Like pedalinbob suggested that there may be a way to a more normal life.....cognitive thought, but specialists would have to be allowed to examine her. Apparently the husband has prevented this. If he is the cause, how can he have a say. How much is media hype to get the story. What really is going on here. As time rolls on I think Mrs. Schiavo is becoming an insignificant player in her own story. Truly a very sad deal indeed.

Normally I just come down on the side of the spouse when I hear cases like this, but there are a few things that disturb me about this one.

1. Video of the woman seems to bring into question whether she is really in a vegetative state.

2. Her husband states emphatically that part of his decision is so that he can just get on with his life... he has already had one child with his girlfriend, and has another on the way with her... his wife is apparently in his way.

3. Two of the five doctors who testified did not agree that she is in a vegetative state.

I think it would be foolish to rush forward now with this, when so much time has been spent on it already. There should be a more substantial examination done on the woman to see what her true condition is by qualified medical personnel. If they are not sure she is in a vegetative state, then the parents are right to defend her life.
Even a murderer will not be executed until the case is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Should the life of Terri Shiavo be cast aside with less care?

David <><

Sasha and I talked about this a bit tonight. We agreed that we are at best forming a position from ignorance. We were first exposed to this story a week ago. The folks in Fl probably longer. The family a good part of their adult lives.

I am obstinate about the husband having a choice because I caught a bit of his being criminally cupable. I think he gets no choice, if there is a chance that he created the situation in where she had her heart failure.

All things being neutral, and her state was created because sometimes life is imperfect, neutral observers (doctors) be brought in to examine her to see if there is a chance with the right therapy to achieve recovery. Those doctors would have to come from a country that has socialized medicine and the doctors can not gain monetarily. And if those doctors say that with current medical knowledge, and with nothing even on the horizon for 20 years, let the girl continue her journey.

Read the attached link from the Washingtom Post. There is no hope of this poor lady ever coming out of this coma. She has been like this for 13 years. This has been in the Fla. courts for over 6 years & heard by 19 different judges. NEVER repeat NEVER did any one of these judges feel that the husband was not in a position to make decisions for his wife. I know if I was ever in that state I would not want to be kept alive. We as a society are much kinder to our pets & animals then we are to our fellow humans http://www.msnbc.com/news/983922.asp?0cv=CB10