• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

right to life - right to die

sweetsymphony, the fact is that whether you like it or not it's completely legal to remove life support systems in this country. That's been established for almost 40 years. Any family can do it any time they wish to. The difference in this case is that the family can't agree. The argument is not about whether it is right or wrong to remove life support, but about who in this case has the right to decide.
 
Her brain is dead. There’s no debate there. She’s not Terri Schiavo.


Sweetsymphony, do you have a living will? Have you instructed your family to keep you alive at all costs no matter by what means, and no matter what condition you maybe in for the rest of your life? Even if it means you are a vegetable in a hospital bed for 30 to 40+ years? Are you saying you would want your family to do to you what’s been done to this girl?
Click to expand...

HER BRAIN IS NOT DEAD. SHE IS NOT A VEGETABLE.

There is so much misinformation in the media - from both sides.

And no, I do not have a living will, but my husband and I have an appointment to make one within the next week. However, I don't worry about myself. I'm not that selfish. My husband and parents know what I want, and I know they would respect that. The difference between myself and Terri is that I did not marry a monster. My husband wouldn't gallivant away with another woman and have two children with her. Michael Schiavo apparently forgot his marriage vows (you know, the parts about "forsaking all others" and "until death do us part"). My husband wouldn't deny me proper care and rehabilitation (which has been proven, albeit ignored, in the courts and media).

What bothers me most is that the "courts" in America think they have authority over every single citizen. What if they decide that people with Alzheimer's, Parkinsons, Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS), or any other hard-to-deal-with person doesn't have the quality of life they think they should, so we should just put an end to them.
 
sweetsymphony said:
HER BRAIN IS NOT DEAD. SHE IS NOT A VEGETABLE.
Click to expand...
So for the last years she has been able to think, unable to communicate or express anything at all... :eek: Then I find it very cruel to keep her alive.
 
hay82 said:
So for the last years she has been able to think, unable to communicate or express anything at all... :eek: Then I find it very cruel to keep her alive.
Click to expand...
The reason she has lost her ability to think or communicate is because her so-called husband has not allowed the nurses and doctors to provide rehabilitation and therapy for her for the last 15 years. Back in 1990 when this first happened to her, she could still speak and move around. But the strength and therapy she needed to get better and continue her abilities was denied her. She probably will be better off dead now - I'm not disputing that. The fact remains that her husband could have helped her, but he didn't.
 
Don't know a lot about the case, although it is also being discussed in Denmark. But I would say that where she is now is not something I would want anyone to be in, and I do think that she will be better of dead.
 
Whether or not the husband is guilty of anything is not the discussion here. Upon her death if they autopsy her and find that her condition was possibly brought on by strangulation by her husband (a theory that’s been floated around) then I have no problem charging him with murder and taking him to trial. No matter what you think of him, she doesn’t deserve the situation she’s in today. Even if he’s guilty of everything you stated does that justify keeping her alive on a feeding tube today?

You know they have machines and tests that monitor brain waves and brain functions. Do you think more than a handful of doctors would be stating that she’s brain dead without having some kind of clinical evidence to back up the claim? In this day and age with malpractice suits?

I noticed you did not specifically answer the question about how you would want your family to handle you if you were in a “persistent vegetative state” and your prognosis was that this would be your life for 30 to 40 years? I assume you would not want that and that your living will is going to state that.
 
Motokid said:
I noticed you did not specifically answer the question about how you would want your family to handle you if you were in a “persistent vegetative state” and your prognosis was that this would be your life for 30 to 40 years? I assume you would not want that and that your living will is going to state that.
Click to expand...
You are correct. If efforts to save my life - in any capacity or quality - were futile, I would want my family to allow me to die (but not by starvation). I personally (and strongly, if you can't tell) believe that efforts to save Terri would not be futile. But back to answering my question... If I were truly braindead (which, again I state, Terri is not), I would much prefer to die than to stay here in this cruel, twisted, depressing world.
 
Motokid said:
You know they have machines and tests that monitor brain waves and brain functions. Do you think more than a handful of doctors would be stating that she’s brain dead without having some kind of clinical evidence to back up the claim? In this day and age with malpractice suits?
Click to expand...
I must also state that her husband has not allowed any MRI to be performed on her. This would prove, much more so than an old CT Scan, in what state her brain truly is.
 
So this situation, that’s gone to trial before something like 14 different judges over the past 15 years, and now making it’s way to the Supreme Court is all based on hearsay from the husband about her wishes, and based on numerous doctors reports that are not based on clinical data and fact, but based on the doctors just refusing to admit this girl might have some chance at normal life because the husband directs them to say that???? I don’t believe you could get so many medical professionals to band together on the side of “non-treatment” without having some pretty concrete evidence that her brain is only functioning at the most basic, primitive level.

Technically I guess her entire brain is not dead. I’ve heard that the brain stem is still functioning and that’s the part that keeps her from needing help breathing and blinking her eyes and such. The doctors also state she’s blind past about 18 inches from her head.

Maybe I’m just being naïve, but I find it hard to believe that so many medical professionals would turn their backs on this women if there was any kind of hope just because the husband was an ass.

Do you give any credibility to the idea that maybe the places you’re getting your information from are so biased towards making this guy look like a monster for no other reason than to keep her alive?
 
Motokid said:
Do you give any credibility to the idea that maybe the places you’re getting your information from are so biased towards making this guy look like a monster for no other reason than to keep her alive?
Click to expand...
If I had no sources whatsoever - left or right, biased or unbiased - to get any information from, I would still know that we should not starve any living creature to death. As absurdly simple as that seems to some, it really is that black and white.
 
I just wanted to share this article and snippet with regards to starvation at end of life. And, after recently watching a man with stomach cancer die on hospice, I can vouch for the lack of eating being part of death.

[ snip ]
In the evolving saga of Terri Schiavo, the prospect of the 41-year-old Florida woman suffering a slow and painful death from starvation has been a galvanizing force.

But medical experts say going without food and water in the last days and weeks of life is as natural as death itself. The body is equipped with its own resources to adjust to death, they say.

In fact, eating and drinking during severe illness can be painful because of the demands it places on weakened organs.

"What my patients have told me over the last 25 years is that when they stop eating and drinking, there's nothing unpleasant about it -- in fact it can be quite blissful and euphoric," said Dr. Perry G. Fine, vice president of medical affairs at the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization in Arlington, Va. "It's a very smooth, graceful and elegant way to go."

Schiavo, who hasn't had any food or water since Friday, has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years that makes it impossible for her brain to recognize pain, doctors say.

"Her reflexes with respect to thirst or hunger are as broken as her ability to think thoughts or dream dreams or do anything a normal, healthy brain does," Fine said.

But even if her brain were functioning normally and she were aware of her condition, she would be comfortable, doctors say.

"The word `starve' is so emotionally loaded," Fine said. "People equate that with the hunger pains they feel or the thirst they feel after a long, hot day of hiking. To jump from that to a person who has an end-stage illness is a gigantic leap."

Contrary to the visceral fears of humans, death by starvation is the norm in nature -- and the body is prepared for it.
[ /snip ]


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...23.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=2&cset=true
 
sweetsymphony:

What is an acceptable way to let her die? Lethal injection? Would that make this all better? It would certainly be less controversial, but does it change anything in the end? Would this not be such a passionate subject if they just put a needle in her arm and she went to sleep forever?
 
Krys said:
"It's a very smooth, graceful and elegant way to go."
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know I feel really graceful and elegant when I've gone without a few meals.

I don't know how any one (including "doctors") can say they know how Terri feels right now.

But one thing I do know - having your face hollow out, your skin flake off, your tongue and mouth swell up, and your major organs fail is anything but graceful.
 
Motokid said:
What is an acceptable way to let her die? Lethal injection? Would that make this all better? It would certainly be less controversial, but does it change anything in the end? Would this not be such a passionate subject if they just put a needle in her arm and she went to sleep forever?
Click to expand...
I'm against killing her by any means, but you'd think in a "civilized" nation, we would at least do it humanely. We lethally inject convicted serial killers. We lethally inject dogs and cats and other animals. Whether or not Terri can feel or sense anything is totally irrelevant. Depriving anyone or anything of food and water (not even ice chips!) is barbaric and disgusting.
 
Sweetsymphony:

"If efforts to save my life - in any capacity or quality - were futile, I would want my family to allow me to die (but not by starvation)."

"I'm against killing her by any means"

Is it killing her, or letting her die? Is she living, and by what definition?

You are sounding hypocritical. You can't have it both ways.

edit: forgot this one from you: "She probably will be better off dead now - I'm not disputing that."
 
Saving Terri's life is more likely than trying to explain this to you.

"If efforts to save my life - in any capacity or quality - were futile, I would want my family to allow me to die (but not by starvation)."
This would not be murder.

"I'm against killing her by any means"
I'm against murder. We're murdering Terri.

Is it killing her, or letting her die? Is she living, and by what definition?
Click to expand...
It is killing her. Murdering. Outright.

"She probably will be better off dead now - I'm not disputing that."
She will be better off dead. But that doesn't mean it's up to us to murder her.

And while we're playing the "quote game" - you wanna explain this one to me?

#1 - "Her brain is dead. There’s no debate there. She’s not Terri Schiavo."

#2 - "Technically I guess her entire brain is not dead."

Or maybe it would be best for us to end our discussion. You think it's okay to kill. I do not.
 
Of coarse you’re not going to change my mind, and I know your mind will never sway either, but thinking about the situation from every possible angle is the reason for the thread. Discussing your beliefs and having them challenged can only make them stronger in this instance. Right?

I don’t see how “allowing you to die” is fine and dandy, but allowing Terri to die is murder.
How will your family allow you to die if not by withholding something that will keep you alive that you can’t get, or do for yourself? Like either food, or breathing, or medication?

And the word “entire” in the quote from me defines what I said. Experts say most of her brain, the part that really would make her Terri is dead. The Brain stem is still functional which is why she does not need a respirator to breathe.

Also, if you read almost every article on this you’ll notice that most of the doctors that are quoted are “court appointed”, not Michael Schiavo appointed. I assume court appointed means they make independent evaluations that are not “bullied” by Michael Schiavo. Otherwise wouldn’t Michael Schiavo be charged with obstructing justice?

Are you giving up on me?
 
No, I'm not giving up on you. For some reason, my passion always overrides my desire to not waste my time.

Of coarse you’re not going to change my mind, and I know your mind will never sway either, but thinking about the situation from every possible angle is the reason for the thread. Discussing your beliefs and having them challenged can only make them stronger in this instance. Right?
Click to expand...
My beliefs cannot be any stronger. I have already thought about this issue from every angle. My mind is made up.

I don’t see how “allowing you to die” is fine and dandy, but allowing Terri to die is murder.
How will your family allow you to die if not by withholding something that will keep you alive that you can’t get, or do for yourself? Like either food, or breathing, or medication?
Click to expand...
We do not know what Terri wanted. Even if she may want to die because her quality of life is low - we don't know for sure. That's really where the difference lies. If I cannot 1000% positively cannot be revived, I would be dead anyway. If there's a 1% chance I can live, I want to live. Terri is alive. She can breathe on her own, see on her own, and she tries to communicate. She does not deserve this slow death (no matter how "graceful" some want us to believe it is).

And the word “entire” in the quote from me defines what I said. Experts say most of her brain, the part that really would make her Terri is dead. The Brain stem is still functional which is why she does not need a respirator to breathe. Also, if you read almost every article on this you’ll notice that most of the doctors that are quoted are “court appointed”, not Michael Schiavo appointed. I assume court appointed means they make independent evaluations that are not “bullied” by Michael Schiavo. Otherwise wouldn’t Michael Schiavo be charged with obstructing justice?
Click to expand...
I have read practically every article on this. I know most of the doctors and experts are court appointed. What I also know is that the majority of our courts and judges were hand-selected and appointed by President Clinton, who is a leader of a party that vehemently supports the right to kill those who have no choice. You can't get around this - you simply can't. It's part of the issue. In fact, it's the heart of this issue.
 
Did you know that President Bush, while Governor of Texas signed a bill that would allow nursing homes to "unplug" terminal patients that could no longer afford medical care regardless of what's stated in a persons living will?

Larry King brought that up, not Michael Schiavo.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

And I must say that I am pretty amazed that you brought all this around to Bill Clinton. That's really got me floored.

Somehow conservative, right-wing, christian American's have the ability to blaim eveything under the sun in the last 15 years on Bill Clinton. Now this is his fault too. Wow.

Maybe I'll give up on you. At least for this thread, and for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top