What did you agree to?--Shiavo case

Quote:
If your support for killing her is predicated on a belief that she can't swallow, but in fact she can, does that change your opinion?



You're taking liberties with that statement. I support allowing her to die a natural and dignified death.

Similarly, your comparison to animal cruelty is a stretch. Let's say your dog were hit by a car and suffered terminal brain damage. The vet says "He's breathing on his own, but that's all he'll ever be capable of. I'm afraid we have to put him down." But, you tell the vet, "But he's my buddy. Keep him alive." The vet cuts a hole in his side and inserts a plastic tube directly into the stomach. OK, he's ready to go home now.

The "buddy" part of that relationship is now forever just a memory. All that's left is the "container" that your buddy once occupied. After 3 weeks and thousands of dollars later, you come to that realization. Do you "pull the plug" or continue to fantasize that a miracle will have your buddy running around the yard and barking any day now?
Is it animal cruelty to pull the tube and let him die? Or was it animal cruelty to insert the tube and prolong the misery?
 
You can have him killed. If you simply starve him and anyone finds out, you likely face serious legal problems. Ditto for refusing to give him water.

Again, they have not had her hooked up to any equipment. It doesn't cost a fortune to provide simple hospice care like this. Most of what care she has gotten could be provided at home, by family members. Have a nurse come by once or twice a week to check & see if any help is needed. We had to do more for my dad before he died.

Terri's parents have offered to pay for all of her care, so I don't see where the cost is a factor. If hubby can't afford it, they can and are willing so it doesn't fall on anyone else to cover it.
 
Quote:
It doesn't cost a fortune to provide simple hospice care like this.
Terri's parents have offered to pay for all of her care, so I don't see where the cost is a factor.



This is a full time job (for someone) to care for a terminal patient. Every 20 min. there is a cleanup; bowel, urine, drool. The "feeding" is much more complicated than just funneling french fries down the tube. The premixed formula cannot be bought at the Safeway store. There are undoubtedly other medications to be administered, as well. The hole into her stomach is an open wound requiring cleaning and medication. She has to be rotated every 30 min. to keep the bedsores to a minimum. I could not take on that task as a lifetime commitment and still keep my sanity.

There must be more to this story than we are aware of, especially if the husband is unwilling to delegate guardianship and financial responsibility to the parents. There must be a healthy insurance settlement involved, upon her expiration.
 
And your last line raises yet further questions.

Is a large insurance settlement a good reason for a man to expediet his wife's death? Or is that no longer considered motive for murder?

Should she die that dignified death so that he can hurry up & collect?
 
So, which is it? Murder or natural death? If allowing natural death by removing artificial interventions is murder, then why is it done all the time? I had to make that same decision once myself.
 
It would be murder if this isn't what she wanted, and/or if she is in this condition due to his actions. There are apparently reasons to consider that he may be responsible for it.

Statements by various care professionals that they were forbidden by him to provide various care & therapies bother me. Things that he is supposed to have said bother me. The fact that he says (with no proof, which would have avoided this whole mess) that this is what she wants, when the rest of her family who knew her for a great many years more than he did say they never knew her to say anything of the sort.

I have no solid answers as to what should be done. I do have a great many things to be suspiscious of. I dunno if I'm right, but I have the feeling that this guy is about to complete a years-long quest to kill his wife (not compassionately carrying out her wishes, I mean intentionally doing her in) & a large part of our society thinks it's the right thing to do.
 
Your suspicions are valid, but unconfirmed. I'm sure the FL legal system has already begun delving into them, as well as some we may not have considered. The minute the DA can support some of these allegations, you can bet the husband will be in court faster than Michael Jackson can get in front of a TV camera.
 
here is my point of view ,a tomato or a carrot does not respond when spoken too! the footage I've seen is enough for me to know that she is NOT A VEGETABLE ! maybe not a fully functioning part of society! I had a friend that they thought was in a vegetative state! thought! they took her off of life support and took away her feeding tubes 2 weeks later she was still alive and her daughter asked that they hook her feeding tubes back up! months later as she recovered she asked them why they were so cruel to her and tried starve her! she was fully aware of what they were doing ! and they {the family} were told that she was a vegetable and wouldn't know one way or the other! I can tell you this I wouldn't want to stand before GOD on judgment day and be the one to try and explain to him why I murdered this woman! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif
 
If she can't swallow then what will it hurt to try and let someone give her some water while a vedio was tapeing the event so we can see if this is true. Her own mother is not aloud to even moisten her mouth. What are they trying to hide. Also if her husband was so loving wouldn't he be by her side?
 
Because she can't swallow, the water would flow straight into her lungs. Swallowing triggers muscles that close off the trachea (windpipe) and opens the esophagus (foodpipe) to allow food and liquid to enter the stomach. The part of the brain that controls those muscles doesn't work anymore. The trachea is stuck in the open position. That's the reason her mouth is always open. She's a mouth breather.
From what I understand, the husband decided that 15 years was too long to be celebate. He has a new honey in the wings.
 
Just like Stu I don't take one side or the other , My only input is the fact that we ALL require food and water to survive. If the is the only support she has been receiving is food and water then where is the difference from her to one of us other than the fact we can speak etc. I have read all the hoopla in the news and in the papers , my only comment is if all she requires is food then whats the problem?? People have lost their freaking minds when it comes to compassion for another human on this planet.
 
AS for myself I don't believe anything the media puts out, they are very good at manipulating information to furher their own agandas or beliefs like taking things out of context not telling the whole story ect. ect.. And unless you know these people personally you really don't know the whole truth. So put yourself in his shoes what has his life been like the last fifteen years even more importantly put yourself in her shoes would you want to live like that for fifteen years if she does know whats going on she maybe in a total hell not having any ablity to do anything someone having to take care of your bodily funtions and messes,your muscles deteriorating and any pain from laying there. some peolpe talked about a dignified death what about a dignified life.
I for one would probably want to die and I think I don't know but( I never been in this situation) I don't think I could watch a loved one live like that either.
I do believe in God and I do believe there is a better place after death.And death is a natural part of life why do we cling to it no matter what the cost?
 
Last edited:
The CAT scans of Shiavo's brain have finally been made public. Now we can see what the medical experts have been basing their statements on. 97% of her brain is in a state of deterioration. This is what they mean by "irreversible" brain damage. When brain cells die, they do not ever, EVER, regenerate. They are lost and gone forever. More brain cells will continue to die, until the involuntary reflexes that control breathing, also die. Then she will need artificial resuscitation for breathing. She will never be anything more than what we see now, but she will be less. She will continue to have muscles atrophy, and bones will contort as arms and legs are disfigured. That is all that's left for her. Fortunately, she has no consciousness, no awareness, no pain.
 
Peggy Noonan has written an article on the subject that I think is quite good. Worth a read:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006460

PEGGY NOONAN

In Love With Death
The bizarre passion of the pull-the-tube people.

Thursday, March 24, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

God made the world or he didn't.

God made you or he didn't.

If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Most--not all, but probably most--of those who support Terri Schiavo's right to live believe the above. This explains their passion and emotionalism. They believe they are fighting for an invaluable and irreplaceable human life. They are like the mother who is famously said to have lifted the back of a small car off the ground to save a child caught under a tire. You're desperate to save a life, you're shot through with adrenaline, your strength is for half a second superhuman, you do the impossible.

That is what they are trying to do.

They do not want an innocent human life ended for what appear to be primarily practical and worldly reasons--e.g., Mrs. Schiavo's quality of life is low, her life is pointless. They say: Who is to say it is pointless? And what does pointless even mean? Maybe life itself is the point.

I do not understand the emotionalism of the pull-the-tube people. What is driving their engagement? Is it because they are compassionate, and their hearts bleed at the thought that Mrs. Schiavo suffers? But throughout this case no one has testified that she is in persistent pain, as those with terminal cancer are.

If they care so much about her pain, why are they unconcerned at the suffering caused her by the denial of food and water? And why do those who argue for Mrs. Schiavo's death employ language and imagery that is so violent and aggressive? The chairman of the Democratic National Committee calls Republicans "brain dead." Michael Schiavo, the husband, calls House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "a slithering snake."

Everyone who has written in defense of Mrs. Schiavo's right to live has received e-mail blasts full of attacks that appear to have been dictated by the unstable and typed by the unhinged. On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

What does Terri Schiavo's life symbolize to them? What does the idea that she might continue to live suggest to them?

Why does this prospect so unnerve them? Again, if you think Terri Schiavo is a precious human gift of God, your passion is explicable. The passion of the pull-the-tube people is not.

I do not understand their certainty. I don't "know" that any degree of progress or healing is possible for Terri Schiavo; I only hope they are. We can't know, but we can "err on the side of life." How do the pro-death forces "know" there is no possibility of progress, healing, miracles? They seem to think they know. They seem to love the phrases they bandy about: "vegetative state," "brain dead," "liquefied cortex."

I do not understand why people who want to save the whales (so do I) find campaigns to save humans so much less arresting. I do not understand their lack of passion. But the save-the-whales people are somehow rarely the stop-abortion-please people.

The PETA people, who say they are committed to ending cruelty to animals, seem disinterested in the fact of late-term abortion, which is a cruel procedure performed on a human.

I do not understand why the don't-drill-in-Alaska-and-destroy-its-prime-beauty people do not join forces with the don't-end-a-life-that-holds-within-it-beauty people.

I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

There are passionate groups of women in America who decry spousal abuse, give beaten wives shelter, insist that a woman is not a husband's chattel. This is good work. Why are they not taking part in the fight for Terri Schiavo? Again, what explains their lack of passion on this? If Mrs. Schiavo dies, it will be because her husband, and only her husband, insists she wanted to, or would want to, or said she wanted to in a hypothetical conversation long ago. A thin reed on which to base the killing of a human being.

The pull-the-tube people say, "She must hate being brain-damaged." Well, yes, she must. (This line of argument presumes she is to some degree or in some way thinking or experiencing emotions.) Who wouldn't feel extreme sadness at being extremely disabled? I'd weep every day, wouldn't you? But consider your life. Are there not facets of it, or facts of it, that make you feel extremely sad, pained, frustrated, angry? But you're still glad you're alive, aren't you? Me too. No one enjoys a deathbed. Very few want to leave.

Terri Schiavo may well die. No good will come of it. Those who are half in love with death will only become more red-fanged and ravenous.

And those who are still learning--our children--oh, what terrible lessons they're learning. What terrible stories are shaping them. They're witnessing the Schiavo drama on television and hearing it on radio. They are seeing a society--their society, their people--on the verge of famously accepting, even embracing, the idea that a damaged life is a throwaway life.

Our children have been reared in the age of abortion, and are coming of age in a time when seemingly respectable people are enthusiastic for euthanasia. It cannot be good for our children, and the world they will make, that they are given this new lesson that human life is not precious, not touched by the divine, not of infinite value.

Once you "know" that--that human life is not so special after all--then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag" (Wall Street Journal Books/Simon & Schuster), a collection of post-Sept. 11 columns, which you can buy from the OpinionJournal bookstore. Her column appears Thursdays.
 
hum 97% gone ! well they claim we only use 5% of our brain to begin with,so she's in about the same shape as 95% of the human race!
I have a friend that was born with cerebral palsey {spelling} he can't walk,talk,clean himself or feed him self! but he laughs when some one tells a joke and cries when some thing is sad, but he requires someone to feed him ! should he be left to starve to death?
I think that people do hang on to loved ones out of selfishness at times.which I feel can be just as cruel as letting them die ! but to satrve someone to death is in no way merciful!
the fact is when God is ready for you he will take you ! no matter how much technology they have hooked up to you!I say give her back her food and let God do the rest!
 
Quote:
hum 97% gone ! well they claim we only use 5% of our brain to begin with,so she's in about the same shape as 95% of the human race!



If that's your idea of a joke, it falls short!
 
Quote:
Quote:
hum 97% gone ! well they claim we only use 5% of our brain to begin with,so she's in about the same shape as 95% of the human race!



If that's your idea of a joke, it falls short!



I thought it was funny.And pretty close to what I've seen in my day.

That was a good article Stu.
 
I am just simply fed up with hearing all of this. Put food and water in front of her. If she responds, anything at all, feed her and let her drink. If not, then she can't "function".

These videos that the news are showing are "supposedly" recent, however, I have also heard that they are 12 years old.

There seems to be a matter of disagreement for everyone. Let's boil this down to facts.

She can not eat or drink on her own.

She has irreversible brain damage.

She will be no better in another 15 years.

I personally don't want my tax dollars to take care of her, or anyone else in this physical state. We have children starving, that can respond, and laugh and talk, and make a difference for our country.

We have parents out there with kids that they are trying to do the very same thing for, on their own, with their own money. If Schiavo's parents want to do this for her, get here home so they can keep doing this things for her. I don't see them trying to get custody of her.

I applaud her hubby for staying with her the length of time he did, but he let go many years ago. Why can't the parents? She will never be their "little girl" again.

I have many more thoughts, but I just am mentally exhausted over this subject. I don't want to watch the news because of this crap. I don't want to open a newspaper because of this crap. I don't want to listen to the radio because of this crap (thank goodness for XM). I don't want to sign onto the internet because this is always the headline on my homepage.

Rather than spending time and effort on this, couldn't they do hundreds of thousands local interest stories about a set of parents, almost at poverty level, raising their kids to be productive members of society. Wait, there isn't controversy in that, and it doesn't sell.
 
"If Schiavo's parents want to do this for her, get here home so they can keep doing this things for her. I don't see them trying to get custody of her."

You haven't been looking. They have been trying to do just that. There is no need for one dime of taxpayer money to pay for her care, her parents & siblings have stated that they are willing to provide all of her care & pay for all costs. Her husband refuses. They can't do it unless he allows it & he won't.
 
Back
Top