Terri Schiavo's Parents Seek Divorce on Her Behalf - Page 7

Trilby · 03-23-2005, 01:15 PM

Let Terri GO. I've seen minions like Terri. Let her go. That is the only humane thing to do.

Kitsune · 03-23-2005, 01:20 PM

I'm just wondering why they won't let the parents feed her if they want to.

Because it isn't their decision. They no longer had any say in the matter the day Terri said "I do" and the papers got signed with the state. It is just as questionable for a random person on the street to make this decision as it would be for her parents to say the tube should be re-inserted because they would be willing to care for her. Until her husband dies, they have zero say in this matter.

If they decide that she shouldn't live out her days with a feeding tube, fine. Euthanize her.

The same people that want this shell of a person to do nothing other than continue processing food pumped into her for years to come are the same ones that made that option entirely illegal.

Troubleshooter · 03-23-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitsune

The same people that want this shell of a person to do nothing other than continue processing food pumped into her for years to come are the same ones that made that option entirely illegal.

If you look here you'll see where that is part true, part travesty.

wolf · 03-23-2005, 01:45 PM

The focus, right now, is on Terri Schindler-Schiavo.

Lets step back from this one emotionally laden case for a moment, and deal with the larger issue. What impact does this have on other right-to-life/death cases?

This is particularly an issue for Florida, at least by anecdotal evidence, because of the large numbers of old people they have ...

If someone is so advanced in their senility that they require tubal feedings for nutrition, have no awareness of themselves or their surroundings, can we starve grandma to death? What about a profoundly mentally retarded child? Can we expose him on a hillside like our forebears?

Troubleshooter · 03-23-2005, 01:47 PM

According to that bill Bush signed in Texass, yes you can.

If the patient runs out of money...

wolf · 03-23-2005, 01:52 PM

Federal Medicare law says you have to treat to the point of stabilizing, regardless of insurance status. (no, I haven't read the whole law, just parts of EMTALA relevant to what I do, so I don't actually know what medicare has to say about continuing care of this kind. And yes, medicare law does apply even when the patient is not covered by medicare.)

Happy Monkey · 03-23-2005, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

Euthanize her.

Kevorkian's in prison (or is he out by now? either way).

Removal of life support is the only legal way to let a human die. It happens all the time. The only unique aspect to this case is that Jeb Bush interfered. Would I prefer that euthanasia were available for cases similar to this? Sure. But it isn't.

Quote:

But if you had a sick dog that needed to be put to sleep, and you decided to let it starve to death, you'd have cops at your door in nothing flat. Why is it ok to starve Terri?

Of course, dog comparisons are meaningless, but this one is not just meaningless - it's wrong. If your dog loses consciousness and stops eating, no cops would show up with a feeding tube and a poison needle and force you to choose. You are well within your rights to let a dog in a coma die with no medical intervention. But no matter what the laws are for dogs, they are completely irrelevant to this case.

Trilby · 03-23-2005, 02:05 PM

The law is more clear on dogs than it is on people.

Kitsune · 03-23-2005, 02:09 PM

If someone is so advanced in their senility that they require tubal feedings for nutrition, have no awareness of themselves or their surroundings, can we starve grandma to death?

Yes. It happens every single day all over the country and is considered normal. Everything from a yellow "DNR" band on the wrist, simply pulling the plug, or turning off assisted breathing is just as much a part of life as the previous years of the person who passes from this world once it happens.

Can we expose him on a hillside like our forebears?

This is a bit of a stretch -- we might as well equate removing the feeding tube with tieing the sick down in a wooden boat and pushing them out to sea after we set it on fire while we're at it. All indications from those concious after the feeding tube has been pulled report that it is not a painful way to expire, nor is it cruel. It is a method a lot of people decide is okay. It is a method a lot of spouses decide is okay.

If I end up this way at some point in my life and am beyond recovery, I sure as hell want to be removed from life support. Should the government deny me, or my next of kin, that right, then the thousands of people who elect to die that way every day are going to be placed into question.

For a moment, put aside the emotional aspect of this case, which should have remained within the families to begin with before the media blew it up, and think about the legal side that could affect all of our families in the future.

Happy Monkey · 03-23-2005, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

The law is more clear on dogs than it is on people.

Like I said, dog comparisons are meaningless, but I've seen the comparison made in several places, including on the "news", so I felt it ought to be addressed.

Trilby · 03-23-2005, 02:18 PM

No one should have to suffer what Terri is suffering. leave her alone and let her be. Those who would "save" her have no idea of her day-to-day life. They should be sentanced to live a day of her life. Things would then change.

mrnoodle · 03-23-2005, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitsune

[If I end up this way at some point in my life and am beyond recovery, I sure as hell want to be removed from life support. Should the government deny me, or my next of kin, that right, then the thousands of people who elect to die that way every day are going to be placed into question.

and that's probably the only lesson that anyone will learn from this. make a living will -- this stuff doesn't just happen to 'other people.'

I don't think it's fair to throw this back in Bush's face, though. What appears to be hypocrisy might be a change of heart. There's no one involved in this case (or the discussion of it) who really knows what to do. They've picked sides, because that's what people do. But I don't think anybody is intending evil. To demonize Bush for being pro-life while simultaneously demonizing him for being the opposite is disingenuous. There are a multitude of easy targets in this situation, and maybe they all deserve a shot across the bow; but I'm no longer certain that there is a "right" answer in the Terri Schiavo case.

although my mom babysat Tommy DeLay and his brothers when he was a 5-year old in Laredo TX, and he was apparently a little brat then, too.

Undertoad · 03-23-2005, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

No one should have to suffer what Terri is suffering. leave her alone and let her be. Those who would "save" her have no idea of her day-to-day life. They should be sentanced to live a day of her life.

I tried it last night... slept 8 hours, didn't recall any dreams. That's a third of her day right there.

Kitsune · 03-23-2005, 02:30 PM

but I'm no longer certain that there is a "right" answer in the Terri Schiavo case.

There is, and its this simple:

Terri is married to Michael Shiavo.
Terri has been braindead for fifteen years and is unable to live unassisted.
Michael, being legal next-of-kin, is having her life support removed.
End of story.

There are no legal questions in this what-so-ever. As to why this has ended up in court repeatedly and is currently in federal hands at the consideration of the f'ing president of the United States, I have no idea. The media and other groups have done a very nice job of twisting this case into "her rights are being denied" when the only right clearly being blocked in this case is her husband's in what he has intended to do what is legally right for years: let her pass away as she wanted.

It doesn't matter what the parents say.
It doesn't matter that the method she passes away with is starvation.
It doesn't matter that some people who have little understanding of Terri's condition think she might miraculously recover or that she might somehow be concious.

Just as there shouldn't be any question in her condition, there is no question of what is "right" in this case.

The president of the United States and Congress should, by all means, be facing a lawsuit for their involvement and their attempts to remove the rights of a married couple.

Happy Monkey · 03-23-2005, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

I don't think it's fair to throw this back in Bush's face, though. What appears to be hypocrisy might be a change of heart.

Quote:

To demonize Bush for being pro-life while simultaneously demonizing him for being the opposite is disingenuous.

Criticising someone for hypocracy is disingenuous?

03-23-2005, 01:15 PM	#91
Trilby Slattern of the Swail Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,654	Let Terri GO. I've seen minions like Terri. Let her go. That is the only humane thing to do. __________________ In Barrie's play and novel, the roles of fairies are brief: they are allies to the Lost Boys, the source of fairy dust and ...They are portrayed as dangerous, whimsical and extremely clever but quite hedonistic. "Shall I give you a kiss?" Peter asked and, jerking an acorn button off his coat, solemnly presented it to her. —James Barrie Wimminfolk they be tricksy. - ZenGum

03-23-2005, 01:45 PM	#94
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	The focus, right now, is on Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Lets step back from this one emotionally laden case for a moment, and deal with the larger issue. What impact does this have on other right-to-life/death cases? This is particularly an issue for Florida, at least by anecdotal evidence, because of the large numbers of old people they have ... If someone is so advanced in their senility that they require tubal feedings for nutrition, have no awareness of themselves or their surroundings, can we starve grandma to death? What about a profoundly mentally retarded child? Can we expose him on a hillside like our forebears? __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-23-2005, 01:47 PM	#95
Troubleshooter The urban Jane Goodall Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 3,012	According to that bill Bush signed in Texass, yes you can. If the patient runs out of money... __________________ I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. - Aristotle

03-23-2005, 01:52 PM	#96
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	Federal Medicare law says you have to treat to the point of stabilizing, regardless of insurance status. (no, I haven't read the whole law, just parts of EMTALA relevant to what I do, so I don't actually know what medicare has to say about continuing care of this kind. And yes, medicare law does apply even when the patient is not covered by medicare.) __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-23-2005, 02:05 PM	#98
Trilby Slattern of the Swail Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,654	The law is more clear on dogs than it is on people. __________________ In Barrie's play and novel, the roles of fairies are brief: they are allies to the Lost Boys, the source of fairy dust and ...They are portrayed as dangerous, whimsical and extremely clever but quite hedonistic. "Shall I give you a kiss?" Peter asked and, jerking an acorn button off his coat, solemnly presented it to her. —James Barrie Wimminfolk they be tricksy. - ZenGum

03-23-2005, 01:20 PM	#92
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	I'm just wondering why they won't let the parents feed her if they want to. Because it isn't their decision. They no longer had any say in the matter the day Terri said "I do" and the papers got signed with the state. It is just as questionable for a random person on the street to make this decision as it would be for her parents to say the tube should be re-inserted because they would be willing to care for her. Until her husband dies, they have zero say in this matter. If they decide that she shouldn't live out her days with a feeding tube, fine. Euthanize her. The same people that want this shell of a person to do nothing other than continue processing food pumped into her for years to come are the same ones that made that option entirely illegal.

03-23-2005, 02:09 PM	#99
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	If someone is so advanced in their senility that they require tubal feedings for nutrition, have no awareness of themselves or their surroundings, can we starve grandma to death? Yes. It happens every single day all over the country and is considered normal. Everything from a yellow "DNR" band on the wrist, simply pulling the plug, or turning off assisted breathing is just as much a part of life as the previous years of the person who passes from this world once it happens. Can we expose him on a hillside like our forebears? This is a bit of a stretch -- we might as well equate removing the feeding tube with tieing the sick down in a wooden boat and pushing them out to sea after we set it on fire while we're at it. All indications from those concious after the feeding tube has been pulled report that it is not a painful way to expire, nor is it cruel. It is a method a lot of people decide is okay. It is a method a lot of spouses decide is okay. If I end up this way at some point in my life and am beyond recovery, I sure as hell want to be removed from life support. Should the government deny me, or my next of kin, that right, then the thousands of people who elect to die that way every day are going to be placed into question. For a moment, put aside the emotional aspect of this case, which should have remained within the families to begin with before the media blew it up, and think about the legal side that could affect all of our families in the future.

03-23-2005, 02:18 PM	#101
Trilby Slattern of the Swail Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 15,654	No one should have to suffer what Terri is suffering. leave her alone and let her be. Those who would "save" her have no idea of her day-to-day life. They should be sentanced to live a day of her life. Things would then change. __________________ In Barrie's play and novel, the roles of fairies are brief: they are allies to the Lost Boys, the source of fairy dust and ...They are portrayed as dangerous, whimsical and extremely clever but quite hedonistic. "Shall I give you a kiss?" Peter asked and, jerking an acorn button off his coat, solemnly presented it to her. —James Barrie Wimminfolk they be tricksy. - ZenGum

03-23-2005, 02:30 PM	#104
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	but I'm no longer certain that there is a "right" answer in the Terri Schiavo case. There is, and its this simple: Terri is married to Michael Shiavo. Terri has been braindead for fifteen years and is unable to live unassisted. Michael, being legal next-of-kin, is having her life support removed. End of story. There are no legal questions in this what-so-ever. As to why this has ended up in court repeatedly and is currently in federal hands at the consideration of the f'ing president of the United States, I have no idea. The media and other groups have done a very nice job of twisting this case into "her rights are being denied" when the only right clearly being blocked in this case is her husband's in what he has intended to do what is legally right for years: let her pass away as she wanted. It doesn't matter what the parents say. It doesn't matter that the method she passes away with is starvation. It doesn't matter that some people who have little understanding of Terri's condition think she might miraculously recover or that she might somehow be concious. Just as there shouldn't be any question in her condition, there is no question of what is "right" in this case. The president of the United States and Congress should, by all means, be facing a lawsuit for their involvement and their attempts to remove the rights of a married couple. Last edited by Kitsune; 03-23-2005 at 02:37 PM. Reason: I am a grammatical retard

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)