Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Legalized Murder
Author Message
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #1
 
What You Need to Know about Terri Schiavo
March 7, 2005

by Carrie Gordon Earll

Terri Schiavo's fight for life has been widely publicized in the media but do you know the facts?
Terri Schindler Schiavo is a 41-year old disabled Florida woman at the center of an on-going legal despite between her estranged husband, Michael, and her parents.

In 1990 at 26-years of age, Terri collapsed in her home when her heart temporarily stopped, cutting off oxygen to her brain and leaving her severely brain damaged.

Terri is not dying or terminally ill; she is not brain-dead or in a coma. She is an otherwise healthy mentally disabled woman. The diagnosis that she is in a “vegetative state
03-16-2005 11:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #2
 
Follow up information:

<a href='http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0035607.cfm' target='_blank'>http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0035607.cfm</a>
03-16-2005 11:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JTiger Offline
Grand Master Sexaaayyyy
*

Posts: 16,068
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 282
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Germantown
Post: #3
 
If her feeding tube is removed, Heavan forbid if anyone of us sustains a head injury and falls into a coma for a period of time like 4 days. Just cut off his tube, it's what he would have wanted. THis is me saying "I MIGHT WAKE UP." This should concern all of us.
03-16-2005 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gruehls
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #4
 
Mark Davis
Zeal for 'life' in Schiavo case blinds us to the unknown

07:10 PM CST on Tuesday, March 15, 2005




These are busy times for pro-lifers. Beyond the abortion battleground lie several issues that also attract interest and energy.

The debate over euthanasia asks whether people in certain dire medical circumstances should be able to secure a physician-assisted death. The debate over life support asks what we should do when people in comas or persistent vegetative states have not made their wishes clear.

That is the dilemma that brings us to the case of Terri Schiavo, whose feeding tube will be removed Friday in Florida unless intervention efforts succeed.

The world now watches to see what will happen to this 41-year-old woman whose 1990 cardiac arrest robbed her brain of oxygen and robbed her loved ones of the vibrant woman they had known.

She has lain in care facilities for 15 years as battles have raged around her. Should she be kept alive indefinitely? Did she once relate to her husband a wish to be spared this suspended animation if such a fate befell her? He says yes, but is he a reliable soul, what with his new family and divided attention?

The key to settling the whole matter lies with the most important question: What would Terri Schiavo want?

Many of us who like to say we value life have pounced on the Schiavo case with an activist vigor that has attracted waves of support from people who believe life is held in lower regard in this era of Kevorkian suicide machines and abortion on demand.

We are energized by our obvious success on the abortion issue. Hearts and minds are being won over to the harsh realities of abortion and the moral wisdom of choosing life.

But for those teetering at the end of life – or others who endure long, mute, immobile years that strip life of much if not all meaning – the call is much more difficult.

Countless passionate voices have jumped into that void to create a brigade fighting to keep Terri alive. Using the logic of "erring on the side of life," they argue that when exact wishes are unknown, better to keep people on life support rather than discontinue it.

There is a strong logical and moral basis for that view. But what bothers me as Terri's date with destiny draws near is the unquestioning certainty of the people shouting for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the state Legislature – anybody –to keep that feeding tube attached.

I would ask each of them a question they certainly are not asking themselves: What if this is not what she wants?

The best evidence we have is husband Michael Schiavo's testimony that his wife said she never wanted to be kept alive this way. Sadly, that "best evidence" is greatly flawed by suspicion about his motives. But what else do we have?

We have her parents, who want to "take care of her," which sounds so wonderful and loving that many say Michael should just go away and let them keep her alive for many more years.

Except I ask again: What if this is not what she wants? What if she is living for Friday and the opportunity to escape her corporeal prison and go be with God?

That topic presumes a conscious awareness that she may not even have. But I hear not one speck of concern from the activists supposedly acting on her behalf that they might be condemning her to an indefinite extended hell from which she may seek a blessed escape.

I sense that many are banging the drum not primarily for Terri but for their own political "life agenda," which contains many praiseworthy things but which cannot tell us whether we are doing what she wants.

No one should conversely presume that they know for certain that she wants out. Anyone emphatic about removing her tube should be equally chastened by the uncertainty over her wishes.

When Terri dies after her tube removal, I will soberly and prayerfully hope that her wish has been granted. I would say the same if her parents were to win custody and keep her alive for years.

Anyone approaching her case without such a reservation is not thinking about it enough.


<a href='http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/all/stories/031605dnedidavis.9f11f.html' target='_blank'>Zeal for life blinds us?</a>
03-16-2005 12:03 PM
Quote this message in a reply
blah Offline
Just doing the splits
*

Posts: 11,539
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Stretching
Location: Just outside Uranus

CrappiesBlazerTalk AwardDonatorsSkunkworksSurvivor Runner-up
Post: #5
 
JTiger Wrote:If her feeding tube is removed, Heavan forbid if anyone of us sustains a head injury and falls into a coma for a period of time like 4 days. Just cut off his tube, it's what he would have wanted. THis is me saying "I MIGHT WAKE UP." This should concern all of us.
Just for the record, you want to be taken off life support immediately, right JTiger?
03-16-2005 12:03 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #6
 
gruehls Wrote:Mark Davis
Zeal for 'life' in Schiavo case blinds us to the unknown

07:10 PM CST on Tuesday, March 15, 2005


But for those teetering at the end of life – or others who endure long, mute, immobile years that strip life of much if not all meaning – the call is much more difficult.

Except I ask again: What if this is not what she wants? What if she is living for Friday and the opportunity to escape her corporeal prison and go be with God?

Anyone approaching her case without such a reservation is not thinking about it enough.

<a href='http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/all/stories/031605dnedidavis.9f11f.html' target='_blank'>Zeal for life blinds us?</a>
I'm sorry, but this article is what infuriates me. The author has not done research. Terri Schaivo has moments of consciousness. She is not in a coma, she is not some lifeless inanimate object.

Save this debate for where it's appropriate. Using it here is part of the problem. It is pure deceit.

Quote:I would ask each of them a question they certainly are not asking themselves: What if this is not what she wants?

Then why don't you ask "them"?
03-16-2005 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #7
 
blah Wrote:
JTiger Wrote:If her feeding tube is removed, Heavan forbid if anyone of us sustains a head injury and falls into a coma for a period of time like 4 days.&nbsp; Just cut off his tube, it's what he would have wanted.&nbsp; THis is me saying "I MIGHT WAKE UP."&nbsp; This should concern all of us.
Just for the record, you want to be taken off life support immediately, right JTiger?
Just for the record, this is NOT life support (in the traditional sense). It's food and water.

If removed, she will die of thirst. A fairly cruel way to die.
03-16-2005 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JTiger Offline
Grand Master Sexaaayyyy
*

Posts: 16,068
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 282
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Germantown
Post: #8
 
blah Wrote:
JTiger Wrote:If her feeding tube is removed, Heavan forbid if anyone of us sustains a head injury and falls into a coma for a period of time like 4 days.&nbsp; Just cut off his tube, it's what he would have wanted.&nbsp; THis is me saying "I MIGHT WAKE UP."&nbsp; This should concern all of us.
Just for the record, you want to be taken off life support immediately, right JTiger?
Uhhh, NO. I might wake up and have something to contribute. If it's my time then God will make that call.
03-16-2005 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blah Offline
Just doing the splits
*

Posts: 11,539
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Stretching
Location: Just outside Uranus

CrappiesBlazerTalk AwardDonatorsSkunkworksSurvivor Runner-up
Post: #9
 
JTiger Wrote:
blah Wrote:
JTiger Wrote:If her feeding tube is removed, Heavan forbid if anyone of us sustains a head injury and falls into a coma for a period of time like 4 days.&nbsp; Just cut off his tube, it's what he would have wanted.&nbsp; THis is me saying "I MIGHT WAKE UP."&nbsp; This should concern all of us.
Just for the record, you want to be taken off life support immediately, right JTiger?
Uhhh, NO. I might wake up and have something to contribute. If it's my time then God will make that call.
You haven't yet and you are not even in a coma.....jk 03-wink
03-16-2005 01:28 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tigerjoe Offline
Fan of Mesaboogie and PRS
*

Posts: 1,295
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Bon Secour

DonatorsDonators
Post: #10
 
I think, in this case, if they allow her to dehydrate and starve to death, that would be most inhumane and sick. I can not speak for what state she is truely in as I have only seen snipets of video and read differing opinions. I also can not judge the quality of her life and what is right and wrong in regards to the families feelings.

The whole debate surrounding this is a very difficult one and I can agree with opinions from both sides in most cases. i.e. I think if you require any machine to sustain life, then you or your immediate family should have the option, without any interference, to not use the machines to live. On the other hand, there are pacemakers. They are machines as well but the quality of life is vastly different. These are but a few examples of a multi-faceted issue.

Personally, I can say that if I were in her situation, I would not want to live another 15 years that way. I would not want to burden my family with the time required to 'upkeep' me nor bear what must be an insurmountable financial burden. However, I would hope that they let me die via a more humane way than starvation.

jw
03-16-2005 01:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gruehls
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #11
 
DrTorch Wrote:I'm sorry, but this article is what infuriates me.&nbsp; The author has not done research.&nbsp; Terri Schaivo has moments of consciousness.&nbsp; She is not in a coma, she is not some lifeless inanimate object.

Save this debate for where it's appropriate.&nbsp; Using it here is part of the problem.&nbsp; It is pure deceit.

where is a debate on terri schiavo appropriate, if not in a thread devoted to the position that she is being murdered? and particularly where you articulate positions (moments of consciousness, surgically inserted feeding tubes to keep her alive because she cannot swallow food or liquids are not "life support," etc.) which are clearly at odds with the findings of multiple courts and multiple doctors ?

Quote:I would ask each of them a question they certainly are not asking themselves: What if this is not what she wants?

Quote:Then why don't you ask "them"?

is that question directed to me, or to the author of the article?

here's a little timeline on the schiavo case:

December 1963… Terri's birth date
November 1984… Terri & Michael marry
February 1990… Terri suffers cardiac arrest and a severe loss of oxygen to her brain
May 1990… Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy
July 1990… Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center
November 1990… Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies
January 1991… Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon
July 1991… Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy
May 1992… Michael and the Schindlers stop living together
January 1993… Michael recovers $1 million settlement for medical malpractice claim involving Terri's care; jury had ruled in Michael's favor on allegations Terri's doctors failed to diagnose her bulimia, which led to her heart failure; case settled while on appeal
March 1994… Terri is transferred to a Largo nursing home
May 1998… Michael files petition for court to determine whether Terri's feeding tube should be removed; Michael takes position that Terri would chose to remove the tube; Terri's parents take position that Terri would chose not to remove the tube
February 2000… Following trial, Judge Greer rules that clear and convincing evidence shows Terri would chose not to receive life-prolonging medical care under her current circumstances (i.e., that she would chose to have the tube removed) [READ]
April 2000… Terri is transferred to a Hospice facility
January 2001… Second District Court of Appeal affirms the trial court's decision regarding Terri's wishes [READ]
April 23, 2001… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision [READ]
April 23 or 24, 2001… Trial court orders feeding tube removed
April 24, 2001… Terri's feeding tube is removed
April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file motion asserting they have new evidence regarding Terri's wishes
April 26, 2001… Trial court denies Terri's parents' motion as untimely
April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file new legal action against Michael Schiavo and request that the removal of Terri's feeding tube be enjoined; the case is randomly assigned to Judge Quesada
April 26, 2001… Judge Quesada grants the temporary injunction, orders Terri's feeding tube restored
July 2001… Second District rules that Judge Greer erred in denying the motion alleging new evidence and, in essence, orders the trial court to consider whether new circumstances make enforcement of the original order inequitable; Second District also reverses the temporary injunction and orders dismissal of much of the new action filed before Judge Quesada [READ]
(uncertain)… Terri's parents detail their reasons why enforcement is inequitable: (1) new witnesses have new information regarding Terri's wishes, and (2) new medical treatment could sufficiently restore Terri's cognitive functioning such that Terri would decide that, under those circumstances, she would continue life-prolonging measures; Terri's parents also move to disqualify Judge Greer
(uncertain)… Trial court denies both motions as insufficient
October 2001… Second District affirms the denial of the motion to disqualify and the motion regarding the new witnesses; the appellate court reverses the order with regard to potential new medical treatments and orders a trial on that question with doctors testifying for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor [READ]
March 2002… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision [READ]
October 2002… Judge Greer holds a trial on the new medical treatment issue, hearing from doctors for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor; Terri's parents also assert that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state
Schindlers file emergency motion for relief from judgment based on a 1991 bone scan report indicating Terri's body had previously been subjected to trauma
November 22, 2002… Following trial, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion for relief (new medical evidence motion), rules that no new treatment offers sufficient promise of improving Terri's cognitive functioning and that Terri is, in fact, in a persistent vegetative state [READ]
November 22, 2002… On this same day, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' emergency motion related to the 1991 bone scan [READ]
June 2003… Second District affirms the trial court's decision denying Schindlers' motion for relief from judgment [READ]
August 2003… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision [READ]
September 2003… Terri's parents file federal action challenging Florida's laws on life-prolonging procedures as unconstitutional
October 10, 2003… Federal court dismisses Schindlers' case
October 15, 2003… Terri's feeding tube is disconnected
October 20, 2003… Florida House passes a bill to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube
October 21, 2003… Federal court rejects injunction request
October 21, 2003… Florida House and Senate pass a bill known informally as "Terri's Law" to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube [READ]; Governor signs the bill into law and immediately orders a stay; Terri is briefly hospitalized while her feeding tube is restored
October 21, 2003… Michael brings suit against the Governor, asking to enjoin the Governor's stay on grounds "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional; Judge Baird rejects Michael's request for an immediate injunction, allowing the tube to be restored, and requests briefs on the constitutional arguments involving the new law
November 7, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor's motion to dismiss Michael's suit and have case litigated in Tallahassee
November 20, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor's request for the judge to recuse himself
December 1, 2003… Guardian ad litem appointed under "Terri's Law" to advise Governor submits report to Governor [READ]
December 10, 2003… Second District rejects Governor's effort to have Judge Baird disqualified
April 2004… Second District affirms Judge Baird's decision denying Governor's motion to dismiss and have case litigated in Tallahassee [READ]
May 2004… Judge Baird declares "Terri's Law" unconstitutional on numerous grounds [READ]
June 2004… Second District certifies "Terri's Law" case directly to the Florida Supreme Court
July 2004… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment based on Pope John Paul II speech
September 2004… Florida Supreme Court affirms Judge Baird's ruling that "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional [READ]
October 2004… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on Pope John Paul II speech) [READ]
December 1, 2004… Governor asks U.S. Supreme Court to review Florida Supreme Court's decision declaring "Terri's Law" unconstitutional
December 29, 2004… Second District affirms (without written opinion) Judge Greer's ruling denying Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment
January 6, 2005… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, alleging Terri never had her own attorney, that the trial court impermissibly applied the law retroactively, and that the original trial on Terri's wishes violated separation of powers principles
January 24, 2005… U.S. Supreme Court declines review in "Terri's Law" case
February 11, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' latest motion for relief from judgment [READ]


<a href='http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html' target='_blank'>THE TERRI SCHIAVO INFORMATION PAGE</a>

i happen to agree with you doc, that the best choice is to always err on the side of sutaining life. but i disagree with your view of how things got to where they are, and whether or not decent, thoughtful and competent people have weighed every aspect of this case from a legal/medical perspective.
03-16-2005 01:34 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ccs178 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,912
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: 39402

CrappiesCrappiesDonators
Post: #12
 
So, what about the death penalty? Is it legalized murder?
03-16-2005 01:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JTiger Offline
Grand Master Sexaaayyyy
*

Posts: 16,068
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 282
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Germantown
Post: #13
 
I'm sure many will not agree with me on this board, but I believe the death penalty is legalized murder. However, this may be better for a new thread.
03-16-2005 02:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #14
 
gruehls Wrote:
DrTorch Wrote:I'm sorry, but this article is what infuriates me.  The author has not done research.  Terri Schaivo has moments of consciousness.  She is not in a coma, she is not some lifeless inanimate object.

Save this debate for where it's appropriate.  Using it here is part of the problem.  It is pure deceit.

where is a debate on terri schiavo appropriate, if not in a thread devoted to the position that she is being murdered? and particularly where you articulate positions (moments of consciousness, surgically inserted feeding tubes to keep her alive because she cannot swallow food or liquids are not "life support," etc.) which are clearly at odds with the findings of multiple courts and multiple doctors ?

Quote:I would ask each of them a question they certainly are not asking themselves: What if this is not what she wants?

and whether or not decent, thoughtful and competent people have weighed every aspect of this case from a legal/medical perspective.
The author didn't cite these "differing opinions", and even if it's implied, it's a ridiculous opinion. I've seen the videos, and you can see them too.

I say save the debate for someone who's brain dead, or at least comatose for a decade. That's a tough question. This however, is not that question.

Quote:
Quote:Then why don't you ask "them"?

is that question directed to me, or to the author of the article?

To the original author.

Quote:i happen to agree with you doc, that the best choice is to always err on the side of sutaining life. but i disagree with your view of how things got to where they are,

Fair enough. I'm not even sure I would say "err on the side of sustaining life" in some extreme cases. Those are hard questions.

I'm talking about a woman who's on video as saying, "Mommy" as she reaches for her mother. We're talking about death by dehydration, not by removing a machine that assists the heart or lungs, and a brain that doesn't respond to this change.

These are the facts that need to be explicitly publicized before this becomes a debate over pulling the plug on life-support.
03-16-2005 02:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gruehls
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #15
 
DrTorch Wrote:The author didn't cite these "differing opinions", and even if it's implied, it's a ridiculous opinion.  I've seen the videos, and you can see them too.

the videos were examined extensively by the court. i have seen parts of many of them, though none in their entirety, and have never seen anything remotely resembling coherent speech, much less an awareness of who was in the room.

Quote: (2nd District Opinions)Since 1990, Theresa has lived in nursing homes with constant care. She is fed and hydrated by tubes. The staff changes her diapers regularly. She has had numerous health problems, but none have been life threatening.

Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs.

 

Although the physicians are not in complete agreement concerning the extent of Mrs. Schiavo's brain damage, they all agree that the brain scans show extensive permanent damage to her brain. The only debate between the doctors is whether she has a small amount of isolated living tissue in her cerebral cortex or whether she has no living tissue in her cerebral cortex.

Quote:I say save the debate for someone who's brain dead, or at least comatose for a decade.  That's a tough question.  This however, is not that question.

i think that's precisely the question they examined, repetitively.

Quote: (2nd District Opinion) The testimony in this case establishes that Theresa was very young and very healthy when this tragedy struck. Like many young people without children, she had not prepared a will, much less a living will. She had been raised in the Catholic faith, but did not regularly attend mass or have a religious advisor who could assist the court in weighing her religious attitudes about life-support methods. Her statements to her friends and family about the dying process were few and they were oral. Nevertheless, those statements, along with other evidence about Theresa, gave the trial court a sufficient basis to make this decision for her.

In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did.

had she clearly expressed her desires via a living will, would you argue the same position? as for the videos, they were addressed by the court, in part, as follows:

Quote: At first blush, the video of Terry Schiavo appearing to smile and look lovingly at her mother seemed to represent cognition. This was also true for how she followed the Mickey Mouse balloon held by her father. The court has carefully viewed the videotapes as requested by counsel and does find that these actions were neither consistent nor reproducible. For instance, Terry Schiavo appeared to have the same look on her face when Dr. Cranford rubbed her neck. Dr. Greer testified she had a smile during his (non-videoed) examination. Also, Mr. Schindler tried several more times to have her eyes follow the Mickey Mouse balloon but without success. Also, she clearly does not consistently respond to her mother. The court finds that based on the credible evidence, cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli.
03-16-2005 02:32 PM
Quote this message in a reply
fsquid Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 81,289
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 1821
I Root For: Memphis, Queens (NC)
Location: St Johns, FL

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesMemphis Hall of Fame
Post: #16
 
remove the tube, she's done. Its been 12 years and the only sign of life is swallowing saliva? If I was in this state, I'd hope to have it removed too so I can go to the upper room.
03-16-2005 05:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


T-Monay820 Offline
Get Rotor-vated!
*

Posts: 5,397
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation: 49
I Root For: Duke, VPI
Location: Norfolk, VA
Post: #17
 
U.S. House OKs Bill to Delay Schiavo Case

By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The House passed legislation late Wednesday intended to delay the removal of the feeding tube keeping alive a brain-damaged woman whose husband has been given permission by a state court to allow her to die.

Earlier in the day, a Florida appeals court refused to block the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. For years her husband has battled her parents over his efforts to allow her to die, which he contends she would prefer rather than live in a vegetative state.


The House bill, passed on a voice vote, would move such a case to federal court. Federal judges have twice turned down efforts by the parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, to move the case out of Florida courts, citing a lack of jurisdiction.


Senate Republicans are introducing a separate bill to give Schiavo and her family standing in federal court, and they hope it can be debated on Thursday, a GOP aide said.


Under the House legislation, a federal judge would decide whether withholding or withdrawing food, fluids or medical treatment from an incapacitated person violates the Constitution or U.S. law. It would apply only to incapacitated people who had not left directives dealing with being kept alive artificially and for whom a state judge had authorized the withholding of food or medical treatment.


Schiavo, 41, suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped temporarily, and court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, says she told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents disagree that was her wish and say she could improve with proper treatment.


Florida Circuit Judge George Greer has granted Michael Schiavo permission to remove the feeding tube, a ruling a state appellate court upheld Wednesday. Without the feeding tube, which the state court allowed to be removed as early as Friday, Terri Schiavo would likely die in one to two weeks.


"What's going on in Florida regarding Terri Schiavo is nothing short of inhumane," said House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., who introduced the bill with Rep. Dave Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla.


Some House members criticized the bill, which Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., called "a dangerously reckless way to deal with some serious issues."


"It does not deal just with feeding tubes. It would allow intervention in any decision affecting any kind of medical care. Read the bill," Nadler said.
03-16-2005 11:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCF_AlumniLXA Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,178
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 20
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
 
fsquid Wrote:remove the tube, she's done. Its been 12 years and the only sign of life is swallowing saliva? If I was in this state, I'd hope to have it removed too so I can go to the upper room.
I agree with you here, i feel bad for this woman. If it was me I would have them pull my tube and be happy...
03-17-2005 10:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
fsquid Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 81,289
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 1821
I Root For: Memphis, Queens (NC)
Location: St Johns, FL

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesMemphis Hall of Fame
Post: #19
 
Looks like this woman will be on her way to see the Lord in a week.
03-18-2005 04:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HorseGlue Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 267
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 3
I Root For: CMU
Location:
Post: #20
 
What happened to this lady is terrible, and I couldn't imagine being in the parents shoes. Having said this, this whole issue makes me sick. Especially how politicians have gotten involved on both sides not because they really care, but to exploit it for political gain. This makes me vommit.

Folks, I'm not a doctor, but it doesn't take a brain surgeon(no pun intended) to figure this out. There is no dispute among the medical commnity about her mental state. However, there is pleanty of dispute among pundints and think tanks on how to spin this and exploit people's lack of education on basic human physiology, and that's what you're hearing through the media.

Here is a fact that I've seen spun 100 ways from Sunday simply by using semantics: Is she brain dead? Yes, no, maybe, kinda, etc. The answer is techincally she is not entirely brain dead, but ALL of the areas of higher function (the Cerebrum) in her brain are dead. This is an indisputable fact. All you have to do is look at a brain scan, it is all black and shows no activity. The only surviving portion of her brain is the brain stem, which is responsible for reflexes and basic body functions such as heartbeat, breathing, sleeping, etc. The area of her brain that processes pain is also dead.

The brain is a giant bundle of nerves and as we know nerve damage DOES NOT HEAL, espescially in the case of brain damage. There are cases where one area of the brain is damaged and other areas adapt to compensate, but in this case the total Cerebrum is dead, so it cannot happen. It is nothing more than wishful thinking to say that she will get better or "wake up from it" Is she alive? Yes, but not alive in the human sense.

Having said all of this, it's still a difficult decision to say if her parents or her husband should be able to make the decision. Who is harmed by keeping her alive? This is a very difficult issue.
03-22-2005 03:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.