Feeding tube can be removed from brain-damaged woman

[Shanty Oilish]

http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1065641941277661.xml

The Associated Press
10/8/2003, 3:31 p.m. ET

snip:
"CLEARWATER, Fla. (AP) — A state circuit judge refused Wednesday to delay next week's scheduled removal of the feeding tube keeping a brain-damaged woman alive."

snip: "Michael Schiavo contends his wife would not want to be kept alive artificially, and state courts have supported his right to remove her feeding tube. The Schindlers say their daughter responds to them and could be rehabilitated, despite court-appointed doctors saying she can never recover."

http://www.terrisfight.org/lead.htm = link to page with details of case and timeline. Woman appears alive and occasionally responsive, not on ventilator, just feeding tube. Husband accused by her parents of mismanaging funds and neglect. Starvation is estimated to take a week or two to kill her. He has a fiancee, new family, and has been trying for several years to get his brain-damaged wife euthanized.

[DEMActivist]

1. And this is OUR business, how?

I take it someone thinks "we" know this woman's wishes better than the man she was married to?

You know, for assholes who keep saying we need less government, the right wingers and freepers can't WAIT for Jeb and the government to step in and "save" this woman in a vegetative state.

These kind of life and death decisions are OURS to make, not the government's.

They should leave this man alone to carry out the wishes of his wife and just butt the hell out.

[im4]

4. duh

If you'd take time to research this woman's plight, you'd see it's not as all cut and dry as that. She collapses at home under mysterious circumstances. She is brain damaged from lack of oxygen. Soon after this man receive and huge amount of money in a malpractice suit for her care and rehabilitation, he suddenly remembers she had mentioned that she didn't want to remain on life support (she only has the feeding tube). Not one cent of the money has gone to even attempt to see if this woman can be rehabilitated. The man refuses to divorce her, thus letting her family step in and take over her care. Which seems to me is what they want to do anyway, since that what they've been fighting in court to do. Why not try therapy and see if her condition improves? Why won't the husband allow any type of therapy? He has a child with another woman and another child on the way and plans to marry as soon as the wife dies. And allegedly once ask a nurse if the b**** was dead yet. That really sounds like a husband that has his dear wife's best interest at heart. Why not slit the woman's throat if that's the case. It would be more humane than letting the woman starve. If she is aware, and just not able to communicate clearly she would face days of agony before she dies. What's the harm in seeing if theapy helps? My question is why is the husband so set on this woman dead? People can trash Hummers, which will probably affect all of our insurance rates eventually, to protect the environment, but people can't stand up and give this woman a few months for rehab?

[DEMActivist]

13. Folks, this is a freeper campaign

This woman has been put through hell for 13 years because of the interference of the freepers making it their "pet cause" of the moment. Note how they manage to leave the date of the original injury out of their propaganda.

It's none of our business - it's up to her husband and judge after judge has said so.

[im4]

18. How long have you known about it?

I wasn't aware of it until last month. When I found out about it, I started researching it. What if it was you that was possibly trapped and your spouse that won all that money decided that you just wasn't worth it? And your family decided who cares. Or would you want your family to fight for you?

[DEMActivist]

21. For a long time....

but so what? It's still none of my business.

Look, my Dad lived for more than a year after a stroke. It was living hell for him. He hated every day of it, even though he COULD function and speak. He didn't WANT to live like that and we made him suffer because WE didn't have the courage to let him go. Because WE were selfish. Because WE didn't love him enough to let him go.

When he had his 2nd stroke and the Doctors asked us about life support, we finally had the courage and loved him enough to say no.

This husband has to have great courage to stand against all these fundamentalist jerks for all these years and STILL love her enough to want to carry out her wishes.

This is none of your business. Butt out.

[im4]

26. So why did he sue for her care?

I completely support someone's right to choose not to have artificial life support. I do question this man's motives. Why are you going to sue for her future care and then say ok forget it? If she truely wanted to die, and he knew this, why didn't he just sue for damages? It all seems too highly suspect.

She hasn't had any rehabilitation. Her husband refused to allow it. I'm not saying don't follow the court order ever. I'm saying give the woman some therapy. See how she does.

My family kept my grandma off of life support. My parents have already done their living wills for no life support. I do not want life support. However, if I am not brain dead, there are things in life that I do not want to miss, whether or not I am a "whole" person. And for as much suffering as you father must have endured, I am sure that he cherished the time that the family had: the chance to say all those things we should tell each other and don't.

[DEMActivist]

27. How presumptous of you

I am sure that he cherished the time that the family had

No, you do NOT know any such thing. He was in terrible pain. He lived in an awful hell. He couldn't speak after the first stroke and was so frustrated he would throw things across the room in frustration. He would throw things at us out of complete disgust for the life WE forced him to live.

You know nothing. And to presume you do is beyond arrogant.

[im4]

31. I am not trying to be presume anything or be arrogant

I am truely sorry for the pain that you've suffered. But I would hope that you would stop beating yourself up over it. At the time you did what you thought was right. And that's all any of us can do. No life is free of pain and suffering, but we trust that God something good will come from it in the end. It may not be now or 5 years from now, but it always happens eventually.

My grandma died from cancer. It was so bad that it was actually eating through her insides. I'm sure she would have been more comfortable in a home, but she wanted to be around family. There were days that she didn't recognize family members. She was determined. She was dead set on living to see the new year and insisted on being with the family when I came home from college on Christmas break. And while I know that she was angry and frustrated and in great pain and proud (she refused to allow any male family member to help with a bed pan or diaper), in the midst of it all, she made sure that each family member knew how much she loved them and gave us the chance to let her know the same. She died on Jan. 2 after seeing the first day of the new year. And being away from college, I hadn't had the chance to talk to her as much as I wanted, and being young thinking I had all the time in the world, wouldn't have had the chance to say and hear the things otherwise. She lived months longer than doctors said she would. I know that she was holding on until the family could all be together. She was strong, proud, and filled with faith, and she taught me a lot. And after all these years, she's still teaching me.

Another teacher I had was a man with cerebral palsy. That had extremely limitted control over his body. He had a wonderful outlook on life. I don't know that I could have handled what he did. One of his favorite things to do was trick new people into flipping him out of his wheel chair. There was a certain spot on a path that his wheel would get caught and he would fly out of the chair and land in the sand next to the path. While the new person was having vapor lock, he was laughing hysterically. He couldn't talk, couldn't feed himself, he spoke with a computer that he operated with his toe. He food had to be blended into a paste, and most of it still ended up all over him because he had difficulty swallowing. He was very intelligent. His brain was perfect, his body on the other hand had revolted against him, as he put it. He insisted on going to church camp in the summer so he could be with kids. He wanted to teach. And I don't know if they learned more or if I did.

I'm not saying your position is right or wrong. But, I thought you should know why I feel as I do, as you shared why you feel as you do.

[Shanty Oilish]

22. Doesn't make it unworthy. It's death by starvation of a young disabled

woman.
If she were a dog, euthanasia by slow starvation would be illegal on the grounds of inhumanity. It could take a couple of weeks to die that way, and it is considered torture in every civilized country. If she were a criminal, it would be illegal and outrageous.
She is not comatose, not dying of anything, not guilty of anything, and her husband's behavior through the years since her mysterious "accident" leaves a lot of room for a benefit of the doubt on the side of life. They have only his word that she said, in an emotional moment, that she didn't want to be kept alive in a similar condition; just as they only have her family's word that the marriage was troubled before her disability occurred. What is not in doubt is what her husband did and didn't do with the money awarded for her medical care. She did not receive rehabilitative therapy. Even now, her parents are struggling uphill to get her a temporary reprieve and trial period to determine if she can learn to feed herself.
When the state permits the euthanization of the disabled, who are not even terminally ill, we are all endangered. You don't need to be a freeper to oppose the slow starvation of a disabled woman.

edit: This is not a "let her die" situation. She isn't dying. The issue is whether or not to kill her. If it's ok to kill her, should they not administer death by lethal injection? If lethal injection doesn't seem proper to anyone, why is starvation appropriate?

[im4]

24. Excellent Point

[donotpassgo]

37. I agree with you...Its their business not ours.

But...I fear the freepers may actually be motivated to do soemthing stupid.

What they need is professional help, from the type of people who could help this poor woman "relocate" to a facility that will give her the attention that is needed, without her SOB husband or the SOB judges poking their noses in. Anyone out there know somebody who might help?
I'll throw in $100 bucks to help pay these professionals....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/998007/posts

[newyawker99]

36. Hi im4!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[im4]

38. Hi

someone noticed I'm a newbie. Am I being non-conformist enough? I enjoy a good debate as long as folks don't get ugly. It's a good ways to get different ideas out there. Althought I do feel strongly on issues, I do put opposing views out just to get them talked about. Now, I'm going to have people wondering if I'm a democrat or republican. I am conservative on some issues and liberal on others. Now the trick is to figure out which is which. And I wonder who will resort to ugliness, while others agree to disagree. I actually wondered how long it would be until I got booted out, (got the stop watch going yet?) because I throw out liberalism vs. conservatism stuff. Maybe I'm a centrist? Maybe I'm a democrat? Maybe I'm a republican? Maybe I'm none of the above? Well, let the debates begin...

Thanks for saying hi....

[davidinalameda]

2. may she go quickly and be at peace finally

my thoughts are with her husband but not with her selfish parents who wanted her on artifical life support

this is not living--this is torture

[im4]

6. what artificial life support?

She only has a feeding tube. The husband has blocked any therapy allowing her to learn to be spoon fed. He won a lawsuit for her FUTURE care and ever since he got the money he remembered her wishes, that were never mentioned to anyone but him and some of his family? Never once mentioned this to her family or friends? If he knew her wishes, why did he sue for the money for her care? It just all sounds a little too convenient.

[alarimer]

29. I agree with you

I saw something on this case on 60 minutes or one of those shows. It is not as simple as he would have it. I think his motives are suspect. Since he has not allowed any therapy to occur, no one knows what would happen. Maybe nothing but then at least an attempt was made. I think this guy simply wants her dead. Maybe he caused her accident in the first place. He seems like a sleaze in any case.

[davidinalameda]

43. her parents want her on life support

just let the poor woman die in peace!

[SiobhanClancy]

47. Being starved to death is inhumane

In fact,it is torture. Imagine the outcry if the government decided to use starvation/dehydration as a form of capital punishment. It would not be allowed,on the basis of it being cruel and unusual. An animal shelter would be shut down and its owners prosecuted if they decided to euthanize animals in that manner. Yet a brain-damaged human being,innocent of any crime, can be done away with like this? If Terri were my daughter,Michael Schiavo would have to pray he found a place to hide if he succeeded in having my child tortured to death in this manner. Why doesn't the husband get a divorce and move on? He already has done so,with a live-in girlfriend he intends to marry as soon as he is a widower;in fact,they've already started their new family together. This is outrageous.

[Shanty Oilish]

25. Lethal injection is quick. Starvation is not.

Lethal injection is painless. Starvation is not. It is regarded as torture by all civilized societies.

[Scairp]

28. At Peace?

Is that a joke? They are going to STARVE HER TO DEATH. In what way is that peaceful? She is not brain dead, she is not a respirator and she responds to stimuli. What this is about is money. Her greedy husband wants that money. He has moved on with his life so why not just divorce her? To say that he has a conflict of interest is a gross understatement. Her parents are the ones who should be making these decisions. We aren't allowed to starve a dog to death let alone a human being. Don't you people have any regard for the suffering this poor woman would endure by being starved to death? How callous. She is not a thing and should not be treated as such. And this is no FReeper cause, because I am vehemently opposed to her feeding tube being removed, and I am certainly no goddamn FReeper. So stick it.

[davidinalameda]

44. she's an adult and under law, her husband is her closest living relative

he's the one to make the decision

not her parents

[Kool Kitty]

3. And didn't Jeb Bush try to stick his nose into this, too?

(Or was that in the article?) This is the family's business, actually, I think it is only her husband's business. How dare these people outside the family butt into this?

[Shanty Oilish]

5. Yes and no

Yes, Bush has gotten involved, and no, it's not in the article. Quite possibly these people got involved at the behest of the woman's parents. She is not terminally ill, and left no living will.
I don't see any humanity in slowly starving a disabled woman to death, even if Bush doesn't approve of it.

[Kool Kitty]

7. I do agree about the humanity part,

but i believe it is the family's business. My Mother died of Alzheimer's disease. She was in a vegetative state for 3 years, but she could still swallow. We had to decide if, when she got to the point that she could no longer swallow, whether or not we would allow them to intubate her. My sister and I decided no. If you knew my Mother, she would have preferred to have been put to sleep like a cat when she was unable to care for herself. We had talked about such things with her before she got too ill to know. She died before she got to the unable to swallow point, so the situation was avoided. But the doctor and her attorney made us sign a statement to not have her intubated, so we wouldn't have to deal with any legal problems about it.

[im4]

8. what if....

But what if this woman is alive and well in there and wants to live? What if she could be rehabilitated as many doctors who have examined her has said is possible. She would still be disabled but not to the point she is now. What if she could still have a very fulfilling life, but her husband just wants her out of the picture?

[Kool Kitty]

9. Then they have to thrash it out.Why-what would you do?

[im4]

10. give her a chance

Don't let the family or the husband have custody. The state can appoint a guardian with the womans best interest in mind. (I've worked with mentally ill and mentally retarded adults that have had brain trama related damage). If she doesn't improve with therapy within a predetermined amount of time, then follow the original court order. But, if she does improve give guardianship back to the parents and give the money he won for her care to the woman in trust, so that no one has personal access to it.

[Kool Kitty]

11. How do you know that this woman had a chance

for recovery?

[im4]

12. I've been following her story for a while

A few doctors have said she's a vegetable. Many doctors have said that she could recover (to a degree) if she had access to any therapy at all. Her family has a web site with video of her and document what they've gone through in court. I've got to do a search for it and links to some of the articles I've read.

One of the most incredible people I've ever met could not talk or feed himself. He couldn't walk and had to wear diapers. He couldn't do anything by himself. All of his food had to be blended into a paste. He had a computer that spoke for him using his toe, because he couldn't control his hands. And he was extrememly intelligent and funny. I'm sure he didn't want to live like that. But he was outgoing and happy with what he had. His parents said he had lived longer than doctors said he would. He was 30 something when I knew him. He was a big influence on my idea of a meaningful life was and quality of life really means.

[im4]

15. articles and links

Post: Over a dozen prominent doctors and therapists have stated that with therapy she could be rehabilitated. A handful of doctors maintain she is "comatose" or "vegetative" and will never recover. Nonetheless, the Florida courts have consistently sided with Schiavo and his legal representative, George Felos, the well-known "right-to-die" attorney.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34555
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Post: The woman tries to answer, but the sounds that come from her mouth are not words but vocalizations. Maybe they include "fine" and "yeah" – then again, maybe not. Asked to say "hi," she does. At least she appears to be struggling to oblige and with obvious difficulty makes noises that sound vaguely like that. Or do they?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - -

Terri Schindler-Schiavo before her disability.

Terri Schindler-Schiavo, 39, has not been able to talk for 13 years; not since February 1990, when at the age of 26 she collapsed at her home in St. Petersburg, Fla., and oxygen to her brain was cut off for several minutes. The incident, which has never been satisfactorily explained and has recently raised a host of unanswered questions, left the young woman incapacitated and severely brain-damaged.

Post: During the first trial, held late January 2000, Schiavo told the court he and Terri had talked about life support when her grandmother was in a nursing home, unconscious for weeks and on a ventilator. He testified that Terri had said, "If I ever have to be a burden to anybody, I don't want to live like that."

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

The Schindlers maintain Terri would never have said such a thing, that it would be completely out of character. They emphasize that their son-in-law never mentioned Terri's supposed views when he sued her doctors for malpractice back in 1992 and won a judgment of $1.3 million that was to be earmarked for her care and therapy but was never spent for that purpose.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33877

The family's web site is www.terrisfight.org



1.3 MILLION DOLLARS! That's all his when she dies. Couldn't that be considered a conflict of interest?

[maveric]

14. I'm a nurse in a sub-acute unit of a hospital.

Where 75% of my patients are on life-support of some type. I agree with the husband, she ought to be able to die peacefully. Especially if that was her wish.
I see many people that will never wake up, never improve, but are being kept alive by a family members request, and at a great expense to them and/or an insurance co. Most of these family members are fundies or overly devout catholics that still believe in miracles. They have birthday parties for the patients and bring in vcrs and are in serious denial to the fact that brain death is irreversible, and if anything the patient may feel pain from the equipment, and from the decubitus (bedsores),that they aquire in that state.
I find that extremely selfish.
Let the poor lady pass!

[im4]

16. No one ever said she was brain dead

There is a very good chance that with therapy this womans life could improve dramatically. And working in that environment you must admit that the persons will has a lot to do with recovery. And some things just can't be explained. And I'm not saying that if there is no chance keep her going. I'm saying give her a chance at therapy. She has had none whatsoever.

[Kool Kitty]

17. I understand and appreciate what you are saying,

but, unless this is a member of your family, it is really not up to you. It is up to her (or whoever's) family. That is the only point that I am trying to make. I'm not trying to get you to think like me, I am just saying that if this was a member of my family, I would not want you butting in. It would be up to my family. And on an aside, Mr Bush getting involved seems to be a joke to me. He certainly doesn't seem to be very involved with his own daughter. He should take care of his own before he tells anyone how to take care of theirs. (And as far as the money part goes, I got money when my Mother died, too. Was that a conflict of interest?)

[im4]

19. Thanks.

I realize that. But it seems to me that the her family has been trying. If it were me, I would hope that someone would care enough for me. I just feel there is more to this than meets the eye.

[Kool Kitty]

20. People care for each other differently.

That is why I said that it was up to her family. And I don't feel that people outside the family, that have no idea who the person was before, should get involved. And again, as far as the money goes, you really don't know how expensive any of this is and what might still be owed. I try not to judge that part. I can tell you that my Mother's care was a fortune.

[im4]

23. Conflict

I think the conflict here is he sued to get the money for her care, and then went to court to have the feeding tube removed.

We kept my grandma off of life support. We all knew what she wanted. Even the family members that wanted life support knew that she wouldn't want it and didn't raise a fuss.

I hate to see someone starved to death. But any other way would really open up doors to a place where I don't want to even think about going.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[noonwitch]

32. She's not brain dead and she's not in a coma

Her husband has refused to allow any type of therapy that might help her develop the ability to eat food without the tube. She is conscious-her parents have a website, if you look at the pictures of her, it's obvious that she is not brain dead, but has brain damage.
A feeding tube is not "life support", although it is keeping her alive. She did not leave a living will-are we supposed to take her husband's word for it that she didn't want to live like this? The man who plans to remarry upon her death and keep whatever is left of his settlement? He can divorce her, get remarried and give up the settlement, but no, he's just greedy and wants that money to go to his bank account, not for her care, which is what it was intended to be for.
I rarely agree with freepers, hell, I voted for Michigan's assisted suicide bill in 2000, but they are right on this one. This is not letting someone die quickly by turning off a respirator, it's not someone asking to die, this is starving a woman to death by court order. Her husband is one sick bastard for wanting them to do this to her, and the courts are wrong. There also are allegations that he may have abused her prior to the heart attack that caused the brain damage. I hope that the freepers and Terri's other supporters succeed in this case.

[SiobhanClancy]

35. You are so right..

This case is just unbelievable. I'm appalled that a court refuses to see the husband's obvious lack of suitability as a legal guardian for her. Just because Freepers and fundies support Terri's parents in their cause does NOT mean the cause is not a valid one. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day,as they say. I'm just sickened by this. If I were Terri's mother,and this "son-in-law" was fighting so hard to have my child starved to death,God help him,because there is nothing that I would not do to prevent it. Clearly,Michael Schiavo has moved on with his life and is anxious to remarry. He should divorce Terri so he can do so,and leave her future in the hands of her parents,or at the very least,an objective legal guardian with no personal agenda in the case.

[im4]

33. Would there be the same apathy...?

Remember all the news coverage on the retarded man that was going to be executed in Texas? In reality isn't this the same thing? Aside from the fact that this woman's only crime is living? Technically she won't starve to death. Going without food for a couple of weeks won't kill you. It will be death by dehydration. What does this kind of death entail?

snip: In addition to feeling the pangs of hunger and thirst, the skin, lips and tongue crack. The nose bleeds because of the drying of the mucus membranes. Heaving and vomiting may ensue because of the drying out of the stomach lining. The victim may experience seizures. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34416

How many of us had gone more than a day with out food, let alone water? We'd be arrested for not giving an animal food and water. There is moral and public outcry when we see a child left to fend for herself when mom gets arrested. (Thank God the child was resourceful) What does this say about us as a people when the majority of us couldn't give a flying flip about this? I thought liberals were the ones that were supposed to be the "bleeding hearts". I thought liberals were the ones that were going to defend the ones that can't defend themselves. Maybe I should rethink my ideas of liberalism. Tell me if I'm wrong. I thought that the conservatives were the one's that were heartless drones, more concerned with themselves than the poor down troddened. Have liberals become a group of people more concerned with themselves and their own agendas that they've forgotten about the real people here? What is going on here? It's his right to let his wife die, so no one should do anything. It's a father's right to beat his wife and child into bloody pulps (spanking is not abuse, but I digress). That's his right. It's his family. We shouldn't get involved. It's his right to deal with his family in the best way he sees fit. Are we getting the double standard here yet?

[im4]

34. This isn't ok?

Post: Geneva - A UN human rights expert is preparing to submit a report to the UN General Assembly that charges Israel of triggering a "humanitarian catastrophe" in the Palestinian territories, newspaper reports said on Wednesday.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler, said in a draft report that the Israeli military is preventing Palestinians reaching food and water with restrictions on movement in the territories, according to Swiss newspaper Le Temps and news agency ATS.

"The humanitarian catastrophe that is emerging in the Occupied Territories must be reversed," the Swiss sociologist and UN expert was quoted as saying in the draft.

"There can be no justification for harsh internal closures that prevent people from having access to food and water, otherwise the imposition of such military measures are amounting to what has been called a 'policy of starvation'", he said in the report. http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1417702,00.html

OOooppps. It's their country, they should be able to do what they feel is best for their country. What is the freakin deal here? You really can't imagine how frustrated I am getting. How can people just not care? You know that this is going to turn around and bite the donkey on the behind. I can hear the conservatives now. "Well, why don't the liberals care about this woman. I told you years ago it would come to this." My God! Liberals are the ones that are supposed to ralley around this cause. But, it's the conservatives that are doing it. Do you see how two faced the liberal side is beginning to look? Do you really see what's happening here? It's bigger than just this woman sentenced to death because she had the nerve to go on living. (If she lives hubby can't keep the money) Oh, just think about if this guy was a republican senator! The outrage we would see. My God, there wouldn't be anything else on the news or around the water cooler. But because it doesn't do anything to advance the party her life is worthless? Are liberals becoming the mirror images of conservatives? I just don't get why most people don't care. Would we care if it was a mink? Would we care if these people had some influence? Would we care if these people were in public service? Would we care if he was a low level repulican? What is wrong with us?

[im4]

39. Do you know what agrivates me?

That there are people all over the PETA and Roy thing, but hardly no one cares about this woman and whats going on....one way or another. And I've been in on the PETA discussion. But I've been on this alot more. Are our values so screwed up that we care more whether or not a tiger attacked his owner from anger or tried to protect him and PETA's cheap shot, than whether or not this woman is getting a fair shake and may possibly be condemned to death in an absolutely disgusting way in less than a week. It could be murder instead of right to die.

[Padraig18]

40. Dear God! Have we sunk so low as this?

The young woman is brain damaged, not brain dead! Have we 'progressed' as a society to the point that it is somehow acceptable to murder by starvation and dehydration those we find 'burdensome', or inconvenient?

Step back from all of you lovely theoretical propositions about 'privacy', and the like, and take an OBJECTIVE LOOK at what is being proposed here! It is BARBARIC, and my stomach churns! This is compassionate HOW? This is civilised HOW? You wouldn't starve your DOG or CAT to death, or deprive it of water, would you! This is EVIL, if that word has ANY meaning left!

:grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke::grr::puke:

[davidinalameda]

45. if my cat or dog was in the same state

I would have him put down--that is the humane thing to do.

I wouldn't let them starve--I would have him euthanized.

Unfortunately, assisted suicide in this country is illegal, and in the one state that it is legal, the Bushies have been fighting the law

it's not the state's business if someone chooses to end their life.

[DemBones DemBones]

49. Please read about this case. This woman is NOT choosing to die.

This is NOT assisted suicide.

The only evidence of her not wanting to be kept alive by artificial means is that her husband says she said it. And the only artificial support she has is a feeding tube. The husband refuses to allow her to receive treatment, including therapy to see if she can feed herself or be fed by a caregiver and swallow on her own. After years with a feeding tube, she needs help to do that.

The husband has a financial incentive for wishing her dead.

[DemBones DemBones]

41. This is OUR business because any one of us could wind up in

the same situation that Terri Schiavo is in.

Why are liberals so willing to allow a judge to decide to condemn a disabled woman to death by starvation and dehydration? Supporting assisted suicide is one things. Supporting this judge's decision is supporting a legally-sanctioned murder.

Terri Schiavo is not terminally ill. She is neurologically disabled. She may never improve but it's also possible that she can and will improve. She has never received any type of therapy to help her swallow food on her own. Her husband's lawyer said the litmus test is whether or not a person can raise a spoon to her own mouth. Physicist Stephen Hawkings and actor Christopher Reeve are two people who would fail that litmus test -- would those who support Terri Schiavo's death also support death sentences for Hawkings and Reeve?

Terri Schiavo has never received any therapy to help her communicate, which would help assess her ability to communicate. Maybe Terri's not "in there" anymore. But maybe she is. Read Rus Cooper-Dowda's story of her own experience:

"There is my own struggle from when I was considered allegedly as good as dead. But I had a single nurse who believed I was still "in there" and able to communicate. With my inked finger and her paper on a clipboard, we proved I indeed had opinions about whether I should live or die.

There was controversy as to whether my recognizable writing was communication or seizure activity until the BIG meeting. The doctors and my husband, who were spending an ever lessening amount of time with me, were granting that gathering as a courtesy to my mother and the nurses who felt I did not deserve to be written off.

At the end of the meeting my then-husband held up a message board to prove I couldn't use it. When asked to communicate something, I laboriously said to my spouse who was not allowing the most basic of care, "D-I-V-O-R-C-E Y-O-U." The doctors all laughed and attributed my phrase to more seizure activity.

Then my mother took the board and asked me to repeat what I had just said. I did so with, "D-I-V-O-R-C-E H-I-M."

After that, Rus Cooper-Dowda says there were no more questions about whether she was able to think or respond to her environment. She divorced her husband and used her divorce settlement for rehabilitative care. She became a writer and disability rights activist and has been reporting on the Schiavo case for years.

[Padraig18]

42. Merit kick!

:thumbsup:

[DemBones DemBones]

46. Thanks! This is such an important issue. Too many people have

got this "right to die" idea in their heads and aren't looking at what's going on here. This is not a brain dead patient being kept alive on a ventilator. This is not a terminally ill patient, either.

The husband could divorce his disabled wife and marry his girlfriend (now expecting their second child) but then he wouldn't inherit his wife's money when she dies. The only explanation that works for me is that he wants the money badly enough to have his wife die of starvation and dehydration. The courts awarded him that money to care for her after she was injured, though, not for him to use in starting up a new life. I don't see why he should be allowed to keep it when he has blocked treatment for Terri.

There is also evidence that suggests that the husband may have caused his wife's injuries by strangling her. Terri's family, and others supporting her right to live, weren't able to see some key medical info, including a bone scan, until years after her injury, and were then told it was too late to investigate how she got all those injuries.

[Padraig18]

48. This is the essence of it

"...The only explanation that works for me is that he wants the money badly enough to have his wife die of starvation and dehydration....."

Yes! This is NOT some 'death with dignity' issue--- this is court-odered murder, with the murderer getting RICH! :grr:

[SiobhanClancy]

50. Exactly..

and isn't it odd that Michael Schiavo never mentioned Terri's supposed wishes until after he'd sued and collected a malpractice award? Isn't it just a bit disturbing that this money,to be used for Terri's treatment,is now being used for Schiavo's legal fees in his crusade to end her life? Wouldn't you think an impartial judge would see a wee bit of conflict of interest in keeping this man as legal guardian,when he is anxiously awaiting his wife's death so he can marry his live-in girlfriend? Doesn't it seem that,at the very least,a new legal guardian should be appointed...possibly a truly objective person,if not the parents?

[DemBones DemBones]

51. It's very troubling to see so many DUers supporting the killing of

an innocent woman. It indicates a profound lack of caring about the lives of the disabled.

Perhaps this is an explanation from two disability rights activists:

". . . well-meaning, well-educated, well-funded progressives who are ignorant about disability rights," says the American Association of People with Disabilities' Andrew Imparato. (Diane) Coleman (J.D., founder of Not Dead Yet) likes to refer to this group as the "4 Ws -- the white, well-off worried well."

The "4Ws -- the white, well-off worried well."

People in good health worry about becoming disabled, think they would prefer death to disability.

Thus, they also prefer that disabled people keep out of their lives, and not present troubling bioethical issues.

[Padraig18]

52. Kick

Disabled people make most 'progressives' (so called) uncomfortable; they can't imagine having a disabled person over for wine and the newest fusion cuisine! :grr:

[Padraig18]

53. Amazing!

We can get 200+ count threads on the color of Candidate X's freakin' TIE COLOR, but this place is strangely silent about a court-ordered murder of a sentient being! :grr: :puke:

[Padraig18]

56. Kick

[Corgigal]

54. I heard about this case on TV

but just clicked on the tapes of the video's. This is insane.
Is this woman's medical bills being paid by Medicare or Medicaid? If they are that would explain Jeb not giving a flip. What doctors or nurses get to stand over this woman for a week or more while they slowly kill her? Do you request that job or are you forced to do it?

If this woman was wealthy without hubby no one would touch her with a ten foot poll. Again, it's proof that we will kill our poor and our disabled.

Here's some facts that our family has up on a website. My husband is disabled.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Percentage of persons in the United States who have an impairment: 20 percent.

Percentage of the population who will experience a disabling condition in the course of their lives: 80 percent.


Number of Americans said to be disabled: 43 million in 1989, 49 million in 1995 and 54 million in 1997.


Number of days the Social Security Administration takes to process a disability claim: 348.


Percentage of first time applicants turned down by the Social Security Administration: 69 percent.



Percentage of those who appeal that win their benefits: 62 percent.



"Waiting period," in years, that an American deemed disabled by the Social Security Administration must endure before becoming eligible for Medicare: 2 years.


Percentage of working-age disabled who were unemployed around the world in 1996: 65-70 percent.


Percentage of working-age severely disabled not working around the world in 1996: 73.9 percent.


Percentage of working-age disabled persons who say they would like to have a job: 66 percent.


Percentage of working-age disabled persons who say they have encountered job discrimination because of their disability: 25 percent.


True or false? The Americans with Disabilities Act was followed up with affirmative action like other minorities' civil rights bills: False


Average amount a severely disabled person makes per month: $1,562.00


Average a non-severely disabled person makes per month: $2,006.00



Average a non-disabled person makes per month: $2,446.00


Number of disabled people purged from disability rolls in 1981: 490,000.


Amount the Social Security Administration received to remove people from the disability rolls in 1996 was $320 million - pushing the total budget to $720 million.


Number of disability reviews Social Security Administration expects to conduct over the next two years: 1.4 million.


Excerpts from - Beyond Ramps: Disability at the End of the Social Contract by Marta Russell (Common Courage Press, 1998)

[ReadTomPaine]

55. I wonder if Jeb will use force (aka State Police) to stop them.

Wouldn't put it past him.

[Padraig18]

57. kick

[Padraig18]

58. WTF is WRONG with everybody?

This is about the judicially-assisted MURDER of a disabled person! :grr:

[Bridget Burke]

59. They can't be bothered to read beyond the headline.

It's easy to make a drive-by snide comment about JEB (who generally deserves it) but there is a more to this case.

[Padraig18]

60. Yes!

"Limousine liberals"! This is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue, ffs! :grr:

[Padraig18]

61. Kick

[Padraig18]

62. Kick

[Padraig18]

63. Why do we only make noises about caring for the disabled?

Why do we cut and run as soon as a TOUGH case arises! Is it because, at heart, we're really NOT committed to human rights?

[Padraig18]

64. Kick

Death from dehydration can be HORRIBLE! :grr:

[Padraig18]

65. Kick

[Padraig18]

66. Kick

[ReadTomPaine]

67. Your kicks were worth it in my case. I reexamined the issue.

Your kicks were worth it in my case. I reexamined the issue in more detail. I’m afraid that I’ve come to the same conclusion I had before, but my comment above wasn't justified. This is not about politics, it’s a tragedy. The courts, hospitals and her husband have had their say however, and I must say I side with them. I could find out very little about her parents beyond thier feelings on this btw. Part of the problem is the article itself, btw. It's poorly written.

[Padraig18]

68. Good!

It is a poorly-written article, I will agree. Although you reached the same conclusion as before (which I regret), I will commend your willingness to at least re-examine the issues involved. :hi:

[Undemcided]

70. This is wrong on so many levels.

It'll be murder, plain and simple.

[Padraig18]

71. "This is wrong on so many levels."

:thumbsup:

[Matilda]

76. The husband definitely has a conflict of interest.

It appears that he's gained an enormous amount of money under false pretences. He seems callous in the extreme - even if it's right to
allow somebody to die, to starve someone to death is monstrous. I
wonder why there aren't avenues of legal action to be taken here. I
guess this is a very good example of why governments can't pass legislation to allow euthanasia - unfortunatley, when large sums of
money are to be gained, moral scruples too often go out the window.

And I sure wouldn't want to be his new fiancee - if she outlives her useby date, it could be her lying there some day.

[Padraig18]

69. Kick

[Padraig18]

72. Kick

[Nikia]

73. This is horrible

The woman has become disabled, not dying. Some children are born disabled. My step mother was a teacher's aide at a special needs pre school. There were a couple children with feeding tubes. Would it be alright for the parents to decide that these children did not need nourishment anymore? Wouldn't they be charged with something if they let their child die that way? Just because someone has lessoned mental function does not mean that she should be condemned to die. We should not be deciding that disabled people deserve to die even if her death is supported by her husband who has reasons for wanting her dead. Let her get therapy so she can recover and have as much quality of life as possible. Regardless, no one should decided that she does not have a life worth living, just like those disabled preschoolers.

[Padraig18]

74. Indeed!

:thumbsup:

[Padraig18]

75. Kick

[Padraig18]

77. Kick

[Padraig18]

78. Kick

[kath]

79. Raises an interesting issue--

In the case of a married person who becomes incapacitated, is that person's spouse automatically appointed guardian? Is this for the best-- ie, should the spouse's wishes always trump the persons parents' wishes? Who is most likely to have the patient's best interests at heart-- the people who gave birth to and raised her (or him) or the spouse?? Complex...