Your thoughts on the Terri Schiavo case

[johnnie]

I'll admit that I didn't pay much attention to this case through he years, but someone brought it up here and I was curious on your thoughts.
Does a feeding tube constitute "life support"? Why doesn't her husband give up the rights to her parents? I know that there are a lot of different angles in this case, but I just thought I would ask what you think.

[chicagojoe]

1. I say let that poor woman die.

What kind of quality of life does she have in her state?

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Seconded.

[Squeech]

5. I couldn't agree more

'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!

'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies!
'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig!
'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!

THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!

Seriously, Terry Schiavo's forebrain hasn't generated an electrical signal in ten years. She is nothing more than a machine that takes up space in a hospital bed and reduces food to excreta, and can't ever do anything else. There is no dignity in such a parody of life. Remove the tube already.

[johnnie]

10. They claim

That she laughs, cries and reacts to her family. If this is true, then she is still in a state of awareness.

[KittyWampus]

31. Those Functions Are Reflexes From The Basal Brain... Not Indicitive

of higher brain functions which the body doesn't have because the higher part of the bodies brain is essentially nonexistant.

[Modem Butterfly]

64. Moreover, tears are the body's way of cleaning and lubricating the eyes

Tears in particular are involuntary, as anyone who's ever had allergies or been at the seashore on a windy day can tell you.

[deek]

72. crying

is more than just tears forming to clean the eyes. It's an emotional response. got some?

[Modem Butterfly]

74. Wow. You're getting a bit personal with your flames, aren't you?

I have emotions, because I have a neocortex. Terri does not have emotions because she doesn't have a neocortex.

[deek]

76. apologies

I get a bit ruffled when people make statements that show callous dehumanization of people with severe disabilities.

[Modem Butterfly]

77. That doesn't really apply here.

I get a bit ruffled when people make statements that show callous dehumanization of people with severe disabilities.

1)I made no such statement dehumanizing anyeone

2)We're not talking about someone with a severe disability, we're talking about a woman who is dead.

[deek]

79. i humbly disagree

on both points.

[Modem Butterfly]

87. That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it

Fortunately, having a neocortex, you are able to have one and convey it. Unfortunately, Terri does not. While this alone is bad enough, her parents and their supporters continue to compound this tragedy by conflating Terri's condition with disability rights. They do a great disservice to the disabled community, as well as the memory of their daughter.

[deek]

99. again

I disagree on both your points re the disability communtiy and their daughter.

Are you involved with the disability community? No one I know or have read feels her right to live is a disservice.

This link might be of interest to you:
http://www.notdeadyet.org/

[maveric]

145. I've seen film of her and I see emotion and responsiveness.

BYW I'm a nurse in a sub-acute unit and I have several patients like her, worse than her an better than her.

[Arkana]

37. I'll third that one

This woman deserves to die peacefully, not be kept alive as a vegetable.

[maveric]

144. She's responsive and can show emotion.

She's not in a vegetative state or in pain, is she?

[Cocoa]

3. I say let her go

and for god's sake leave the politics out of it. I can't believe they're actually rushing legislation through around this. It's disgusting.

[bunkerbuster1]

4. Why does the GOPee hate hetero marriage?

this case is as much about the right of a husband to assert his rights, as anything else.

It's really husband-vs.-inlaws.

Jebbie and the GOPee are on the side of the family, and AGAINST MARRIAGE.

why do they hate marriage?

[LiberalEsto]

6. I don't know enough about the situation

to have a firm opinion, but I think if we as humans have any shred of compassion, we should not let her starve to death.

[RPM]

7. let her go life with the fundy clowns who want to keep her alive.

grant him a divorce, let the fundies wipe her nose and ass and pay for her upkeep.

When they don't want to, then just pull the plug already...

[aden_nak]

8. I'll believe EITHER side once the money is off the table.

The husband wants them to pull the tube so he can get her malpractice settlement and remarry. The parents want them to keep her alive so he will give up and get a divorce, thus entitling them to the settlement. As soon as one side says they'll donate the settlement to a charitable cause (perhaps one that does research on the condition that she did not get diagnosed properly), I'll believe they're fucking humanitarians.

[hangemhigh]

18. Here, here!

Once there is no financial incentive for either party, THEN there is a dilemma. Until then, it's an evil greed battle. Bad Karma for all involved. Personally, I think they should let the poor woman go-keeping her alive while the courts hash it out is ghoulish. And takes us back to your original point.

[KittyWampus]

33. There IS NO FINANCIAL INCENTIVE For The Husband. The Idea There

is exists because of the lies being told by those with an agenda.

[msanthrope]

32. There isn't any money left......

After thirteen years of care and lawyers and less than 1.6 in combined settlements, there is nothing left. Michael Schiavo already has/had access to all the money--he didn't need Terry to die to get at it.

As for her condition that she did not get diagnosed properly, where did you get that? Terry was a bulimic who was living on iced tea and diet foods. She had a chemical imbalance and a heart attack. That's why her awards were so low.

[Dulcinea]

9. Hasn't she suffered enough?

For the love of God, let this poor woman go, PLEASE, & quit using her as a political football!

"Have you no decency, sir?" someone should ask Jeb.

[shawcomm]

15. You don't just 'let her go'...

for her to die, you have to starve and dehydrate her to death. It's a torture one can go to jail for doing to animals.

Hell, it'd be more humane to put a fucking bullet in her heart. Why don't they just do that?

[KittyWampus]

34. "She" Doesn't Exist. It's A Body With No Soul. The Higher Brain Is Gone

it will never come back.

And who the hell ever said Death is supposed to be glamourous or easy?

[DearAbby]

20. She had stated to her husband that she did not wish to live in this

condition, if there were no way of her recovery. He is just trying to go by her expressed wishes. The State claims the sanctity of the marriage vows, until it hits the wall of the church and it's beliefs.

Knowing her wishes not to be sustained on life support, the parents parade her in this condition to the public...have they no decency? The woman expressed her wishes to her husband. It has been drawn through the court system and back again. The court's has agreed with the husband's case. Let her wishes be followed allow her to die.

To me, it is an abomination, to drag her out like a "Right to life Parade float." She has the right to dignity in life, and dignity in death. It is a sickening case.

[shawcomm]

21. The problem with this case is that there is no cut and dried evidence...

that she stated such wishes. The husband only came up with that after he was awarded money to pay for her care. Now he's living with another woman who he's fathered kids with. His only dedication to their marriage appears to be his work to try to have her starved to death.

There's just too much dishonesty from boths sides. The one thing I vehemently disagree with is starving and dehydrating people to death, regardless of their mental abilities or lack thereof. Like I said in the other post, just shoot them. Do it quickly if it must be done.

[MXMLLN]

129. Is she suffering now ?

If not, then what does it hurt to keep her alive ?

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. Let her go. n/t

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[johnnie]

14. But if she is laughing, crying and reacting to her family

She isn't in a vegetative state. What then?

[msanthrope]

35. Yes, she is--and that tape is a pastiche of nearly

four hours of video tape--

People with PVS aren't necessarily immobile.

[livetohike]

16. Welcome to DU rvas

:hi:

[NC_Nurse]

17. I second your opinion...

as another RN.

Welcome to DU! :)

[janx]

120. Welcome!

:hi:

Edit: Please see my post #118.

[deek]

13. It's not a "right to die" issue

It's a disability rights issue. People with severe impairments have the right to live, even though some able-bodied people project their own insecurities and say, "I would never want to live like that."

A person with severe brain damage is not necc in a persistive vegetative state. Terri responds to music and her mother's presence. She smiles and squeals to conversation. She has exhibited anticipatory behaviors.

A person with severe brain damage (like the rest of us) needs consistent stimulation in order to avoid withdrawal. She has not been allowed to experience very much because of her husbands "orders".

A feeding tube is NOT "life support", no more than a milkshake is. It simply bypasses the mouth and throat and avoids aspiration of food into the lungs (causing pneuommia) for people who have difficulty swallowing.

Her "husband" has financial gain by retaining guardianship.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

19. has she really been exhibiting these behaviours?

are the doc's confirming this or is it just something that the parents are saying is happening? I don't know enough about the story. But I agree with your and another person's comments about the $$$ involved. I would believe a doc's assessment, but I would not believe parents or loving husband until ALL the money is off the table...

theProdigal

[DearAbby]

22. By the way there is no Money. The money had been spent over the long

years she has spent in this condition. The Husband, out of his loyalty and love for her wishes to do the one thing she had asked of him...not to allow her to be kept alive in this condition. The courts had agreed with him and again so on appeal.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

25. did she have a living will

or some other documented evidence that this is what she wants/ed. Maybe a DNR or something of the like in case of this scenario? My understanding is that there IS more money to be had...lawsuits and malpractice and possibly even insurance...

I don't like the idea of killing her off because of her mental state. Especially if there are sparks of life and response in her...if you start killing people off because they don't meet your definition of alive, you open a mighty nasty hole...

theProdigal

[tishaLA]

26. There's no money

and, failing a living will/DNR order, the spouse has the last word on these issues. Some people may not like that Mr. Schaivo has these rights, but it has been part of marriage for a long time.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

28. it is obvious to Schaivo that she is no longer alive

why not then agree to a non-contested divorce and let her parents have custody? If to him she is not alive, it is no more that turning over a corpse...

theProdigal

[DearAbby]

46. Your husband or wife makes a promise not to be kept alive artificially

why should he have to divorce his wife? Consider for a moment you make the same promise to your spouse. Would you cut an run, not follow through? This is a perfect example why there should be a living will. Legal document. But to assume that the husband has other motives other than to follow through with what they had agreed to during their marriage. What evidence is this based upon, what evidence do you have that the husband has other motives?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

59. get it in writing and none of this is a problem...

i agree...get it in writing and no one can question your motives...I question it because there are easier ways to do either side of this...if he doesn't care enough for her to keep her alive (as in, he believes she is already dead) then he should have no problem assigning custody to her parents...

theProdigal

[Jonathan_Hoag]

128. Her parents' lawyer said today

That Schindlers offered Michael Schiavo the remaining money if he would give in. Similarlily, at an earlier point he offered to donate the remaining money to charity if they would give in. So even if there is substantial money left (very doubtful) it does not appear to be an issue for either side.

[deek]

23. "loving husband"???

I would suggest reading up on the history a bit more.

Believe those who spend time with her. Look at the videos. No one can assess another person's functioning in a few hours.

Think about standardized testing. Do people perform like seals? Some do. Not all.

Doctors' assessments are not all that valid, imho (albeit experienced).
There are a few rare geniuses in the field, but not many.

People with severe brain damage are hard to "read" unless you know them well or if you are extremely observant and in tune with how someone who is nonverbal and has significant neurological damage communicates.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

27. 'loving' was sarcasm...

i think given a few days of observation they could determine if she has reactions or not. I have dealt with the loss of a family member who was severely incapacitated for almost two years...his communication was sometime limited to as little as a flush appearance on his face (could be seen upon showing affection or telling jokes) so I know where they are coming from. If she shows ANY sign of acknowledging any stimulus, I really think she should be maintained.

theProdigal

[deek]

39. gotcha

Experience and love acknowledges human value. "Normal" quality of life is actually relative.

[KaliTracy]

41. but "mother love" sometimes sees things that aren't there (you can

substitute "father love" or "spouse love" at will if you wish). For example, parents who have a child that hasn't been diagnosed with a certain problem (behavior, learning, cognitive, etc.) -- sometimes will completely deny that there is a problem no matter how many relatives, teachers, friends tell them to seek help. I have an aunt with such a child. He's a teenager now -- she home schooled -- and he has significant communication and learning problems that may have been addressed had she gotten him help when suggested. Doctors have been trained to read CT and other brain scans. Granted there could be misreading of such diagnostic techniques, but maybe in a one shot deal -- not something that has gone on for years.

[deek]

47. and doctors sometimes don't see things that are there.....

I've had para and professionals (educators, communication and feeding therapists, friends, children) see things that the parent hasn't seen--for a variety of possible reasons (yet another shattered dream, fear of being labelled in denial, etc.)

There is more to our personhood than a brain scan.

You'd be surprised at how much our medical professionals do NOT know. Only when you are entrenched in the system do you discover this.

[KaliTracy]

67. sorry... to me, if there is no brain activity, there isn't thought process

that can be done. My aunt had a stroke -- taught herself to speak in small phrases, walk, go to the bathroom, feed herself, do puzzles, use a remote. At first, it was touch and go, but she did get to a place where she can do these things. Her brain is functioning, and was able to find new connections for the parts of the brain that were destroyed. That's what rehab does.

In this case, I think the only thing that rehab would do would be to keep the muscles from atrophy. Severely mentally retarded people have thought process -- I'm not saying that anyone who cannot speak their wishes should die.

However if you have a flat brain scan and no neocortex activity, it's quite unlikely that these areas will regenerate.

[deek]

73. Where are you hearing flat brain scan? n/t

.

[KaliTracy]

85. sorry -- no neocortex activity. n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

89. Can You Elucidate?

Personhood has to include self-awareness, no? Self-awareness requires a functioning higher brain, no?

What other criteria to personhood are there, if self-awareness is impossible? How would one measure the criteria without a brainscan, or in addition to one?

Your statement may have merit, but you've provided no context with which to judge its qualities.
The Professor

[deek]

96. self-awareness

If you are referring to the self-awareness of personhood as described by......(doh)...my psych/child development course content is escaping me.....then we are using the same word to describe 2 different states of being. I'm not talking about the quest toward self actualization here...the introspection of self that leads you toward a higher self.

I'm talking about being aware of yourself as a being. Personhood as the generalization for unique personality which we possess.

Personhood in its humanity sense, not in scientific developmental sense.

[ProfessorGAC]

98. That's What I'm Talking About Too

If self-awareness is not measured by higher brain functions of memory, sense of self, knowledge obtained, experiences remember that shape personality, then how would we measure personhood sans brain activity?

You stated that personhood is not just a brain scan? I'm asking in what other ways would or should we measure it?
The Professor

[deek]

102. focused observation

and an open mind

I wasn't saying sans brain activity. There is brain activity.

I have no checklist or tool. Shall we develop one? It must already be compiled somewhere. This discussion is not new.

TASH? Not Dead Yet?

[Modem Butterfly]

105. The focused observers say she's gone

The doctors that have observed Terri say she's gone. From the trial court:http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html
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.

The Second District Court reviewed the same evidence and they said, Through the assistance of Mrs. Schiavo's treating physician, Dr. Victor Gambone, the physicians obtained current medical information about Theresa Schiavo including high-quality brain scans. Each physician reviewed her medical records and personally conducted a neurological examination of Mrs. Schiavo. Lengthy videotapes of some of the medical examinations were created and introduced into evidence. Thus, the quality of the evidence presented to the guardianship court was very high, and each side had ample opportunity to present detailed medical evidence, all of which was subjected to thorough cross-examination. It is likely that no guardianship court has ever received as much high-quality medical evidence in such a proceeding.

[deek]

109. cognitive function does not manifest itself constantly

sorry.

My cognitive function is not consistent either. Why should we expect Terri's?

I trust the judicial system as much as I trust the medical system.

I have no doubt this case is as much as an atrocity to our humanness as the rest of our historical disregard/aversion/dehumanization/experiments/sterilization to people with disabilities.

[Modem Butterfly]

111. Right. The experts are wrong. The courts (all of them) are wrong.

Everyone is wrong but deek.

:eyes:

[deek]

113. live and learn, modem

wisdom comes with age and experience

And do you subscribe to LIHOP? Election Fraud? PNAC? Illegal Enron and other asst corporate crimes? BFEE?

If so, then hear this--this is no different.

[Modem Butterfly]

116. Or, with age and experience comes raging denial

The Terri Schiavo case has been going on since 1998. Terri's parents, the Schindlers, have had seven years to produce evidence that either Terri is not in a persistant vegetative state or that she would want to continue existing in this manner. Seven years. They haven't produced anything. Zip. Nada. Zilch.

The only conspiracy here is that the Schindlers are trying to milk their dead daughter for publicity and money. And they're willing to play on public sympathy for the disabled community to do it.

[deek]

121. nadda

Imagine their lives since 1998. You can't, unless you've lived something similar. You have no idea what a struggle it is to take care of regular life (remember they are aging at a rapid pace), caring for a daughter with extremely coomplicated issues (both physical and medical), medical crises (yes, that's the plural form), bureaucracies, legal attempts to beat you down so you feel powerless and helpless........blah blah. Seven years can go by very quickly and you discover you are still in the same place.

...or maybe you do.

What if someone decided your quality of life, since it isn't the same as it used to be, wasn't worth it for you? Even if you've contemplated it yourself at times, you've made the choice to trudge forward.

Ever have someone tell you "I just couldn't do it if I were you". What's your response?

Understand my parallels here?

[Modem Butterfly]

127. I don't see the parallels at all

The Schindlers lost their daughter in 1990. In 1998, her husband sought the determination of a court as to whether or not she was in a persistant vegetative state. Since 2002, her parents have been grandstanding and campaigning to- what? I'm not sure. If they had spent that energy trying to find proof that their daughter either wasn't in a persistant vegetative state or wished to exist in this condition, maybe they wouldn't have needed to do all this grandstanding and campaging. But then again, they wouldn't have been guests on Larry King, Bill O'Reilly, and dozens of other shows either.

So have I ever had a family member all but die, and then, more than a decade after the fact, decide to beat my breast on television, slander the spouse, and beg for money?

No. I haven't. I wouldn't. And I'll bet most folks fall into that category.

[tishaLA]

134. And not only that!

They have also used Randall Terry, the radical anti-abortion activist, as a spokesman for their "cause." Or rather, Terry has made Mrs. Schaivo his "cause" so he can push his radical pro-life agenda and use the emotion from her case to pull people to his side. Is it accidental that the Supreme Court decided to hear the Oregon euthenasia case today because another radical, in the form of former AG John Ashcroft, pushed the administration to challenge the validity of the law? This isn't about "Terri Schaivo" for Terry and his compatriots--this is a political-religious war with Mrs. Schaivo as a pawn in his game.

The Schindlers have, in short, aligned themselves with someone who believes the following:

"Let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good.... If a Christian voted for Clinton, he sinned against God. It's that simple.... Our goal is a Christian Nation... we have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want Pluralism. We want theocracy. Theocracy means God rules. I've got a hot flash. God rules."

"When I, or people like me, are running the country, you'd better flee, because we will find you, we will try you, and we will execute you. I mean every word of it. I will make it part of my mission to see to it that they are tried and executed... If we're going to have true reformation in America, it is because men once again, if I may use a worn out expression, have righteous testoserone flowing through their veins. They are not afraid of contempt for their contemporaries. They are not even here to get along. They are here to take over... Somebody like Susan Smith should be dead. She should be dead now. Some people will go, "Well how do you know God doesn't have a wonderful plan for her life?" He does, it's listed in the Bible. His plan for her is that she should be dead."

"What it is coming down to is who runs the country. It's us against them. It's the good guys versus the bad guys. It's the God-fearing people against the pagans, and some of the pagans are going to church." link

[deek]

141. i was referring

to your personal health struggles

[Modem Butterfly]

149. I've never been for all intents and purposes dead for fifteen years, sorry

Seriously, Terri Schiavo doesn't have health problems and she's not disabled. Most of her brain is gone. There's no Terri left. Terri is gone, only her shell remains, and that shell grows weaker everyday.

You seem to want to make an analogy that Terri is simply disabled, as though if we got her a wheelchair and sent her to pool therapy three times a week, she'd get better. No. There's no Terri there to get better.

[deek]

153. if you're "simply disabled"

that's all it takes to "get better"? Disable people aren't sick, first of all.

wow.

You totally missed what you did not want to read.
Nevermind.

No further comments.

[Modem Butterfly]

154. Still trying to bring disability into it I see

Terri's not going to get better and she's not going to improve. Period.

Get off your high horse and put aside your manufactured outrage. Disabled people become disabled through accidents, illness, not all were born with a disability. Many are capable of great improvements with the right medicines, treatments, therapies, and equipment. But Terri doesn't fall into that category because she's not disabled. She's gone.

[deek]

160. you know nothing of which you speak

.

[Modem Butterfly]

162. Don't be so sure.

[MXMLLN]

131. And they could be ...

Should we risk sacrificing a woman's life based on any outsider's particular assessment ?

[Pithlet]

132. Should we be butting in where we have no business?

Should no person ever get to see that their loved one's wishes are seen to without outsiders thinking their opinon matters more, and people with political motives jumping on that bandwagon, and forcing the issue?

[MXMLLN]

143. Do we not have the responsibility to shield our neighbors from harm ?

Unfortunately, it's not been conclusively demonstrated that Michael Schiavo is, or was ever, acting in Terri's best interest.

It's only his claim that Terri ever stated that she wished not to kept alive artificially ... and his behaviour since her disability has been somewhat dubious.

After he was awarded money he specifically requested for her care and rehabilitation ... he refused to use the money to do so.

He's used more money on legal fees to remove her feeding tube than anything else.

[Pithlet]

147. Of course.

It has also never been conclusively demonstrated that he has NOT had her best interests at heart.

His behavior has been judged dubious by some. Of course it has. That is America's past time to get the facts filtered through the media and base their opinions on them. I believe the fact that it would have been easier, and better financially if he'd just turned her over to her family, and yet he chose not to, as evidence that he truly wants to see her wishes followed. Of all of the speculative facts, those two speak the loudest, to me. If my opinion even counted, that is.

Look, enough doctors with no dog in this hunt have said that she is PVS. Her husband states that she did not want to live that way. The only two people who know exactly how that relationship was were the two people in it. She can no longer speak for herself. As her husband, he had the right to do that for her. All of the dubious judgments are based on speculation, and many of them do not even hold up when the facts are born. The court found that he did not have other motives, and granted the decision that he could decide. That should be the end of it.

If there was solid evidence that he had nefarious purposes, then it is the job of the law to stand in and strip him of those rights. I'm not arguing otherwise. But it is not up to anyone else to decide that. Not the court of public opinion and politics, certainly. It is the job of the courts. Her doctors. Her next of kin. Her family. That's it.

[Modem Butterfly]

136. In this case, it is several assessments, taken over a long period of time

There has been a great deal of evidence and many, many evaluations of that evidence. This is not a "let's take Bob's word for it" kind of situation.

[ProfessorGAC]

126. Just Asking

I thought this had already all been done. My concern, however, with focused observation is the possibility of seeing what one is looking for, rather than finding what is actually occurring. This happens all the time is sociological and psychosocial experiments I have peer reviewed the research in many studies, strictly as a statistician, and find observations often to be highly correlated to the position stated in the initial hypothesis.

Translation: Findings tend to be those that reinforce one's pre-existing beliefs. That's why psychosocial studies have be very large to pass any scientific muster. The sheer size of the study obvattes the vast majority of the such biases.

If we can't relate on objective measures to make such a determination, i have serious scientific concerns about the validity of measures on one person at one time. The validity of such conclusions would have to be based upon a huge prior dataset, which i don't think exists.
The Professor

[deek]

148. I like your idea

I understand the research findings. In these types of situations, the pre-existing beliefs can cloud the findings for both sides.

What does constitute personhood?

To some on this and the yahoo boards, it is simply being fed a different way. Should people who are catherized daily be included in this subset also?

To others, it is the communication issue. Whose communication is it anyway?


I would like to see an attempt to list those attributes that deem someone "a person".

Self awareness? Enjoy life's moments? (So how do you define enjoy? What if someone is physically incapable of smiling? Does that mean they aren't enjoying the moment? Sparkle in the eye? A "brightening"?)

How could we possibly compose a tool that has to be based on objective observation when individual differences are so vastly subjective?

How is a person supposed to register an IQ on a motor-based test if they are quadrapeligic and nonverbal?

Does that mean there is no "Light in the Attic"?

[ProfessorGAC]

My Thoughts On Your Questions

Should people who are catherized daily be included in this subset also?

Apples & oranges. The feeding tube isn't the issue. It's the awareness that the system is in need of food, or of cleansing. The differences do not lie in the method, but the congition of the differences in the method.

To others, it is the communication issue. Whose communication is it anyway?
Communication cannot be exclusively one way. The inability to even acknowledge that one understands the ATTEMPT by another to communicate is not communication. A starfish HEARS a human voice. But, cannot even begin to indicate that it hears it, let alone understands it. That's not communication, it's random auditory stimulus.

I would like to see an attempt to list those attributes that deem someone "a person".
That's what i was asking you to do, since you are unwilling to accept objective scientific measures as a determinant.

How could we possibly compose a tool that has to be based on objective observation when individual differences are so vastly subjective?
Once again, that's what i asked of you. But, conveniently, you dismissed dispassionate analytical tools in favor of "other" criteria, and now you suggest no such criteria can be developed. That's either very confusing, or extremely convenient.

How is a person supposed to register an IQ on a motor-based test if they are quadrapeligic and nonverbal?
Ask Steven Hawking.

Does that mean there is no "Light in the Attic"?
Ask Steven Hawking.

Do you get the point? Your own questions indicate that personhood cannot be conveniently, objectively, and dispassionately determined. But, brain activity can be measured in that way. The brain is the SOUL! Without brain function, we have no way to determining the measure of a human being. Yet, you wish to dismiss this obvious determinant in favor of criteria, you yourself, cannot elucidate.

You are suggesting that in order to play God with this woman's life, one must first be able to play God with metaphysical concepts beyond ANYBODY's scope. Well, or course, nobody could argue the point. You've made it completely impossible, with a PRECONCEIVED NOTION OF THE RIGHT ANSWER.
The Professor

[deek]

157. yes, professor

I was posing those scenerios because that is what I read that is most disconcerting about Terri. People seem to think that if she could be trained to eat, then she should be allowed to live. People are very afraid of "unnatural" methods. That was my point.

I think you were confused by my communication question. I was talking about Terri's communication to others, not theirs to her. Lou Brown and other experts in the field have some very valid points re communication and people with severe disabilities.

I'm not attempting to find convenient excuses. I am confused as to what should be included and yet cover the vast range of neurological impairment possibilities. In my experience, a combination of objective criteria with anecdotal input seems to be the answer.

I would love to see an objective scientific tool. Brain activity can be measured and has been useful in assessing vision impairment in individuals who can not consistently give clear communication/motor responses (evoked potential).

Terri's brain shows no activity? I haven't seen that information.

I am a strong proponent of considering altered states of consciousness in people who have brain damage. It only makes sense. There are scientific studies regarding this, which I do not have on hand. Basically, a damaged brain (and even more so, a medicated damaged brain) will allow fluctuating states of alertness. We have to note the factors surrounding peak alertness and take advantage of them in order to optimize our opportunities.

People with severe disabilities do possess nonsymbolic communication. You have to develop a relationship with the person, be sensitive to recognize the attempts and increase opportunities for reciprocal interactions to occur.

If you want documentation from studies, most of it will be anecdotal.

Steven Hawking had a lot of opportunities for his genius to be untapped. Unfortunately, this is extremely rare, even in the best of situations. There are very few "feel good" stories in the world of severe disability.

Science is important, but so is common sense and a sense of brother/sisterhood.

My preconceived notion of the right answer is this: Terri is a person. Starving her is wrong.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

24. Her neocortex has been destroyed.

And you ARE your neocortex. There's no "there" there anymore. It's not like a tetraplegic.

[DearAbby]

29. A link to one of the stories covering this case...lets know what the facts

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=32940

>snip<

Doctors have ruled that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope for recovery, and would live no more than a week or two without getting food and water through the tube inserted into her abdomen.

Her parents have countered with other medical opinions that the 41-year-old woman who appears to cry, laugh and react to her family might improve with rehabilitation.

If the tube is removed, the development will fall near the 15th anniversary of Terri Schiavo's Feb. 25, 1990 collapse, when a chemical imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder caused her heart to stop beating and cut off oxygen to her brain.

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

Thought I would insert an article that explains both arguments. the above is the background of the case. the Woman has spent the last 15 years in this state.

[KaliTracy]

38. a link would be helpful here, I've heard that there are no reactions

such as you state (doens't mean that they aren't there, just that NPR isn't stating this information during their reports).

[deek]

43. article and links

Newly Released Schiavo Tapes Stir Emotion, Debate (2003)


News Discussion Forums

Clearwater, Fl. (TNN) - The Pinellas County Court has released four hours of Terri Schiavo video never before seen by the public.

The video, taken last year without the permission of her husband Michael, shows Terri smiling at the voice and touch of her mother, following the path of a balloon with her eyes on several occasions, moaning, and responding to a command to open her eyes.


The Schindler's say the most profound evidence that Terri is not in a "persistent vegetative state" exists in the following sequence of events: Dr. William Hammesfahr, a Clearwater neurologist asks Schiavo to open her eyes. At first, her eyelids flutter. She slowly turns her head toward Hammesfahr, gradually opening her eyes. Then her eyebrows lift into an arch - she appears to display an expression of astonishment. "Good job!" the doctor exults on tape. "Good job, young lady!"

more at http://www.realnews247.com/newly_released_schiavo_tapes.htm

video clips available at: http://www.terrisfight.org/

[deek]

30. better to be dead than disabled?

~snip

The media seems to have figured out that Terri Shiavo may not be exactly, totally comatose and may not be exactly, totally terminally ill (or at least, wasn't until six days or starvation and dehydration) but they aren't sure what she is. Is she in a vegetative state, minimally comatose, minimally conscious, severely brain damaged, locked in her body or just living without dignity? Is she suffering terribly or is she a shell that feels nothing?

Never mind, it makes no difference. As Boston Globe writer Carey Goldberg was told by a doctor, "persistent vegetative state patients and those the next step up, the severely handicapped, often have clear responses to stimuli but, he said -- and he didn't intend to be insulting... even his dog has an emotional response. Even his son's goldfish moves when you tap on the glass." The writer failed to pick up that it would be illegal for the doctor to starve his dog, although he could probably have his way with the goldfish. Instead, she indicated that the doctor had dispelled her concerns. "That brought it home!" she wrote.

~snip

I know little about the conditions under which Terri Shiavo has lived. I don't know who she is. My hunch is that what she wants is not death but her mother. I really don't know though. What is chilling is that people who otherwise oppose bigotry and prejudice seem almost pathologically unwilling to examine their eagerness to have Ms. Shiavo gone.

~snip

Conventional liberals need to grow up and realize that we are all in this together. Disability issues including issues related to the values of our lives are part of the human rights agenda. This does not change if there's a reactionary in the White House or if the budget is being slashed or if the abortion foes seem to be riding high.

more: http://www.raggededgemagazine.com/mediacircus/dejavu.html

[Pithlet]

42. She isn't disabled.

She simply isn't there. The woman who was Terri Schiavo died years ago, and her husband wanted to see that her wishes were carried out, which was his right. It was no one else's business to butt in. This is not an issue of disabled rights.

[deek]

49. The person I used to be died 5 years ago

I am a much different person now. Isn't this inevitable for most of us?

[Pithlet]

53. You aren't brain dead.

People do change, it's true. I just don't think that's the issue, here.

[deek]

56. not brain dead...

but my brain and body are very different than they used to be, as well as my productivity and and the "content" of my life.

Where's the line?

[Pithlet]

58. The line

is when a person is brain dead, and their next of kin (in Terri's case, her spouse) tries to see that their loved one's wishes are met. Everyone else outside of the case is only speculating. And, while it's certainly okay to hold an opinion, it should have remained just that for everyone outside of that relationship. No one else had the right to butt in. This is about a spouse's rights. Unless there is clear evidence that a next of kin doesn't have the person's best interests at heart, it's no one else's business. Family members went to the court; the court sided with Mr. Schiavo. That should have been it.

[deek]

61. spouse's rights

dangerous zone there.......

Sometimes the line is no having the supportive services to make life less overwhelming.....sometimes the line is not recieving the help from the bureaucracies who are paid by our tax dollars to help people........sometimes the line is having a reprieve from debilitating chronic pain or fatigue.

What about chronic depression? Shall we just put them out of their misery once and for all?

[Pithlet]

63. Not a dangerous zone.

It's something that's been around for a long time. You don't want your spouse or next of kin to be able to see that your wishes are carried out? If you told your spouse that you didn't want to live like a vegetable, and others stopped him/her after they tried to see this wish carried out, you'd be okay with them butting in where they have no business?

This isn't chronic depression. This is brain dead. Huge difference. A spouse could not condemn their spouse to die because of chronic depression. Never have been able to, and never will be able to.

[deek]

68. actually, brain damaged, not dead

huge difference.

My point re "spouse's rights" refered to the fact that not all spouses have their mates' best interests at heart...witness the plethora of power plays, abuses, murder before divorce, etc scenerios

[Pithlet]

69. Actually, brain dead.

And, you're right. Not all spoused do have their best interests at heart. That is why courts have overruled them in the past, and will continue to do so. They did not, in the Schiavo case, because there was no solid evidence that he didn't have Terri's best interests at heart. The court found in his favor. That should have been the end of it.

[deek]

108. remember all the misleading headlines re *?

This case has had plenty of them too.

Terri is not brain dead.

[Pithlet]

124. Yes, she is.

But, we could keep going back and forth on this. It's still irrelevant. The courts had sided with her husband. He stated that it was not her wish to live that way. The doctors had concluded that she was PVS. The courts agreed and said he could fulfill her wished not to live that way. That should have been the end of it. Whatever anyone thinks of the state of her fluid filled brain, it's none of our business. The political grandstanding and defamation of character is shameful, and not even relevant.

[MXMLLN]

133. Terri's not brain-dead. n/t

[Pithlet]

150. So

When did you visit her? And what are your medical qualifications? If you've answered none to both of those questions, then what do you know? Because enough doctors HAVE visited her, and the courts agreed with their assessment. I can't believe people who aren't even remotely connected with this case can think that they know more. I don't know, myself. Her husband thinks so. Doctors think so. The courts think so. So, I'm inclined to go with them. At any rate, I don't think it's my business to override that decision. It's not yours or anyone else's, either.

[MXMLLN]

151. Noone who has observed Terri has concluded that she is brain-dead.

What they have concluded is that she is in a Persistent Vegetative State.

There's a difference between the two.

[Pithlet]

152. They both mean effectively the same thing.

She is not there. The things that made Terri Terri are gone from her brain.

And, it still doesn't take away from the fact that this wasn't the business of any politician, or anyone in the media, or anyone watching the media. This should never have been an issue outside of her family and the courts.

[KaliTracy]

75. Persistent Vegetative State

From ReasonOnline (written in 2003) http://www.reason.com/links/links102303.shtml

<snipe>

"What is a persistent vegetative state? According to the National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke people in PVS "have lost their thinking abilities and awareness of their surroundings, but retain non-cognitive function and normal sleep patterns. Even though those in a persistent vegetative state lose their higher brain functions, other key functions such as breathing and circulation remain relatively intact. Spontaneous movements may occur, and the eyes may open in response to external stimuli. They may even occasionally grimace, cry, or laugh. Although individuals in a persistent vegetative state may appear somewhat normal, they do not speak and they are unable to respond to commands." People suffering from PVS can generally be distinguished from afflicted but cognitively intact patients who suffer from "locked-in syndrome" by the fact that "locked in" patients can track visual stimuli and use eye blinks for communication.

"According to most neurological experts, Terri Schiavo is definitely PVS—her eyes do not really track visual stimuli and she cannot communicate using eye blinks. However, Terri Schiavo's parents have posted several short ambiguous video clips online which are meant to show that Ms. Schiavo responds to stimuli. But what they show seems to fit an AMA's report of how PVS patients can respond to environmental cues without being aware. Specifically, the report notes, "Despite an 'alert demeanor', observation and examination repeatedly fail to demonstrate coherent speech, comprehension of the words of examiners or attendants, or any capacity to initiate or make consistently purposeful movements. Movements are largely confined to reflex withdrawals or posturing in response to noxious or other external stimuli. Since neither visual nor auditory signals require cortical integrity to stimulate brief orienting reflexes, some vegetative patients may turn the head or dart the eyes toward a noise or moving objects. However, PVS patients neither fixate upon nor consistently follow moving objects with the eyes, nor do they show other than startle responses to loud stimuli. They blink when air movements stimulate the cornea but not in the presence of visual threats per se." "

<snip>

[deek]

78. MYTH: Terri is PVS

from www.terrisfight.org

MYTH: Terri is PVS (Persistent vegetative state)
FACT: The definition of PVS in Florida Statue 765.101:
Persistent vegetative state means a permanent and irreversible condition of unconsciousness in which there is:

(a) The absence of voluntary action or cognitive behavior of ANY kind.
(b) An inability to communicate or interact purposefully with the environment.

Terri's behavior does not meet the medical or statutory definition of persistent vegetative state. Terri responds to stimuli, tries to communicate verbally, follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposefully with her environment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As you might know, vision is usually the first thing to go when a brain is starved of oxygen, which would explain the inconsistent response to visual stimuli.

Also, people with significant brain damage experience alternating states of consciousness, because of the obivous neurological problems involved (and, in many cases, the medications administered).

The parents are not in denial. Come on! They are based in reality. Terri has limitations. The key point is purposeful interaction.

[Modem Butterfly]

82. The state of Florida has declared Terri to be in a PVS

It's ironic that you cite Florida state law when the state has consistantly found that Terri is in a persistant vegetative state.

[deek]

88. exactly! n/t

.

[KaliTracy]

83. communicates how? if you spent a solid week with her would you

know her communicative processes? A month? A year? She interacts purposefully with the environment (asks for blankets when cold, a fan when hot, etc.)? Can tell when she needs more or less of something?

[deek]

93. i think i could grasp an inkling of her communication

I have extended training and experience in observation re causation of behaviors, particularly those that may appear unrelated to others.

Interacting purposefully with the environment entails much different examples than what you cite, silly.

We're talking basic interaction here. Think of how a newborn interacts purposefully with his/her environment. Smiles, frowns, vocalizations, rudimentary motor movements, focusing.......etc...sometimes just a "brightening"....

You have to really know the person and look for their personal communication--not a communication based on your own perspective.

You will never see what you don't think exists.

[KaliTracy]

101. interpretation of such is different than being told - though if there are

definite expressions she uses over and over for specific things, I would call that communication. Not random, but deliberate. I used those examples because they are easy to understand, and generally, are wants/desires that people usually try to fulfill.

When my son was about 5 months old (not rolling over yet) he was screaming at 2:00 in the morning. We had house guests, and I thought it was toothpain (as all other attempts to appease him didn't work) so I wanted to get the baby ora-gel. But he was really screaming and I didn't want to take him down the hall where everyone was sleeping.

He was safely laying on the floor and I tried to get him to take a pacifier so I could get the medicine. He grabbed the pacifier out of his mouth with his left hand, put it into his right hand and threw that sucker across the room (overhand!). My interpretation of what he wanted failed and though he couldn't tell me what he wanted, he could tell me what he didn't want. Though all I could do at that point was stare for a moment at him, and say "What the hell was that???"

[deek]

103. you failed to understand his communication

that doesn't mean he wasn't communicating

Inconsistent does not equal random.

[KaliTracy]

114. no I did not fail -- I would call that example Random -- but Deliberate.

Babies use random communication all the time -- but there is a point when they know that they do one thing, they will get it. In this case -- it was random, but I knew that he was NOT pleased with my attempt to put a pacifier in his mouth -- no ambiguity there. I used this example to show that there are cases of random communication that are definite. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

However, from what I have read, I haven't even heard of her deliberately giving yes/no answers (eye blinks, or whatever means necessary) on a consistent and deliberate basis for wants or needs --(blinking rapidly to show that there is something she wants to get across, for example).

[deek]

123. random behavior means non deliberate behavior, imho

no?

deliberate behavior can be inconsistent.

eye blinks as a means for communication doesn't work for as many people as you would think, especially if the brain damage is diffuse.

We have to remember that the brain damage effects the ability to control volitional movement as well as speech, swallowing, etc.

[China_cat]

161. Are you one of the

'alternative' medicine folks that her parents are now trying to bring into it? The ones who have promised them that they will bring Terri back if they use their methods?

[truebrit71]

36. Let her go.

She is beyond help and has been kept alive by machines for far too long.

Time to move on.

[DearAbby]

40. Why after 15 years in this condition does the public assume the Husband is

in this for money...there is no money, it has been spent. Do you realize how much it costs to care for a person in this condition for 15 years?

I grieve for her parents, but their daughter died 15 yrs ago.

[Pithlet]

44. Exactly. It pisses me off.

If my husband's wishes were not to live like a vegetable, and people blocked my right as his wife to see that happen, I would fight like mad. This is all politics. I could easily see them try to smear me and make it look like I didn't have his interests at heart. Because that is what they do. Schiavo isn't the only case. The right wing "pro-life" camp has been butting in to other cases as well, it's just that the Schiavo case has gotten more attention.

I do feel for her parents. They fought in court, and lost. That should have been the end of it. People with political motive butt in and draw this out, which is bad for BOTH sides. It's tragic on either side.

[benny05]

166. It is Sad on Both Sides

But I know I would want my husband to move me on for this reason: in his and my mother's judgement, they might think I'm going to heaven, and that my soul is in a better place. Whether I would or not is not known to me. But if my faculties cannot perform reason, especially after 15 years, life as a spouse is not useful to him or being a good daughter to my mother. While death is unkind, so are the medical bills that are unnecessary.

I know her parents are upset with Michael, but I don't blame him for moving on to a certain extent. Perhaps he needed support, and with an adversial (sp) relationship with them, he needed an intimate friend. If he had been like Joe McGinness, that would have been different, but it seems to me, he did the best he could by her, especially the first few years when she seemed to be able to come of her coma. Providing her a proper exit of her human journey with grace is the best course he can take.

Sorry for the parents will miss seeing her physically.

[deek]

48. Michael already has moved on

Perhaps he's trying assuage his guilt?

[DearAbby]

54. What evidence do you have? Why do you assume after 15 yrs ........

Why do you make it seem that Michael is the bad guy...should live like a monk because his wife died 15yrs ago and the shell of his wife is being kept alive artificially?

His life must end too? He cares enough to want to follow Terri's wishes. You have no evidence that she did not express them during their marriage.

[deek]

57. He has 2 children by another woman...

wants to remarry. I call that moving on.

I'm not saying his life had to end. He made a choice. He should let go and continue to move on. Let Terri's parents make their choice in continuing to love and support their daughter. What's the harm?

He has no evidence she didn't want to live if she needed a feeding tube.

Actually, I know many people who have removed that phrase from their living wills, once they discovered how innocuous a feeding tube is and that it really isn't the horror most people visualize when they hear "feeding tube".

How about pacemakers? Colostomies? Diapers? Hearing aids?

She is not a dead person being kept alive by machines.

[truebrit71]

66. She is unable to sustain herself without a feeding tube.

She has no higher brain functions.

She is being kept alive solely by machines.

She expressed a wish to her husband that she would not want to live the way she is now.

Time to let her go.

[deek]

71. i can't sustain myself without a grilled cheese sandwich.

1. so what. Let's administer IQ tests to everyone and......


2. what machines? a feeding tube is just a piece of silicone placed in a little hole near your belly button....a stomach piercing, if you will.

Actually, most feeding tubes are not "tubes" anymore. They are "buttons". Is that better? Certainly sounds cuter to me.

3. questionable

4. Time to let her live and interact with family and friends, not keep her isolated and starve her to death.

[Hugin]

81. Thanks for fighting the good fight...

... deek.

This case is more about the time-to-die.

I can't see anyone letting anyone lay around
for two weeks dying. So help me... I can't.

Why after 15 years is this suddenly such an
issue for the family. Shouldn't they have
started thinking about this, say, 14y-11m-28d
ago?

[deek]

112. welcome

Looking at the legal timeline of events, I can't comprehend how stressful this has been for Terri and her family.

[China_cat]

163. After 15 years

I would think anyone actually living would have the right to get on with that life.

There is no point in keeping yourself shackled to the living dead.

[Hugin]

45. This is a tough question for me...

Now, mind you all I know about the subject I learned
via the corrupt MSM.

They're claiming it would take Terri Schiavo around two
weeks to die if care was ceased. If this is true then
,yes, she *is* a vegetable... But, a stable vegetable.
Her care consists of food and drink for the most part.

"Removing Care" would in this case amount to starving
her to death.

Unfortunately, in this case I'd have to vote against
removing care. Because there are a large percentage of
people who are born in a state similar to her. What
are we to do... Kill them too?

(IPOF... Some ppl claim I'm a vegetable kept alive
only by the food and water I'm provided.)

Now, if she were on respiration or other means of
active mechanical support. Where if it were removed
she would only last a matter of hours. I'd say letting
her go would be the humane thing to do.

Well, there you have it... My Opinion.

*GAD* I'm coming up on Jeb's side in this. That's
a first.

[deek]

51. bingo

Let's all stop eating/drinking for a week or so and see what happens to us.

[ernstbass]

50. Let her die

[ElsewheresDaughter]

52. i have seen video of her responding to her parents voices and following ..

people and things with her eyes and smiling....she just cannot speak...i say let her parents have the care for her that is all they are asking for.

i say let her live

[barb162]

158. me too

[KaliTracy]

55. Personally, for myself, I will make sure my living will states that I

should not exist in such a state. If my son were ever in a state such as this, at any age (he's 5 now), I would be devastated, but I would not think that some day he would wake up and start talking to me again. Hard call, but I think I'd let him rest (die) if all options had been tried. 15 years is a long time to wait for a miracle to happen. There is a point where one needs to let go and grieve.

If it were my husband, and I knew his wish not to exist in such a state but his mother insisted on a court battle to keep him alive, I'd fight for what he wanted (and since this is true, I will make sure we have this in writing, but I'd fight for his wishes if we didn't).

That said, there are a lot of posts about money - no money -- who's right is it to decide, etc. Legally it's the husband's. If there is any insurance payout it would need to go for her hospital bill most probably, but I don't know. If money isn't the issue (and it could very well be), then he should be granted the ability to divorce (if that's what he wants), and leave all of the caretaking up to the parents.

It's not my place to say what someone else's quality of life is, but I know that it's not my personal wish to exist in such a state.

[Pithlet]

60. Absolutely

And, if God forbid, the worst happened (I have two small boys, it's unthinkable), you should have that right to do so. Others should not be able to use political motivation to step in and say THEY know better than you do. Which is exactly what Jeb Bush, and the organization behind this whole mess is doing. And it's wrong.

[Virginian]

65. Dehydration? Starvation? I don't have an answer to this.

"It's not my place to say what someone else's quality of life is, but I know that it's not my personal wish to exist in such a state."

I agree with your statement, but I wouldn't want to be starved to death to remove me from that state.

I guess if I were to forced to decide, I would rather err on the side of life and allow her parents to take care of her.

Can't her parents start divorce proceedings on her behalf? Her husband wants her dead. Isn't that grounds for divorce in Florida?

Can't they sue for custody?
What happens to her once her parents are gone?

[KaliTracy]

70. For me, the method (removing the tube, therefore starving or

dehydrating) wouldn't be a problem. I would not want to live in a vegetative state. That's me. Your living will may have something different. And, if her parents did take over, definitely, they would have to make arrangements for continual care in case something happened to them unexpectedly (or of natural causes).

[China_cat]

164. The problem with a living will

is that unless your family agrees to uphold it, it isn't worth the paper it's written on. Terri's parents could still have done this even if she had had it written down, chisled in stone and witnessed by the Supreme Court. State laws allow them to be challenged and overturned.

And when it comes to a fight like this, the person being fought over will be kept alive until there's no more money to pay the medical bills and then there will be a definite rush to 'accede to the person's wishes'.

[KaliTracy]

167. since Jeb is so gung ho on keeping her alive, shouldn't Florida foot

the bill?

[kentuck]

62. She's taking up all that space and using all that oxygen....

So?

(on edit)
Think of all that we gain if we pull the plug...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

80. I think what bothers me the most about this

is that her parents are willing to take on everything. They still claim she hasn't had the assistance she needs because her husband has been denying it.

Just let him walk away, and give custody over to her parents.

[Hugin]

84. Yeah...

Pull a King Solomon on him!

[Pithlet]

86. Why should he?

I would hope that my husband wouldn't do that to me. I would hope that he would fight my family members, who aren't aware of all of the intimate details of our marriage. I don't fault Terri's family. I think their grief is behind this, and that grief has been exploited by right wing right to life groups, pressuring them to continue this fight, against their daughter's wishes.

[mcar]

97. Bingo!

You said: "I think their grief is behind this, and that grief has been exploited by right wing right to life groups."

That's what this is about. I've followed this case since the beginning and there is nothing, repeat, nothing, that indicates that this poor woman is anything but in a PVS. She has no brain left -- it is full of fluid. There's no "her" there anymore.

Feeding tubes are removed from terminally ill patients on a daily basis; it is a common practice, it is not torture, it is not mistreatment, it is not painful. Check out information on hospice if you don't believe me.

Terri Schiavo is dead, her body just hasn't figured it out yet. Her parents, in their grief, are being manipulated by fundies. Her husband, who, yes, has moved on, is trying to do the best thing for his wife. Jeb has callously made this a political issue in his bid for the White House.

Evidence? Every court has sided with the husband, every court. In all this time, I have never read an interview or seen the husband on TV news, he keeps a very low profile. The parents are all over the place (15 minutes of fame, anyone?). Terri is his wife; isn't that something the fundies hold sacred?

No, he should not just divorce her and let the parents have her. He is trying to do what he believes she would want.

I believe the fundamentalists are using Terri and her parents for their own ends and don't really give a damn about that poor woman. In my mind, this circus is abusive to her.

[Modem Butterfly]

91. Her parents offered him $700,000 to walk away

It's not about the money. It's about honoring his dead wife's wishes.

[Hugin]

94. Sorry, I don't know much about this case...

... but, is this true?

"It's about honoring his dead wife's wishes."

[Modem Butterfly]

100. Here's a neat little timeline of the case, along with a FAQ

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

This has been going on for years, so it's gotten quite complex.

And I was wrong about the offer to her husband. The family offered no money, but rather to let him have what was left of her estate, to not sue him, to not contest a divorce from his wife and to not come after him for her support. In essence, he could have walked away with all the money that is supposedly left over from her jury awards. Yet he chose not to do so. To me, that's extraordinary. This guy is getting slandered in the press day in and day out, constantly dragged into court, and has received nothing but heartache and trouble from this. He could walk away clean. But he hasn't. That speaks volumes about his character.

http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/SettlementLetter10-04.pdf

[Hugin]

107. Thanks for the additional info Modem Butterfly. n/t

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

110. The big problem of course is that it wasn't down on paper, and

we only have his word that it was her wish.

[tishaLA]

139. That;'s often the case, though

and we honor those wishes.

The big problem is that Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry has bankrolled this entire operation because he sees it as a different kind of battle in which Mrs. Schaivo is only ancillary.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

90. Proves that the GOP loves Pregnant Women, brain-dead women,

dead women and fetuses.

[Modem Butterfly]

92. Not pregnant women. Just their cargo.

Pwecious, pwecious fetii that must be protected from their incubator's free will.

/sarcasm

[kerry-is-my-prez]

104. I forgot - they only love DEAD pregnant women (Laci Peterson, etc.)

n/t

[glenhein]

117. didn't gov. bush want to help her?

I thought Gov. Bush tried to stop her husband from killing her?? What happened to that? Was it just another political ploy?

[Modem Butterfly]

119. Yes, it was just a political ploy

Gov. Bush hates marriage. He grandstanded on Michael Schiavo's dead wife Terri in order to chip away at one of the foundation blocks of human society, the notion that married adults no longer are subject to their parents' control. This is why Bush is so opposed to gay marriage- he knows that the more marriages that are out there, the stronger marriage becomes.

[Locut0s]

95. One of the worst things about this is...

Even if they decide to "let her go" the crazy fundies and their "life is so precious that even extreme suffering is preferable" attitude have created an atmosphere where you can't actually legally intervene and end her suffering. Instead they will remove her feeding tube and let her starve to death. Well I guess that's a "natural" war of dying, whatever that may mean, but it sure is a cruel method. If I were ever in such a situation and wanted someone to end my life I would much prefer someone to shoot me in the head then let me slowly starve to death.

What kind of !*#$% messed up world is this? "No it would be cruel to end her life, life is precious and must always be protected NO MATTER WHAT". "Oh but if you are going to end her suffering you can only do so in the worst way possible".

[Locut0s]

137. "life is so precious"....

Oh unless it's Iraqi life, or <insert "axis of evil" country here> life. And unless you've committed a bad crime, and unless you're Christian, and....

[Blue_In_AK]

106. This is a difficult issue, and I see both sides...

...but 15 years is an awfully long time to keep someone alive in that state. My family dealt with this same sort of thing on a smaller scale in the early '90s when my father developed peritonitis after colon surgery and was near death. He was on a feeding tube for several weeks, virtually comatose, nonresponsive, although to outward appearances he looked pink and healthy. The doctors couldn't do anything to wake him up and get him to eat on his own. Finally, after much discussion, my brothers and I, with our mother, made the decision to have him removed from the life support. Rather miraculously, at that point he woke up and demanded some real food and gradually got well enough to come home and live for five more years, although he never regained his former strength. When he had a small stroke at the end of 1993 and was incapacitated, my mother decided to keep him at home, make him as comfortable as possible, with the help of Hospice, and he died in his own bed a couple of months later, as I'm sure he would have wanted.

The difference here I think is that my mom and dad both had written living wills and had made it clear to all of us children that they did NOT want superhuman efforts made to keep them alive if this situation came up. Which reminds me, I need to make that little codicil to my own will, as well as a provision for organ donation.

The Schiavo case clearly emphasizes the need for people to make WRITTEN provisions regarding their wishes if this sort of unfortunate scenario arises ... because probably many of us are going to be there someday and we don't want to put our families and loved ones through this same kind of tragedy.

[noonwitch]

115. I think it's wrong to starve someone to death

That's where I draw the line. I have no problem with removing a respirator from someone who can no longer breathe on her own. I don't care how many painkillers they give her, it is still wrong to starve someone to death.

It's terrible-no one ever wants to be in her condition. Her husband needs to let go, in my opinion, divorce Terri, marry his girlfriend, and let the Schiavos take care of their daughter.

[janx]

118. NOW I AM ANGRY!

Look at what Bob Schindler sent NewsMax subscribers...! I can't believe this.

http://view.exacttarget.com/?ffcd16-febd137970640d79-fe0615737560067876117275

Isn't this illegal, or is Michael Schiavo considered a public figure now?

[Lars39]

122. If this ever ends,

I'd love to see him sue for defamation of character and win.

[johnnie]

176. From what I have seen

The husband isn't as innocent as he is portraying himself to be.
Then again, a lot of the stories I have seen are from Christian sites.

[deek]

125. from another post: re FEAR and being clueless

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=145&topic_id=950

(hope you don't mind, banazir...)
Banazir
4. This isn't a right-to-life vs. right-to-die issue.



And you could turn it around and say, much more accurately, that most people are very afraid of certain kinds of life, so afraid they won't even call it life.

There is a strong disability rights perspective on this, and you've apparently completely missed it in order to frame this as a left wing vs. right wing issue. A little beyond disabled, you say, but where do you draw the line? Some of these disability rights activists are people who have been diagnosed with PVS in the past. One of them, every time she tried to communicate, was declared to be seizing and drugged for it.

Read some of the disability rights perspectives on this before you dismiss everyone as right-wing wackos. Most disabled progressives are very aware that other progressives don't have a clue about our issues. (Check the disability board on this forum if you want to read our gripings about it.) I don't consider how severely disabled a person is to be the dividing line between life and death, and I don't believe in non-human humans or living death. Many of us have sound reasons for not drawing these lines.

Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere. -J.R.R. Tolkien

[flyarm]

130. breaking ..judge just held it over till friday!!

i am in pinellas close to where teri is in hospice...i have no opinion other than ..it was her wishes to not be kept like this..her husband has no say other than to follow her wishes no matter what..if they took his rights away and someone else was put in charge of her fate..they would have to do exeactly what her husband has to do not matter what..because those were teri's wishes.
jeb should never have done what he did because he had no state constitutional right to.

fly

[Catfight]

135. We don't even let dogs starve to death, why do we want to do it to humans?

My thoughts are, give the parents custody, as long as they are willing to foot the bills, etc....Michael doesn't have anymore right fighting for her death as he does her life. But starving a human being to death isn't humane. Might as well put her to sleep like we do animals then.

[Modem Butterfly]

138. The law gives no other options in the state of Florida

They withhold sustenance because they have no other options in that state.

Michael has the right to make medical decisions for Terri because he is her husband. She took that right from her parents and gave it to Michael when she married him. This is why equality in marriage is so important. Michael wants to carry out her wishes, her parents want to stop her wishes from being carried out.

[Locut0s]

146. Agreed but...

I agree that the issue of who has the right to decide this is a sticky issue, the verbal contract the husband said he had with his wife isn't good enough. However the current right wing values atmosphere in the states, and Canada as far as I know, makes it so that people stuck in these situations have to suffer no matter what. "Oh you can't end her life that wouldn't be the 'Christian' thing to do, all life is precious", but I guess it's OK to keep someone alive if they are suffering and you can't end the pain?! And "Oh but if you are going to end her life we are only going to let you do it in the most cruel manner possible". Seriously if I ever ended up in such a situation and I had made it clear that I didn't want to live like that I would only hope someone would be kind enough to shoot me in the head. Seriously it's a hell of a lot more humane than letting someone starve to death!

[trumad]

140. Where is Clint Eastwood when you need him.

[maveric]

142. If she's responsive and not suffering, let her live.

If she's in a vegatative state and suffering then take her off life support and let her die with dignity.

BTW I work in a sub-acute unit of a hospital and have several patients that I feel should go either way. From what I saw on the news she is somewhat responsive, smiles and shows other emotions while not suffering in pain.

[Disturbed]

155. Everytime this comes up many post about it.

For many it is an emotional issue. Seems to me it's a legal and medical issue. Weighing in on this person's medical issue is questionable because most are not qualified to do so. The same goes for the legal issue.

That Jeb Bush intervened is completely wrong in my view. I still don't understand the motives behind his move. I also don't understand the Right To Life folks motives.

I have read volumes about this on the Net and have come to the conclusion that I cannot weigh in on this issue, except to say that everyone should get their legalaties in order ASAP.

Seems to me that now in Amerika there is a struggle going on between the State and the individual concerning rights. Of course that struggle has been going on since the inception of the Republic. Now it is reaching critical mass.

[barb162]

156. Yeah, why doesn't the husband give up the rights to the parents

My feeling is I really doubt he loves her that much. Let the parents take guardianship; let one more set of tests get done by the MDs, etc

[johnnie]

165. I agree with you

I have been looking more into this today and her husband doesn't really seem like the stand up guy they want you to believe he is. I'm not judging him, but he should just give her up to her parents.

[Stop_the_War]

159. LET THE POOR WOMAN DIE!

It looks like she may never recover. If I was in her position I would not want to live any more.

[allalone]

168. I've been thinking about this a lot

They say she is vegetative. I guess that's a medical term, but I think it's a totally different thing if a person can't survive without a machine breathing for them and having their food and water withheld. Anyone will die if their food and water is withheld. It's called starving to death. If you do it to an animal you'll go to jail and here they want to do it to a person. It may be that she never gets better, but it also may be they find a way to help her recover. Sounds like a bad thing to me.

[benny05]

170. But Animals/Pets are Euthanized Every Day

About every 9 seconds..

[allalone]

172. true, but not starved to death

[benny05]

174. But No One Has Say Over the Animals who are put to sleep

Respectfully, I have a different view. These folks have had 15 years to fight against this; many people who are close to death do starve, but it's because they are not hungry at the end. Generally it is their wills, or perhaps the med procedures have reduced their appetites. Animals should have protectors (just as this person had), but even if they are healthy, and if no one adopts them after a certain time period, there isn't a "bed" or "cage" or "room" for them, so they are put to sleep. Very different from humans.

Interesting how pro-birth people think the heart beating is life, but the brain is not that well-developed at that time.

[Idioteque]

169. I live in Pinellas Park, Florida...

...Terri Schiavo is about 6 blocks from my house right now. Kinda scary, nothing important ever happens here.

[bleedingheart]

171. Let's be honest, she is fed through a tube to live...is that life?

she can't lift a fork or hold a glass. she can't even acknowledge whether she enjoyed a meal or is receiving a visitor....is this life?

I say let her die...

[deek]

175. i don't measure the quality of my life

by what i can lift or not.

Food is a very important part of our culture. It's a very important part of my life....I cook gourmet veggie meals almost every day and find great solace in the preparation and ingestion (probably more so the preparation, actually) of tasty food.

It's not the center of everyone's life.

Believe me--receiving nutrition via a gastrostomy tube is no big deal. It's like having a milkshake through a straw. It just bypasses the mouth and esophagus and goes directly into the stomach.

Certainly not a condition for having a life worth living.

Acknowledgment of receiving a visitor has been documented on film

I agree--the simple pleasures in life are key.

Music, the smell of a flower, the simple joy of helium balloons, a loved one's kiss, a warming hug......Terri is fully capable of enjoying all of these pleasures.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

173. My family and I were faced with the same decision about my

Dad in February of 1991.

We all sat down and talked about it and we came to the decision that Daddy would not have wanted to "live" like that. My eldest brother was going to inform Dad's doctor the next morning, but we received a phone call that night that Daddy had died peacefully in his sleep.

The hardest thing anyone ever faces is the death of a loved one. Sometimes you just have to let them go.

Of course, being Catholics, we all believed that my father was reunited with Mom, his siblings and parents. That thought, although it may not be true, was a comfort for all of us.