Terri Schiavo - Disconnect Her Tube, Or Leave It In...And Why?

[mermaid]

Poll question: Terri Schiavo - Disconnect Her Tube, Or Leave It In...And Why?

I'm wondering what gives out there in Florida with this. I mean, we have a woman who, for 15 years, has been in a vegitative state...is, in all likelihood, NEVER going to get better or lead anything resembling an actual LIFE...and yet, Jeb Bush is still sticking his nose in, on the side of her parents, trying to keep this tube in...for what?? So she can be a breathing piece of meat, and continue to line the pockets of doctors and the hospital, which are surely making money hand over fist, keeping this woman "alive," while tearing Michael Schiavo apart...tearing the family apart...what gives?

I know I sure as shit wouldn't want to be kept as a living, breathing piece of meat for fifteen years, with no chance, whatsoever for recovery! If I were Terri, I'd make it my personal business to come back and HAUNT the mo-fo's who kept me in that state for that long.

Why can't the parents...accept the fact that their daughter is never going to get better...and set her free...and stop tearing each other apart...and why can't Jeb Bush keep his big nose out of it??

So, please vote in the poll, so we can have a flash on what public opinion is out there, and if you feel like it, go into WHY you voted as you did. In my case, I am voting for the tube's removal. I'm glad I have a Living Will, because NO-ONE is EVER gonna make me suffer as a breathing piece of meat for fifteen years, when my chances of regaining any semblance of a normal life is ZERO!!

[Katarina]

1. Leave the tube in

For the simple fact that I don't believe in starving her to death. If I decided tomorrow that my dog was too ill to go on and chose to starve her to death, I would go to jail. It's a sad world when people have more compassion over a sick animal than a human being. Find a way to peacefully put her to sleep without torture and I will change my mind.

[CindyDale]

6. Yes, and the parents say she responds to them

The husband is having children with some other woman, but won't divorce. To me, it's bizarre, the idea of this man obsessed with trying to keep these people from their daughter and insisting on stopping feedings.

It's not as though she were on life support. That would be different.

[mermaid]

11. the Only Problem With That Is That Euthanasia On Humans Is Not Legal

Sad. We let our pets go when they are beyond help and hope. We spare them the suffering, and the agony, and the pain. We set them free. And yet we won't let that same thing happen for humans who are beyond all help and hope. Why? I suspect it is because doctors are making a lot of money off keeping her "alive." And doctors make a lot of money off keeping other people "alive." And because someone powerful is making money...on the back of someone else's suffering...they will not allow the suffering person that final peace.

Maybe if they were given permission to harvest her organs and SELL them, and make a bunch of money that way, maybe THEN they might agree to it...just the sick system wanting to suck every last dollar...avery last shred of joy, every last shred of dignity out of you...and then...FUCK YOU, you no longer have anything left useful for us to suck, so we take you to the curb in a Glad Bag now.

Fuck...I can't even go on...this whole goddam thing just makes me sick.

[Trillo]

16. I agree that disconnecting a feeding tube is likely inhumane.

I believe the reason this is being fought so vehemently is that disconnecting her feeding tube would set a tremendous precedent towards assisted suicide, by the argument that getting a quick injection that kills is kinder, this in turn might effect the whole health care syndicate: people might actually opt-out of end-of-life medical care instead of bankrupting the family with medical expenses.

If an injection to end her life isn't legally available, the next kindest course is to let her "survive on her own", even if it results in her death. Isn't that the same survival condition the poor and homeless are served daily?

[Warpy]

29. Sorry, you're off base there

Allowing nature to take its course by withdrawing artificial feeding would be cruel only if hospice weren't allowed to step in and keep her comfortable, and believe me when I say they err on the side of comfort. She will be maintained on pain medication and probably benzodiazepines, and will be allowed to slip away in as much comfort as can be provided.

Since Ms. Schiavo gets hydration as well as nutrition via the tube, the whole process will likely take only a few short days.

True cruelty is keeping her between life and death, incapable of partaking in real life, able to react to pain, deprived of everything that makes us human, and makes life worth living. Wringing every last bit of misery out of a prolonged death is cruel.

I do have a lot of sympathy for her parents, because no parent ever wants to outlive a child. However, they've had her between life and death for 15 years, and it's time to respect her husband's wishes and let her go.

[Mugweed]

2. Even though I voted

for disconnect, can't they just OD the body and stop the heart instead of waiting for starvation and dehydration? Does the passive killing make it easier for those that have to actually pull the tube? Choke her, put a pillow over her head, make it quick just so you don't have to hang around and keep tabs on a slowly dying sack of flesh.

[CindyDale]

12. Um, that is called murder

[Mugweed]

22. Only right now

I hear that killing the unborn was once also considered murder...legally that is. It isn't right now, but many consider it to be so still. Semantics and "life". I don't claim to know. I just think that when you decide on death, faster is better.

[Warpy]

30. Abortion's illegality before 1974 was based on public health laws

designed to protect women from septic abortion. It had nothing to do with protecting the bay-bees. That only became the sentimental rallying cry of the sentimental right after Roe v. Wade legalized early therapeutic abortion.

Roe v. Wade had as much to do with recognizing that the medical technology had advanced as it did with extending the rights of women to control their own destinies.

[Katarina]

26. Following your logic

Isn't willingly starving a person to death also murder? What's the difference? If you are going to kill a person isn't it better to just be done with it instead of having them linger for up to 2 weeks? In the long run wouldn't it be better for everyone involved? Do you think her family really wants to do this death vigil for 2 weeks?

[Mugweed]

33. My point n/t

[CindyDale]

36. One difference is that you would be charged with murder for smothering

her. The law might possibly allow you to starve her to death. As yet, it is undecided. Her family wants her to live.

[donheld]

3. Let the poor woman go

She's suffered enough.

[wolfgirl]

4. Disconnect the tube...

let her finally rest. The doctors are overwhelmingly in agreement, there is no hope for recovery.

(PS - put your own wishes in writing so your family will never be faced with making such a terrible decision for you. Peace!)

[noamnety]

5. Undecided

I saw an interview with the dad, who was saying she in fact is not in a vegetative state - that she's able to eat without the tube with assistance, but they use the tube because it's so time consuming. He was saying that she does respond to stimuli, and with therapy - which she isn't getting for some reason - she can learn to speak again and get better at things like eating, although for sure she is brain damaged. A number of her doctors have said she is not in a permanent vegetative state.

And then we have the husband and his paid (according to the dad) experts saying she IS in a permanent vegetative state.

So I'm going with undecided, because I don't know which side to believe. It's clear one side is misrepresenting the facts, but I don't have enough faith in the media to trust how they are presenting it.

[ET Awful]

8. The parents paid experts have vested interest in keeping her on a tube

they STOP getting paid if it gets disconnected. They're making a fortune off doing nothing but letting her wither away in bed.

[DrWeird]

7. I'd say euthanize.

Just removing the tube and letting her starve seems cruel.

Can they harvest her organs?

[mermaid]

14. Thanks A Lot, Jonathan Swift!!

I mentioned exactly the same thing...and I can't help but think of Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" when I raise the very same question about harvesting her organs...because you know they'd probably just love to!

[DrWeird]

31. Yes.

I'm sure somebody in need of a kidney or lung would love to.

[mermaid]

38. I Was Thinking More In Terms Of

a doctor needing to figure out a way to make the next yacht payment!

[REP]

41. She's Been on TPN for Over 15 Years - Her Organs Are Useless

She's been on TPN (total parenteral nurition) for over 15 years, making her an unsuitable organ donor for liver, kidneys, intestines and probably lungs and heart (well, that and she had a heart attack, leading to her present condition). Those in persistant vegetative states are not vending machines for those of us with failing organs (I'm in kidney failure myself) and her right to a dignified death should not be predicated upon whether or not her body might be useful to others. The reason to remove her feeding tube is because it is the kindest and most humane option open. There is no need need to prolong this woman's death any longer than it already has been.

[mermaid]

44. No Kidding!

I agree....Those in persistent vegetative states are NOT vending machines for those of us with failing organs. which is one more reason they will not let her go.

My point was...if they COULD use her as a vending machine, in that way, then they might let her go.

Call me sick, call me cynical, call me jaded, but I think everyone's interest here is more on the money, and less on Terri's wishes.

[Walt Starr]

9. "She's dead, Jim."

Let the shell die, fifteen years later.

[ET Awful]

10. I say disconnect the tube . . .why?

Because that's what I would want done for me if I were in her situation. It's that simple.

[qanda]

13. An extremely difficult situation

Hard to say. I was jumped on yesterday for being honest and having an opinion, so I'll keep my thoughts to myself.

[KittyWampus]

15. Disconnect Tube & Give Body Painkillers Till All Functions Stop

Terri's Neocortex is NOT THERE.

Her soul has moved on a long time ago.

You can't sit in a chair that has no legs or seat.

The only thing the body is capable of doing is reflexive in nature.

It's disgusting the way people identify so obsessively with their physical bodies.

[porphyrian]

17. Jeb! is a fucking fundamentalist republican asshole.

There really isn't any better expanation than that. Try to accept it and move on.

[cornermouse]

18. Why the tube should be disconnected.

http://crossingthecreek.com/guts.htm

"Appetite decreases

The patient may stop eating entirely. Indeed, this is to be expected. Progressive loss of appetite is a hallmark of dying process and is a mechanism by which the body keeps itself more comfortable. This is often very hard for caregivers to accept but it is important to listen to what the patient wants and not what you think s/he ought to be wanting. Bodies have been going through this for thousands of years and have worked out effective techniques for keeping themselves comfortable. Pay attention to what the body is saying it wants… or does not want.

As physical bodies progress through the dying process they lose their ability to digest food effectively. If the patient tries to force themselves to eat when their stomach's ability to digest food is diminished, the food just sits there, causing a feeling of being bloated... or like they swallowed a brick. The stomach will likely reject food outright; i.e. vomit, if the patient insists on trying to eat after having lost their appetite.

If the goal is to achieve comfort, then force feeding is a direct contradiction of that goal. Forcing terminally ill people to eat causes them discomfort."

The article continues on with information about fluids, which is pretty much the same as food. Caretaker reaction paragraph is applicable as well. I think Terri's situation has a lot of similarity to what is in the article. I also hope I am never in the situation that she is in. I know her parents are trapped between pain and hope, but it is time they let her go.

[sundancekid]

34. thanks for your post/link ... it's very helpful to me ... funny how

hypocritical some positions are: life at all costs, but death penalty is just fine; do not kill fetuses, but go right ahead and kill in war; teach only the "natural" viewpoint of life/creation, but support only the "artificial" viewpoint of death/demise ... curioser and curioser

for those interested or in need of more information be sure to ask about or simple google how to execute Physician's Directives and Living Wills; also, be sure to file them with hospitals, county records, courts or wherever else your towns/cities allow ...

[Swamp Rat]

19. Keeping this person stuffed with tubes is sadistic in the extreme.

The country is full of psychos. :(

[Medium Baby Jesus]

20. Remove the tube

There are two reasons. One, because she expressed that belief before she got ill. Two, it will piss off the fundies down here in Florida.

[WillowTree]

35. Your first reason...

.....is something that we only have her "husband's" word for. No one else, apparently, ever heard her say that. Just more evidence that we need to put our wishes about such things in writing and have them signed-off on by those who we might leave behind.

Your second reason is.......I was going to say something along the lines of "ludicrous", but stupid in the face of a human tragedy is closer to the reality of it.

Honestly, it's a difficult situation. I just have to think that there's a piece of this puzzle missing somewhere. Her blood family is ready and willing to take full personal and financial responsibility for her if the husband will just divorce her and walk away. After all these years and with him having moved on and created a family elsewhere, I have to question what his motives really are. I just plain don't believe that this is all "conviction" and "respecting her wishes" on his part.

I can truthfully say that if I had no brain waves, I wouldn't want to be kept on a respirator. But starving any living thing to death is something that I just can't reconcile myself with. That just seems wrong to me.

Whatever happens, I wish her and all who love her peace and closure, whenever and however it comes.

[CindyDale]

21. Disability rights groups watching this, too (it's not just Jeb)

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-42,GGLD:en&q=disability+rights+terri

I don't see this as a simple issue at all.

[BuyingThyme]

23. None of my business.

[morningglory]

24. I certainly would not want a photo of my drooling open-mouthed

face on national tv. Please kill me before that happens! If I can't walk outside and water my flowers and look at the butterflies, I do not want to be kept alive. In fact if I can not enjoy food, and good company and reading, what point is there to living?

[medeak]

25. both sides are receiving $

to fight court case.

Just remember to make your wishes succinct and clear and have on file

[cornermouse]

27. You also better hope that they pay attention to your

written wishes. Sometimes, they don't.

[medeak]

28. they have to be on file at hospital

worked with dying for decades... it's not pretty if one has written wishes and not on file... they are forced to resuscitate until found.

Know from personal experience...had mad drive to bank with client's wife to open security box.

[DearAbby]

32. It has and always been up to her husband. Courts had agreed time and again

The woman died 15yrs ago...its time to allow the body to die as well.

[cornermouse]

40. Not just with the hospital.

Need to have copies available for ambulance and across the whole spectrum.

[Illinois_Dem]

37. "Bad cases make bad law"

That's an old legal maxim, and this case is a perfect illustration of it.

[progressivebydesign]

39. Problem is.. feeding her with a tube is not extraordinary measures..

.. It's one thing if someone is hooked up to life support, and has no brain function. But she is being fed thru tubes.. that's all. So, she'd starve to death.

I was JUST thinking of that young woman that was speechless and responded with blinks, (tho they weren't sure if she was really responding), WELL.. she started talking the other day. She will live in an institution the rest of her life, from the injuries suffered from a drunk driver... BUT she is now talking and communicating with her family AFTER 20 YEARS! I can't help but wonder.. if you let someone that cannot communicate with you, starve to death, are you really doing what she wants? WHAT if the parents of the woman that suddenly began communicating had decided to let her die? All the while, she was in there.. unable to communicate. It's not really apples and oranges, because this woman's body is wracked with muscle spasms, to the point of being fed thru a tube (sound familiar).

[Nikia]

43. I agree

I don't really know whether she is "dead" or severely disabled, but ability to eat on one's own shouldn't be the standard for life substainment. There are disabled people who need feeding tubes that are able to communicate and do other things that non disabled people do. I am not sure what the precedence is on this one. If she was more functional but could not eat, would the husband be able to decide to remove the feeding tube? Isn't this similiar to not bringing food to a highly immobile person who is unable to prepare or even retrieve food for him or herself? Wouldn't that be considered neglect?

[dsc]

42. The law should be followed in this case

but something needs to be done about the unfettered discresion given to husbands or wives in these cases. Clearly this man has moved on and his views shouldn't be dispositive. Maybe requiring a court hearing in cases like this to determine her real wishes is the right call.

[Vinca]

45. I'm very conflicted about this case and voted "undecided."

For starters, isn't it inhumane to starve a person to death? Why can't they be euthanized peacefully by injection? It seems convicted killers are getting more compassion here. Secondly, she apparently didn't have a living will, so no one knows her wishes with any certainty. The parents want to assume the entire responsibility for her and maybe that's the best solution. I don't know . . . I really don't. I'm a proponent for the right to die, but this case isn't cut and dried. It almost doesn't make sense to discuss it without seeing all the court testimony, reading the documents, talking to the parents, talking to the husband and making a visit to Terri. (P.S. Be sure you've got a Living Will.)