Has anyone checked out the CNN poll on Jeb Bush / Terri Schiavo????!!!

[sleipnir]

Seriously, this ain't our doin'...

The people have spoken, wow, check out the numbers...

http://www.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/6720.html

[Kool Kitty]

1. Whoa.

I'm sure surprised at this.

[Bozita]

2. Anybody who has lived through something like this is NOT surprised

[Old and In the Way]

4. Exactly.....

I went through this with my mother in 1997....she had ALS and she was completely incapable of physical movement at the end. It is a very difficult decision for each family, but it is their decision ALONE.

[Kool Kitty]

6. I meant that I was surprised that people would vote that way.

I went through a similar situation with my Mother, re: feeding tube. She had Alzheimer's. The way that the media made it sound was that everyone wanted this woman's feeding tube replaced. I'm glad to see these results. I certainly agree that it is the family's decision, not the court.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

8. The familty wants to keep the tube in.

Only the husband wants it removed, and he stands to gain up to a million dollars, to share with his fiance and their two children.

I have read a bit about this, and I am certainly a believer in the right to die with dignity, but as far as I am concerned, if you are going to kill someone (which is what denying them food and water is) then at least do it quick and painlessly. Even mass murderers get that dignity.

Aside from that, it sure does seem that it is the HUSBAND that wants her to die, not her, nor her family. Apparently the husband sued for medical expenses (obviously in order to keep her alive) then immediately after receiving the award tried to have her killed by "remembering" that she had never wanted to be this way. Why did he not remember that BEFORE sueing?

[Bozita]

10. This woman has not spoken a word since her heart attack

I don't know her wishes.

How can you?

[Devils Advocate NZ]

20. Where did I say I knew her wishes?

I said it seems the husband (who has a fiance and is having his second child with her) is the one that wants her to die. There is plenty of reason to doubt the husband's word as to his wife's wishes, including the fact that he originally argued that she should be kept alive, and sued for the ability to do so.

Thus his sudden flip-flop when the money became available makes me question his honesty.

Seeing as you admit you don't know her wishes, why are you so ready to kill her in such a horrendous way? Why do you want her to starve to death?

[hlthe2b]

12. The government has no business involving itself...

it is a family matter. Only if there is criminal intent, should the government intervene...

Having said that, I believe the court should have given more latitude to the wishes of the parents... I think they should have had the ultimate say, and not the husband.

Now would be a very good time for GOD to intervene, I think....

[chiburb]

14. 2 responses:

1. There are rumors that Mr. Schiavo will inherite a large sum of money -- not true; what little money there might have been was eaten up by medical bills years ago.

More about the money Mr. Schiavo is allegedly trying to kill his wife to inherit -- according to Time magazine, in 1992 he was awarded $700,000 for his wife's care and another $300,000 for loss of companionship. After more than a decade there can't be much left to "inherit."

I've even heard people say this is some kind of victory for the disabled. Ms. Schiavo is not "disabled." She is missing a large part of her brain. In nature, that is called "dead." She is already gone, for all practical purposes.

2. Please note: Ms. Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state since 1990. This is not the same thing as being in a coma. Ms. Schiavo has no hope of recovery, for the simple reason that most of her brain cortex is gone.
Mrs Schiavo's brain scans have not been made public but Dr Walker has followed the case closely through media reports and court records.
"The majority of her cerebral cortex - the part of the brain that thinks and feels - has been destroyed and replaced by fluid," he said.

"She doesn't have any perception, there is no reason to believe she can suffer."

Unlike a patient in a coma, Dr Walker believes there is no hope for recovery for someone in Mrs Schiavo's condition - known as permanent vegetative state - because the cerebral cortex does not regrow once destroyed.

Ms. Schiavo still has reflexes, which her parents and others who want her kept alive have projected to be signs of intelligence. But if you don't have a brain, you don't have a brain.

Source: http://www.mahablog.com/

[kutastha]

17. interesting

>>Ms. Schiavo still has reflexes, which her parents and others who want her kept alive have projected to be signs of intelligence. But if you don't have a brain, you don't have a brain.<<

If neurons are damaged in the brain, reflexes are actually more pronounced (upper motor neuron syndrome; hyperreflexia - loss of inhibition of the reflex by the brain) It's when they're damaged at the cord or somewhere along the path of the nerves to the tendon that they are decreased (lower motor neuron syndrome). Interesting conclusion by the family.

[chiburb]

18. It really boils down to this:

Whether in this thread or the numerous others on this subject, there are certain people that will NOT change their minds regardless of what facts are put in front of them. The husband may have ZERO coming after she stops breathing and people will still call him a golddigger.
She may have the brain of a tree (it moves and responds too!), yet people will still argue that this is MURDER!
I think it is best to post and run in these threads, or stay out altogether...

[Devils Advocate NZ]

25. Answers:

Firstly, there is the question of a life insurance policy. I have read accusations that the husband has a policy to the tune of $750,000 that does not pay out until she dies.

This may be untrue, but does not negate the fact that the husband has a REASON to have his wife die, in the form of a fiance and two children. Once she dies, it clears the way for his marriage, and removes the stigma of divorcing a disabled wife.

Secondly, new research shows that "persistent vegetative states" are NOT what they appear to be. Scans done on such patients show that the same parts of the brain that respond in a normal person to things like the voice of a loved one, respond in the brains of people in such states.

As for the amount of brain she has, I assume you know about those cases of people who lived perfectly normal lives with most of their brain missing. In one case, a patient had only a few millimetres of cerebral cortex surrounding a fluid filled hole, but still functioned perfectly well, and was not diagnosed with any problems until after death.

Finally, consider this:

An extensive summary in regard to the clinical criteria for determining human death is found in Defining Death, the report of the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (2) In accord with traditional practice the Commission accepts irreversible cessation of spontaneous cardio-pulmonary function as one clinical criterion for death. But the Commission also maintains that death may be determined if brain function is lacking because the brain integrates the activity of the body. However, in order using brain function as the criterion, the Commission requires cessation "of all functions of the entire brain including the brain stem."

That "brain death" involves more than the higher brain function also was made clear in one of the first scientific seminars to investigate this topic. (3) The seminar participants agreed that "brain death is defined as irreversible destruction of the neuronal contents of the intracranial cavity. This includes both cerebral hemispheres, including cortex and deep structures, as well as the brain stem and the cerebellum. An equivalent term is total brain infarction to the first cervical level of the spinal cord" (p.7).

The President's Commission rejects explicitly the theory that higher brain death alone, that is, absence of function in the cortex with the brain stem retaining its function, would constitute a criterion for human death because:

"First...it is not known which portions of the brain are responsible for cognition and consciousness; what little is known points to substantial interconnections among brainstem, subcortical structures and the neocortex. Thus, the "higher brain" may well exist only as a metaphorical concept, not in reality. Second, even when the sites of certain aspects of consciousness can be found, their cessation often cannot be assessed with the certainty that would be required in applying a statutory definition" (p.40).
http://www.op.org/Domcentral/study/kor/87050809.htm

So, would you kill her, knowing that neither you nor the doctors have any idea whether she is really able to comprehend what is happening to her because she is unable to effectively communicate her wishes even if she were able to comprehend?

She is NOT dead, that is clear. By withholding food and water, the doctors are KILLING her. She breathes on her own, her body digests food, and mai ntains all the functions of a living body except for the ability to eat and drink when desired.

Many quadraplegics are the same. Without external help they can't feed themselves and in some case they can't breathe, but because they can communicate we treat them differently. No one would agree to withholding food and water from Christopher Reeves for example.

Nobody knows what is going on in this womans brain, not even the doctors, so what right does anyone have to say that she should be killed?

[spooky3]

16. I agree with you, DANZ.

[deek]

9. Surprised here

and am living a life that i fear could turn into this.

I'm losing faith in mankind's humanity.

[Old and In the Way]

3. It's all about State Control, isn't it?

I remember when conservatives used to rail about government interference in one's personal lives.

I understand the emotion of the Schiavo case, but Bush did this to score points with his political base. No reason to bring the State into the middle of this intensely personal issue, IMHO. If the courts had sided with the husband, why make a legislative point on this case, knowing it's probably unconstitutional?....purely political at the expense of the family's involved.

[frank frankly]

5. bingo, yo!

It is all about State Control.

[Waistdeep]

7. It is about yet another wedge issue

To be used to divide the electorate.

[sangh0]

13. Yep, it's pure politics

and it has little to do with how Repuke politicians feel. After all, they know that regardless of the law, their women will be able to get an abortion if they need/want one.

[soup]

19. Politics

You sure called that one correctly.

TALLAHASSEE - By injecting themselves into the life-or-death drama of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman whose fate has become a cause celebre for the nation's Christian conservative movement, Gov. Jeb Bush and the Republican-led Legislature are reflecting the wishes of a constituency that could be critical to GOP success in next year's elections.

Although several moderate Republican lawmakers voted Tuesday against allowing Bush to overrule the court order that removed Schiavo's feeding tube, the governor's actions on such a high-profile case could energize the very evangelicals who stayed home in 2000 when Bush's brother, now the president, lost the national popular vote and narrowly won Florida.

>snip<

The Schiavo vote Tuesday unfolded with leaders from the Christian Coalition, the Florida Catholic Conference, Operation Rescue and other religious groups -- groups that bind together a voting bloc that President Bush's senior political advisor, Karl Rove, has pledged to court next year -- watching from the public galleries.

Rove lamented in a 2001 speech that 4 million evangelicals failed to vote, suggesting that their absence from the polls was largely to blame for the narrow outcome.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/state/7074643.htm

[ClintonTyree]

11. Jeb's...............

a right wing, conservative tool of the religiwhackos, what else would you expect from him? God probably told him to intervene, God talks to ALL of the Bush's. I believe they have God on speed dial, they're pals.

[AntiCoup2K4]

15. They only THINK they have God on speed dial

if they were paying attention they would realize the calls were being routed to area code 666 :evilgrin:

[radwriter0555]

21. He can legally divorce her, and remand her care over to her parents..

now, what would stop him from doing this?

[SiobhanClancy]

22. How about this...

He is honoring his marriage vows.
<tongue firmly in cheek>

[maha]

23. The parents are looney toons.

The more I hear about the parents, the nuttier I suspect they are. The husband may have legitimate concerns about what the parents would do to her.

[Snellius]

24. AOL poll has similar numbers

AOL's polls usually trend in a very traditional/conservative direction, so it was surprising to see there numbers running 2 to 1 against Bush's decision. The ratio may have been even higher if they had not posed the first question "Would you let her die?"