| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| susquesus |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 01:20:20 AM
Here's your chance to weigh in with words and a vote- what do you think about the Schiavo situation? Should her husband be able to carry out her wishes? Should the parents be able to prolong her life in hopes that she may make a partial recovery? What do you think about the political wranglings surrounding this? Are they warranted? Do you have an agreement with your family? |
| 22 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - April 01 2005 : 10:52:14 PM
quote:
Monadnock Guide stated: Doc, - I agree completely about complying with someone's whose wishes have already been made know. However, without that information, - deciding someones elses life or death is assuming an awful lot. I would err on the side of life, - given no additional information.
That has been my whole point as well...
YMH&OS,
The Sarge |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - April 01 2005 : 1:26:52 PM
Doc, - I agree completely about complying with someone's whose wishes have already been made know. However, without that information, - deciding someones elses life or death is assuming an awful lot. I would err on the side of life, - given no additional information. |
| Doc M |
Posted - April 01 2005 : 12:51:01 PM
In my case, my sister and I were "lucky" if you can use such a ridiculous term in a situation like this. My mother had made her
wishes well-known to us beforehand, and she had a living will. It
was a case where we both "knew" deep in our souls what she wanted...
and even then it was a far from easy decision. This is why I say
so strongly that no one who has never had to be put in this
situation can possibly make a judgement from the outside. It's
a deeply private and painful decision that should only be made by
those closest to the patient, and by those unselfish enough to go
by what their loved one wanted...not by their own wants and needs.
I know many would not agree with our choice, but I only say...don't
judge until you're in that situation. And didn't someone once say,
"Judge not lest you be judged?"
Doc M |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 11:36:17 PM
It's a diffucult difficult case. I have/had a step daughter that's now 35, she's extremely handicapped. She's been in a nursing home since she was 26. She's blind, cannot walk, and frankly can't carry on any kind of a conversation. She "might" recoganize something/someone, - but often who really knows? She's had a feeding tube in her stomach for about 6 years now. It's how she gets her medication also. There is a standing order to not revive her should "something" happen. However, to remove that tube would kill her. She's not on a respirator, simply needs help eating. While there's no chance of a recovery, - why kill her? Is she to be looked at like an animal, - that one puts out of it's misery? If anyone pulled out that feeding tube, - I'm not sure what I'd do. |
| Kaylynn44 |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 6:42:59 PM
Having had to make the horrible decision to withdraw life support from a beloved parent when there was no hope for recovery, I can
say from experience that NO ONE can understand what's involved unless
you are there. And no one -- no idiot politician, reporter, or
outside party no matter what their supposed "religious" beliefs --
should have been involved in any way whatsoever. The fact that this
poor woman's death was turned into a circus -- all that was missing
was a geek biting the head off a chicken -- was appalling and
disgusting.
Doc M.,
I feel the same way. Although I have never had to be in that position, I can really feel for anybody that has to make a decision like that. It is probably one of the hardest decisions that you would ever have to make.
The one good thing that has come out of this whole thing is that alot of people now realize that they really need a living will, so that they don't have to go through what Terri and her family have gone through.
Love,
Kay |
| Christina |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 12:03:26 PM
My belief is that we don't have to worry about Terri Schiavo anymore and that we really didn't have to for 15 years...I believe she went to be with God when her cerebral cortex, the part of her that made her who she was and allowed her to be the person God created, stopped functioning.
My main prayer now echoes Doc M's. I pray for peace and healing for everybody involved on both sides of this conflict. I pray that they will use lessons learned to do good in the world and to help others in similar difficult situations, and that this will not descend into a years-long cycle of revenge, exploitation and petty fighting, that Terri's memory won't be blighted by repeated appearances on the talk show and book circuit. but sadly, I fear, like Doc M said, that my prayers along this line may not be answered. I hope I'm wrong.
Christina |
| Doc M |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 10:46:41 AM
Having had to make the horrible decision to withdraw life support from a beloved parent when there was no hope for recovery, I can
say from experience that NO ONE can understand what's involved unless
you are there. And no one -- no idiot politician, reporter, or
outside party no matter what their supposed "religious" beliefs --
should have been involved in any way whatsoever. The fact that this
poor woman's death was turned into a circus -- all that was missing
was a geek biting the head off a chicken -- was appalling and
disgusting.
I pray that this woman has finally found peace, and that both sides
of her family will go on with their lives...and resist the temptation
to turn their ordeal into a movie of the week or a tell-all book, but
I suppose that's a vain hope.
Doc M |
| Diane B. |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 10:19:45 AM
Well, I guess this is all water under the bridge now, as Terri Schiavo has now passed away... 
Click on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7293186/ to read more.
My thoughts and prayers are with her family, and they have my deepest sympathies. May God bless Terri's soul and may she finally rest in peace. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 07:49:08 AM
quote:
caitlin asks: I have a question, (if it has already been addressed, I apologize - let me know)
I was sent an article from the Herald-Times in February. Other than that article, there seems to be little mention of Terri Schiavo having an eating disorder that brought on a potassium problem that lead to her heart attack and then her coma. I'm curious as to why this hasn't been talked/discussed about more ?
It is a major problem! And it is a cruel irony in Terri Schiavo's case....
Well, I think that the lack of coverage of that theory, was that it is that, a theory. According to the interviews with a couple of doctors familiar with the case, it was never truly ascertained as to the cause of her suspected 'heart attack'. But, in order to look at that theory, one may ask, "What brought this eating disorder on?" There have been several witnesses to the mental abuse of Terri (Most of what they had was hearsay evidence, because it was of statements allegedly made by Michael, and related by Terri to a close confidant; who in-turn told it to her co-workers. Therefore, it too only remains a theory.), and if a person is pre-disposed to such a condition, being told your are overweight, and undesirable because of that, would only add fuel to the fire.
Your Most Humble Servant, |
| caitlin |
Posted - March 31 2005 : 12:38:47 AM
I have a question, (if it has already been addressed, I apologize - let me know)
I was sent an article from the Herald-Times in February. Other than that article, there seems to be little mention of Terri Schiavo having an eating disorder that brought on a potassium problem that lead to her heart attack and then her coma. I'm curious as to why this hasn't been talked/discussed about more ?
It is a major problem! And it is a cruel irony in Terri Schiavo's case.... |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 01:23:39 AM
The more I am hearing of Mr. Schiavo's conduct of the past several years, the more I believe that there is something, possibly criminal, afoot here. All of you have made some sound points, but there are a few which I would like to address:
quote:
Christina noted: I abhor the fact of Congress and the President interfering in personal and family medical matters. Let the Florida state courts fight it out for 45 years if that's what folks want, but when folks in D.C start getting involved in medical matters, that's a slippery slope nobody wants to go down.
The 'slope' you speak of started with Roe vs. Wade; even though it was ruled as a 'privacy' issue, its roots were in the federal interference with an existing state statute concerning a medical procedure... Too late.
quote:
Christina also noted: My understanding at one point in my life was that the conservative side of government believed in LESS government interference in personal matters.
I would agree with your basic statement, except that all that was done here was to afford Ms. Schiavo the same due process rights that are afforded to the murderer of Philadelphia Policeman, Daniel Faulkner. To play 'Devil's Advocate', and turn the tables, could a question be raised as to the conduct of those on the ideological 'left'? To wit: Is it not a society's responsibility to protect the 'least' among us?
quote:
Carter added: Her "husband" (who by the way has gotten on with his life (I can't blame him there) and lives with a women with whom he has had two kids) forbid the bottle feeding.
If he has truly 'gotten on with his life', why then did he not grant a divorce? Perhaps life insurance, may have something to do with it? Or maybe, he was worried that she might have recovered fully enough (If he would have granted the rehab treatments that the court settlement was to help pay for), she might have related what had really occured on the day of her accident. (Remember what I said about possible criminal activity, it had already been documented of verbal and mental abuse. How far would it be for him to do physical as well?) Also, why is he so concerned about having her body cremated immediately after death? Hmmmm, sounds like someone does not want even the most basic post mortem examination...
quote:
misschanelno5 asks: Questions, if anyone knows:
What, ultimately, is the Shiavo family's argument? I keep hearing things about the injunction request, but I'm curious about the exact points of law being put forth for consideration. Are they going forward strictly on questions of due process, or is more involved?
Also -- I read in an article last week that Terri can swallow. Is the feeding tube necessary, or does it just make her care easier and more consistent? Or is the swallowing claim true?
I think you mean the Schindler Family (Terri's madien name), if so, I believe that their argument is that no one had any clue as to the existence of a 'refuse to sustain' wish. The fact that her husband only came up with that story, after he got the money and refused any rehab, tells me that there probably was never any such wish.
Secondly, I too have he |
| Kaya |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 9:21:59 PM
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18737&page=2&pp=25
Enough said. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 8:37:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Carter
Terry Schiavo is very much like an infant. She can laugh, cry, suck from a bottle, babble and feel pain. Like an infant, she cannot feed herself.
...and for these very reasons, I cannot be convinced that she is in a "vegetative state." Is an infant considered to be a vegetable? No. She is awake, not comatose. She has functions. She is not relying on a machine to help her breathe. Christopher Reeve did. No one said he should be removed from his machine and left to die. When my husband's cancer progresses to the point that he must have a feeding tube, shall I order it removed so that he can slowly starve to death? I think not.
All I have to do is watch the video of Terri looking into her mother's eyes and to see the smile on her face and I tear up. I think that removing that feeding tube to force her to die is absolutely inhumane. Her so-called "caring husband" should be locked in a room and be given nothing to eat or drink so that he may slowly starve to death.
|
| misschanelno5 |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 7:55:53 PM
Thanks for the link, Kaylynn! The site is really useful -- especially finding links to the court decisions conveniently grouped together. (I'd forgotten how hard it can be to read appellate summaries ... yeesh.)
Anyway -- highly recommended for anyone who wants more information. The court documents answered my questions. |
| Kaylynn44 |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 6:12:04 PM
I found a very informative website. Since I didn't know too terribly much about Terri Shiavo, I found this site very interesting. Here is the addy if anyone wants to read it: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html
Love,
Kay |
| Carter |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 5:49:55 PM
Terry Schiavo is very much like an infant. She can laugh, cry, suck from a bottle, babble and feel pain. Like an infant, she cannot feed herself. Her "husband" (who by the way has gotten on with his life (I can't blame him there) and lives with a women with whom he has had two kids) forbid the bottle feeding. So she is being allowed to slowly starve to death. We have all seen pictures of starving children; the cracked lips, the swollen belly...that is what Terry is going through now. She will suffer greatly. |
| misschanelno5 |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 5:38:19 PM
I agree completely with Kaylynn's points -- I would never want to be kept alive artificially on my own; if I had a child, I couldn't say the same. In Terri's case especially, where she does appear to respond to stimuli, including her family members, it would be especially wrenching to have to let go.
On one hand, though no two marital situations are alike and I've only heard sketchy stories of the Schiavo marriage,I'd want my husband to have final say over my fate in a situation like Terri's. There's no telling what my parents might do! (I could see them donating me to some strange fringe group for ongoing study!)
On the other hand, I can't shake my initial impression that money has a big part in this. I wish that weren't true, but it looks that way. Maybe that's not the point ... maybe those reasons shouldn't even matter when we try to boil this all down to the bottom line: What's best for Terri and what she wanted. But Michael Schiavo brought this motion ... and there's something about that guy I just don't trust.
Questions, if anyone knows:
What, ultimately, is the Shiavo family's argument? I keep hearing things about the injunction request, but I'm curious about the exact points of law being put forth for consideration. Are they going forward strictly on questions of due process, or is more involved?
Also -- I read in an article last week that Terri can swallow. Is the feeding tube necessary, or does it just make her care easier and more consistent? Or is the swallowing claim true? |
| Christina |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 11:52:55 AM
This IS a tough one and I've heard many intelligent opinions from both sides, but I personally believe she should be allowed to die in peace. She has been in this state for 15 years. There has been no visible improvement really. A raft of doctors and neurologists have weighed in on this issue and said the same thing. Had she been in this state for only two years or even five years, I might say ... hold out for a miracle, but 15 years. Nope. I don't think she's coming back. My best friend works in a nursing home and has cared for many patients in Terri's same state. She says that when the cerebral cortex or whatever has turned to liquid, there is no hope for a meaningful recovery.
I won't go into the dispute between Michael Schiavo and the family. Too many ugly issues to raise. But here are two points that bother me:
1. Terri's parents claim to be very religious and say that their beliefs are a large part of why they are doing what they are doing. But here is my question: what kind of clergy have the Schindlers had ministering to them for the past 15 years? It's all well and good to hold out for a miracle and to pray for one, but at some point, in all the difficult medical cases I've been party to or heard about from friends and relatives, at some point if a good minister or priest is involved, and things drag on, there should be some counseling to somehow accept God's will and let the loved one go. It's been 15 years. I've watched the Schindlers talk on TV many times now and I'm sorry, I really feel that what I'm seeing are two people who are grasping at straws and have lost some touch with reality. I have heard the same opinion in the past few days from clergy and friends who vary from Catholic to Episcopal to very conservative evangelical. At some point, a responsible spiritual counselor addresses the finality of a situation like this with the family and encourages them to accept things and let their loved one go to God. This was done for me when my mother had terminal cancer. I can only hope somebody will do this for the Schindlers.
2. I abhor the fact of Congress and the President interfering in personal and family medical matters. Let the Florida state courts fight it out for 45 years if that's what folks want, but when folks in D.C start getting involved in medical matters, that's a slippery slope nobody wants to go down. My understanding at one point in my life was that the conservative side of government believed in LESS government interference in personal matters. This is what I've been led to believe in talking to conservative Republicans and reading position papers, etc. To me, the Congressional meddling in this is the WORST kind of government interference. I don't want to see where it might lead. |
| Kaylynn44 |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 10:38:26 AM
This is a hard one, because as a parent, you don't want to see your child die, so I can understand how her parents feel. But, you have to wonder if it isn't even worse for Terri to just exist, and not really live. I know that if it were me, I would want the feeding tube taken out so that my family could finally grieve and then get on with their lives, BUT if it were my son, I think that I might feel like Terri's parents. Like I said, this is a very hard thing to think about and I don't envy any of Terri's family at this time.
Love,
Kay |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 08:12:50 AM
If she had mentioned her desires, either through a living will (which were not at all common in the 1980's) or verbally to a third party (other than her husband or blood relations), then I would say that it was truly her wish not to be sustained. However, there are way too many odd occurances here to just go-ahead. Her husband I find particularly interesting (speaking as a cop), since he used the excuse of paying for rehibilitation and making her life come to a natural end, as grounds for bilking over a millon dollars in a court settlement years ago. Since then he had spent over 500,000 on legal fees trying to kill her.
His excuse was a year after the court settlement, he remembered that he and his wife were watching the 'Karen Quinlin Story' and she alledgedly said "I wouldn't want to live like that." Hmmmmm, it is very interesting that he remembered that nugget of information after he got the check (Just as suspicous as all of those "Now I remember..." from Hillary concerning her service to the Rose Law Office)
Anyway, his convienent memory return, along with the recent reported stements of the hospice nurse Iyres (who has since formed it into a sworn affadavit), in addition to the very suspicous dissappearence/modification of her medical records, add to that the Florida judge who has a documented record of being very hostile to women, and the fact that Mr. Schivo's attorney also sat on the board for the hospice (Come on, I know that the same people that were eager to connect VP Cheney's Haliburton Board seat to the White House, should now chime in...) all seem to weave a rope of circumstancial evidence. Now anybody with legal experience knows that circumstancial evidence, in and of itself, is neither damning or vindicating; however if enough of it is present, then it should warrant a deeper look into just what is going on. (Enough circumstancial evidence sent Jay Smith to the electric chair in Pennsylvania, over 20 years ago.)
Is this is truly a case of a person's 'right to die' (of which I would not object), or is this publicized, pre-meditated murder? Since I do not have the answer right now, I would have to vote to keep her alive until all of the facts are laid out on the table...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Kaya |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 07:49:16 AM
Terri has no cerebral cortex - it is just liquid. She will never recover, she is in a persistant vegatative state. Ironic that she is in this state because all she put in her body was 10 to 12 glasses of ice tea a day erasing all the potassium in her body. |
| blueotter |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 07:05:49 AM
Criminy! This is a tough one. But it's been 14 years since this poor woman had her affliction, and I can't see that a partial recovery will make her happy. If it had just happened and there were amazing procedures that had been used in the past and were successful, that would be a different story. Artificial life sustaining devices are creepy! I remember many years ago, Karen Ann Quinlin was the first such invalid to be "unhooked"... and they had waited so long, she ended up NOT dying. She was still not responsive, could not do anything for herself, and eventually she did die on her own, but not until after a huge expense and stress to her family had accumulated. I remember thinking about such a life back then and knowing that I would not want that if it were me.
Rose |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
