Terri Schiavo

[Renderking Fisk]

Now that she's gone... what does this mean for the future of medicne?

 

[Biltmore Bob]

What a tragedy. I guess we need to pull the feeding tube from the Pope now too. You know, since he can't feed himself and all.

 

[Matt Deckard]

The Pope should have a living will.

 

[jamespowers]

The future of medicine received a wake up call. It brought to the forefront the prevalent thinking concerning "unwanted" and "inconvenient" life. I hope it does not signal a future where older people who cannot move fast enough or work are "euthanized" because they are suffering or inconvenient. It is disturbing to think some people value life so little. If you believe the polls, many people do. Perhaps some introspection concerning this is needed.
This situation also forced people to think about their end of days and what they want. Many have rushed to lawyers to codify what they want through health care power of attorneys, health care directives and such. I suppose it would be better if the law were on the side of life if there was a glimmer of hope and you would have to run to an attorney if you wanted to end it but this case showed that the law is on the side of convenience over hope and life. Just making your wishes known verbally is not good enough any more. Just think about it and review your wishes as sometimes your views change over time concerning what you are willing to accept in "quality of life."

Regards to all,

J

 

[jamespowers]

The Pope should have a living will.

He does. God will take him when he is ready.

Regards to all,

J

 

[BellyTank]

...and may she finally rest in peace, as was God's will.

BT.

 

[Renderking Fisk]

I'm posting something about this tommorow morning. I just finished writing it.

This is the first step towards killing off the weak in an attempt to save social - Medical programs in the Western World.

We devalue life after conception if the mother is having a bad day, we devalue life through violence in the media, we forget the people who are too old or too sick...

... how soon is it going to be before we start estinguishing life for monetary reasons? Not next week or next month, but with in a few years.

 

[JenLyn]

Medical developments have increased phenomenally in the last century - think of all the things that used to commonly kill people but are now eradicated by immunizations or treatments. Progress is great, but it's also changed the aspects of life and death - there's a gray area in what was once black and white. The Terry Schiavo case has showed us some questions that are hard to answer. When is death the better choice than life? Who should have the right to say if we live or die?

The first question is hard to answer because it can depend on so many factors, not the least of which is a person's definition of quality of life. Y'all, I'm not even going to try to get into it right now, because I would just end up rambling for ages!

The Terry Schiavo case is sad to me, because both sides truly believed that they had her best interests in mind. Her husband believed he was acting in accordance with Terry's wishes, that she had stated that she would not want to continue living this way. Her parents felt that she was still capable of rehabilitation and that ending her life was wrong.

A good thing coming out of this is that people are taking an interest in living wills, medical directives and other medical legalities. Think of how much heartbreak might have been avoided if Terry had left a medical directive. I'm a firm believer in being prepared. My husband and I have living wills and advanced medical directives in place, but they will have to be redone soon. Not that I like thinking of death, especially my own (who does?), but making these kinds of decisions beforehand can make things easier for others. I don't want to put the burden of choosing to end my life on my husband or family. My sister is a critical care nurse in an ICU, and she has seen countless situations where the decision to let someone die or keep them alive was fought over by family members. From her standpoint, living wills and advanced medical directives are a must.

 

[Renderking Fisk]

Here's The link to my article...

I might be over the top... but I think it's fair.

 

[android]

Why are the very same people that so strongly believe in an afterlife that is better than mortal life on earth the ones that are so strongly against letting this woman go to her God?

Why are they claiming that deprivation of food and water is "different" than removing life support such as oxygen? They are both exactly the same thing: chemicals that the body needs to sustain life. You just need O2 on a much more frequent basis.

Why is it that "just because we can do something, doesn't make it a good idea." unless that something is keeping someone that is braindead alive artificially for years on end?

Gee, if a mad scientist had kidnapped a woman and then kept here alive like this, you'd be demanding he got the electric chair.

 

[jamespowers]

Why are they claiming that deprivation of food and water is "different" than removing life support such as oxygen? They are both exactly the same thing: chemicals that the body needs to sustain life. You just need O2 on a much more frequent basis.

Hmmm... that means you are keeping yourself artifically alive. Stop eating and drinking. She could breathe on her own--no machines necessary. It was not an extraordinary effort to keep her alive just like it isn't for you to eat and drink.
The other component you are missing is that there is suspected fowl play in how she got to that state. Not to mention that the person suspected of being involved in that fowl play was her "guardian!" The man is living with another woman and has two kids with her. That would be grounds for divorce anywhere on this planet that I know of.
Terry died and he now has $70,000 left that is his. This was supposed to be used for her care and rehabilitiation. The guy is a scum bag. He should have just let the parents take care of her and stop wondering:"when is that B***** going to die?" He is a truly reprehensible character. It was all about money not quality of life for him.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Slicksuit]

A feeding tube, and the nutritional products that are used with it, are relatively recent developments in medical technology. They don't just take a food processed cheeseburger and shove it down the tube - she was likely receiving an individualized and optimized composition of nutrients, tailored to her condition.

I don't see a distinction between this state and receiving support on a ventilator. The difference between the two situations is the specific area of the brain that is affected. When also taken into consideration with the respected opinion that Terri was brain-dead (obtained from independent, court-appointed medical evaluation), plus the evidence that she would not want to be kept in that condition (convincing enough to be upheld by all 3 levels of the Florida municipal courts), I don't think it proposterous for life support to be witheld. What's next - a patient on a ventilator being 'suffocated' for having treatment witheld, when they have no meaningful chance to breathe on their own? A patient with heartfailure being 'killed-off' for not being put onto a bypass machine?

It's quite a long stretch to go from a case like this to Nazist Germany. The legal rulings that were reached in this case were carefully considered, and a multitude of times at that.

What concerns me is the disrespect given to the judiciary. Just because the Republicans in Congress, and the Evangelical Christians don't agree with the decisions met, they have to go to such measures to beat the issue to death. Putting the matters into federal court was an egregious violation of seperation of powers, as well as state sovereignty regarding the matter. I think the founding fathers are truly rolling over in their grave over this matter.

 

[jamespowers]

If you don't see a difference between a feeding tube and ventilator then I really cannot help you. If you want to starve to death I really cannot help you either.
As I said before it is not so much the generalities of this case that concern me it is the specifics as they relate to the "husband" and the circumstances surrounding the case.
The case was tried improperly in my opinion. It should have been based on a struggle for guardianship and a divorce based on abandonment. The money involved and an unknown cause of the prolonged period of oxygen deprivation made it different than your standard case.
It is a stretch to go from Nazist Germany because the nazis would have just killed her without regard to law and due process just as they did many mentally retarded individuals because their lives are meaningless and should not be allowed to propagate. That was not my point.
The judiciary in general is another case. When the benefit of the doubt goes to the preservation of death instead of life then something is wrong. The narrow areas that were defined by the local level courts were further compounded by that of the apellate courts because no new testimony or evidence was allowed. If she were on deathrow sceduled to be executed for killing an entire family then you would have seen the democrats, ACLU and atheists out beating the issue to death. The founding fathers would likely have much less angst over the Shiavo case than the propping up and defense of a convicted felon.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Biltmore Bob]

James, I'm with you man....It seems that many have forgoten about the sanctity of Human life....It will only get worse in days to come. I suppose you have read the end of the Book.

 

[Renderking Fisk]

Android: Why are those on the left who claim to fight for the Civil Rights of those who can’t stick up for themselves are always in a hurry to extinguish life that’s inconvenient and call that a “Choice?�

Someone who’s sick, suffering and wants to die and have made their wishes known SHOULD be allowed to die. Those who can’t speak for themselves and never made their wishes known should be given the benefit of the doubt. Another concern I have that I didn’t want to sidetrack is that I’m also concerned that sometime in the near future we’re going to have the ability to defy nature and force people to stay alive beyond their wishes.

Also, why are people like myself vilified just for asking questions? I have serious problems with the ethics used to make these decisions and all the sudden I’m branded like some kind of villain.

I question the motivations of Michael Schiavo and challenge the motivations of the State and the Judicial System who ignored some evidence that causes many of us to believe there was foul play. How does that make me a villain? Why does that give people like you an excuse and cause to dismiss people like me who are asking these questions as “Religious nuts?�

Liberals talk a good game about “Celebrating Diversity� until someone dares to have a diverse conservative opinion.

 

[android]

If you don't see a difference between a feeding tube and ventilator then I really cannot help you.

I will explain to you how they are the same.

A ventilator (a machine) provides oxygen (a chemical) to a human that is incapable of breathing on his own.

A feeding tube (a machine) provide nutrients (chemicals ) to a human that is incapable of eating on his own.

You usually die more quickly when deprived of oxygen than when deprived of food, so when you pull the plug on a ventilator, the victim dies quickly and when you pull the plug on a feeding tube, the victim dies slowly.

In my opinion, if you think there is a difference, it means you think it is OK to kill somebody as long as it is "mercifully quick" rather than "agonizingly slow".

Please explain how you think they are different.

 

[jamespowers]

I will explain to you how they are the same.

A ventilator (a machine) provides oxygen (a chemical) to a human that is incapable of breathing on his own.

A feeding tube (a machine) provide nutrients (chemicals ) to a human that is incapable of eating on his own.

You usually die more quickly when deprived of oxygen than when deprived of food, so when you pull the plug on a ventilator, the victim dies quickly and when you pull the plug on a feeding tube, the victim dies slowly.

In my opinion, if you think there is a difference, it means you think it is OK to kill somebody as long as it is "mercifully quick" rather than "agonizingly slow".

Please explain how you think they are different.

I don't think it is ok to kill anyone who has a chance to live and did not stipulate that they were not to be placed on life support.
The ventilator is needed at every second of the day. The body is not capable of supplying itself with oxygen so that means the body is in quite dilapidated condition that it needs such an extraordinary amount of help just to survive.
A feeding tube can be as simple as injecting Ensure into someone's stomach. It doesn't involve being there every second of every day---just when nutrition and fluids are needed. Feeding someone in such a way does not denote that their body is dilapidated. It is not an extraordinary life saving device. It is used in many cases where nothing else is wrong with the patient except they had an operation on their throat and it prevents them from swallowing. I suppose you would be against vaccinations and injectable drugs then?
The feeding tube is not a machine either. It is just a tube that a syringe with nutrition can be attached to to inject directly into the stomach.
A ventilator is definitely a machine that forces oxygen---a gas---into the lungs because a person cannot even simply breathe on their own.
The greatest difference exists to me. I can give you an example for just a few years ago. My great aunt was in serious condition but did not require a ventilator just feeding. My mother had the complete ability to withhold food but did not. The doctor was even pleased that my aunt would not starve to death. She just passed on when her heart stopped and she could not be revived. The feeding tube did not prevent her from dying but a ventilator would have. There is your difference.
In the Shaivo case it is even more clear cut. The husband wouldn't even allow the nurses to try to feed her or give her fluids orally. They were threatened with being fired and one even was. The guy is an uncaring monster to starve someone so badly that blood comes from the eyes and tongue. Someday he might find that what goes around comes around.

Regards to all,

J

 

[android]

The feeding tube is not a machine either. It is just a tube that a syringe with nutrition can be attached to to inject directly into the stomach.

Yes it is a machine.

Machine: A device with fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy in order to do work.

Fixed part: tube
Moving part: plunger
Work: Moving food from point A to point B.

It is not as complicated as a respirator but is a machine nonetheless.

So your argument comes down to how dilapidated the body is, the complexity of the machine required to sustain the dilapidated body and how often the machine must be used, right?

I don't think you're ready to make a moral agument about removing artificial life support from a brain-dead body when you want to pick and choose based on the complexity of the support devices involved.

 

[jamespowers]

Yes it is a machine.

Machine: A device with fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy in order to do work.

Fixed part: tube
Moving part: plunger
Work: Moving food from point A to point B.

It is not as complicated as a respirator but is a machine nonetheless.

So your argument comes down to how dilapidated the body is, the complexity of the machine required to sustain the dilapidated body and how often the machine must be used, right?

I don't think you're ready to make a moral agument about removing artificial life support from a brain-dead body when you want to pick and choose based on the complexity of the support devices involved.

You are still going to compare a feeding tube with a ventilator?! It is not a machine unless you think the nurse's hand is a machine. Try this:

A device consisting of fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy and transmits it in a more useful form.

What is the mechanical energy that is transmitted into a useful form? The nurses hand is operated by electricity and the belows of a ventilator?
This argument is a red herring anyway without looking at the individual case in front of us. I did not comment on the world. I just commented on the Shaivo case which is not a brain dead case. The whole moral argument is not what I am making. I am making it on this case. If the facts were different then the conclusion would be different. I didn't make a blanket statement as you did concerning an entire group of people based on party or religious affiliation.
I have made the judgement many times in true practice. How many times have you? It is obvious that you have never been faced with it or you would not be so blase about letting someone starve to death. I hope you never have to make that decision because you demonstrate an inability to make a concise and quick decision that will be on your conscience the rest of your days.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Biltmore Bob]

If one starves their dog to death and the athorities find out they will be charged with a crime and if found guilty fined and possibly imprisoned. And that's just an animal. My babies could not feed themselves for a couple of years after birth. They still need me to provide food for them.