Euthanasia - should it be legal or illegal? (v2.0)

And brain dead, vegetative state; same thing.

Since you can't seem to get past this very important point that it is NOT the same thing, there's not much sense in even bothering to address the rest of your post or waste any more of my time debating the issue with you, FID. Let me just say that if she were technically brain dead, I'd have a lot less problem with "just letting her die", because it likely would be as simple as turning off a respirator, and a hell of a lot quicker.

She has not, by any stretch of either imagination or cynicism, been diagnosed brain dead.

But with the type of arguments as exampled above, I've had to wonder sometimes if you have.

 

Thanks Guinastasia.

I see similar types of situations on a daily basis, although certainly not as prolonged as Terri Schiavo's situation.

To the members that keep insinuating that Terri is gong to starve to death, you have no idea what you're talking about. For the last time, she will die from dehydration, not from starvation.

 

If the only thing keeping her alive (whether a respirator or feeding tude) is a piece of machinery, I'd say she's brain dead. It's sad that you'd have to let someone die like that, I'd just give her something to put her in a coma (like she'd know the difference now) and let her drift away. Quick, painless, and it sounds a hell of a lot better than letting her dehydrate. Do the decent thing and let her die with some dignity, I say. But no, we've turned her into a political issue. Good job ya stupid parents. And I do blame her parents for this travesty since they've made it an issue.

 

I agree. I'm sure that considering that she's been like this for so long, her doctors probably wouldn't have any problems with just giving her an overdose of morphine. It'd be fast and painless and hell of alot better than letting her die of dehydration for 3 or 4 days.

 

Wow, this thread sure is a great illustration of all the misinformation that is being spread about this case. And unfortunately, Republicans in Congress are all too eager to buy into this garbage (or more likely to pander to their fundamentalist right-wing base).

F_I_D, in technical terms she is not brain-dead, as there is still activity in her brainstem. There is a difference between being brain-dead and being in a persistent vegetative state. But although Terri's body is not dead, Terri the person has been dead for years, as her cerebral cortex is gone and she has zero chance of ever regaining consciousness. The effort to keep her "alive" is utterly ridiculous.

 

first of all terri is not a vegetable acording to Florida Law:

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.

evidence for that, lookey here:

terri responding to music:
http://johnsipos.com/terrivideos/Terri%20Music.rm

terri tracking a balloon:
http://johnsipos.com/terrivideos/balloon.rm

terri responding to questions:
http://johnsipos.com/terrivideos/how's%20that%20cold.rm

terri with her mom:
http://johnsipos.com/terrivideos/Terri%20Mum.rm
now watch the videos, it is hard to make judgements if we dont see something sometimes.

another law that is being broken:
FACT: The courts had only allowed removal of Terri's feeding tube, not regular food and water. Terri's husband illegally ordered this. The law only allows the removal of "life-prolonging procedures," not regular food and water:

Florida Statute 765.309 Mercy killing or euthanasia not authorized; suicide distinguished. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or euthanasia, or to permit any affirmative or deliberate act or omission to end life other than to permit the natural process of dying.

also, when the tube is out she has about two weeks to die, not a couple days, two weeks. that is a long time. the last time her feeding tube was removed i believe two years ago, she stayed alive for 7 days until they put the tube back in.


i still dont get why Michael Schiavo doesnt just divorce her, he already has a fiance and two kids by her.

 

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.

Wrong. Those video clips you see were selectively taken from hours of video to try to show she can meaningfully respond to things around her. In fact, the responses are random and not reproducible:

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.
(source)

 

When her brain becomes completely liquified will that be enough to convince everyone she's not coming back?

 

Unfortunately, for some, no. I've run into families who believe in miraculous cures.

 

That's very stupid. She'd have no brain! Once brain tissue dies it's dead.

 

well, does it really matter if she can respond or not? here comes the question of quality of life. your life does not have to be all the great to still have dignity, you are still a human being and therefore have a dignity above all creatures to live. terri is not a dog and should not be dealt like one. she should recieve therapy.


MYTH: Terri does not need rehabilitation
FACT: Florida Statute 744.3215 Rights of persons determined incapacitated:

(1) A person who has been determined to be incapacitated retains the right
(i) To receive necessary services and rehabilitation.

This is a retained right that a guardian cannot take away. Additionally, it does not make exception for PVS patients. Terri has illegally been denied rehabilitation - as many nurses have sworn in affidavits.



why not start up the rehabilitation? yeah it was stopped in 1991 just a year after her fall, but why not do it just to satisfy people and clearly show that rehabilitation cannot work? i mean, michael should have a couple million dollars in terri's trust fund to start up therapy again for at least a couple months just to disprove everyones notion that she can be rehabilitated.

for those who think the million dollar trust fund was used in therapy:

Summary of expenses paid from Terri?s 1.2 Million Dollar medical trust fund (jury awarded 1992)
NOTE: In his November 1993 Petition Schiavo alleges the 1993 guardianship asset balance as $761,507.50

Atty Gwyneth Stanley $10,668.05
Atty Deborah Bushnell $65,607.00
Atty Steve Nilson $7,404.95
Atty Pacarek $1,500.00
Atty Richard Pearse (GAL) $4,511.95
Atty George Felos $397,249.99

Other

1st Union/South Trust Bank
$55,459.85

Michael Schiavo
$10,929.95

Total $545,852.34


still not quite sure why he is still married to her since he has a fiance and two kids with her

 

She shouldn't get rehabilitation because she's in a PVS, and there is no amount of therapy that will make her the least bit willfully responsive.

Removing nutrition and hydration are not treating her like an animal - it is removing the artifical barriers that prevented the underlying disease process from killing her. Her body is alive; the person is not.

edit - clarification

 

I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the role the government (particularly Congress) is playing in this.

This seems to be tailor-made for religious conservatives to take advantage of, and to use the law at their disposal, or if the law doesn't suit them, to change in their favor.

 

still, why not try it? i mean, trying to rehabilitate wont hurt. then if she doesnt improve then thats it, end of argument, but since there are still doubts then why not?

 

but since there are still doubts then why not?

Because it's not what her husband wants, and he has the final say.

 

i still dont understand that. why is he still her guardian? i mean he is her husband, but he has a fiance and two children by his fiance. i dont get it. if he is "true and faithful" to his wife, than why does he have a fiance and children not Terri's?

 

Acolyte-Phikoz posted on 3/20/05 7:34pm

---

i still dont understand that. why is he still her guardian? i mean he is her husband, but he has a fiance and two children by his fiance. i dont get it. if he is "true and faithful" to his wife, than why does he have a fiance and children not Terri's?
[hr][/blockquote]

Maybe because Terri has been essentially dead for the past 15 years.

 

Although I disagree with the motives of Congress in this particular matter KW (in that they are deciding an issue based upon one individual instead of a broad-range application of the issue of euthanasia), the generalization concerning religious conservatives is a bit of a stretch.

Congress does have the right to formulate law on general matters such as these, although I disagree with their methodology in this case.

By nature, Congres is a political body subject to the whims of the populace, but the judiciary is supposed to be above politics. Therein lies the difference, because the public should have no influence on matters of jurisprudence.

 

well then michael isnt exactly the nicest of guys. i mean, there shows no dignity in his wedding vows, its like "hey ill marry you, but if you die, or are in a hospital, ill go ahead and marry someone else, because i seek to please myself" why couldnt he had suffered with his wife and abstain from getting a new spouse to fill his life? i mean what is love anyway? just something that passes on to person to person, or something that holds on, never stopping, where you will stay by that persons bedside and be in their anguish because you love that person. now that my friends is love. a self-sacrificing love. not michael's love.

 

Yeah, people should never re-marry after the death of a spouse.

Wait, what?

 

terri is not a dog

YOu're right, and that's what gets me-if a beloved pet were in this condition, the humane thing to do is have him or her put to sleep. I had a dog that was dying of massive organ failure-and let me tell you, our last minutes with her, as much as I'm glad I was there, were painful. You could tell how bad she was suffering, and it was honestly better for her when the vet finally came and gave her the dose.

We treat animals in terminal pain much better than we do people. Now, I'm NOT arguing for direct euthanasia, because I think it's way too easy to be abused. But taking people off of life sustaining machines is NOT killing someone-it's letting nature take its course.

As for Schiavo dying of dehydration/starvation, many terminally ill patients in hospices stop eating in their final days, because it's just too painful for their bodies to digest food. A woman I talked to said her father died that way in a hospice-and it was very peaceful.

How many times does it have to be said that one needs a cerebral cortex in order to be conscious, to feel things, to respond or recover? Terri's is GONE.

 

terri is not a dog

YOu're right, and that's what gets me-if a beloved pet were in this condition, the humane thing to do is have him or her put to sleep. I had a dog that was dying of massive organ failure-and let me tell you, our last minutes with her, as much as I'm glad I was there, were painful. You could tell how bad she was suffering, and it was honestly better for her when the vet finally came and gave her the dose.

And that's exactly my point. If this woman were somebody's pet she would have been put out of her misery 15 years ago,but for some reason, which I find to be less and less comprehensible the more I think about it, we can't seem to recognize that sometimes the best thing to do in cases such as this one is to simply let the person in question die. I don't mean to compare this woman to a dog, but considering that she's been in this state for the last 15 years, the hope of her making any sort of recovery at all is non-existant. It would far kinder to just let her die than to for her to continue in the state that she is currently in.

 

FID

you all realize she's being used as a political chess piece any way, don't you?

I can't say I always agree with you, but at least you're quick and to the point.

On this issue, we most certainly agree.

From the WP:

An unsigned one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators, said the debate over Schiavo would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters. The memo singled out Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who is up for reelection next year and is potentially vulnerable in a state President Bush won last year.

"This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue," said the memo, which was reported by ABC News and later given to The Washington Post. "This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49701-2005Mar19_2.html

 

I must confess, the issue of the young lady in America, whilst tragic, doesn't get terribly much press on this part of the world, so forgive my not gettig involved.

I am strongly pro-Euthanasia because I believe ultimate and true sovereignty for one's body lies with oneself; furthermore, I believe that a person should be spared an ignominious death if possible. Ultimately, however, I utterly resent someone else using my mortality to further a political or religious agenda.

E_S

 

I beleive it should be legal if the person to be euthenised is dying, and wants to die.

We kill pets regularly simply as "mercy killings" so they dont suffer. Why let people suffer?


Whats wrong with getting married after your first spouse dies? The vows go "til death do us part" not for eternity.