More on Terri Schiavo--UPDATE: Schiavo dead 31 Mar 05

[The_Nice_Guy]

Show me one married man who will go 15 years without sex.

I think you should add the caveat "Under 50", because my father sure fits your criteria above!

TWG

[Jason von Evil]

Schiavo's parents are dumb as bricks. They filed an appeal again, with the same federal judge who's turned them down for the last fifteen years. They and others also seem to think Jeb Bush can somehow step in and save the day, even when he's stated otherwise, repeatedly. He's out too, by the way.

Edit: They finally came to their senses. They're not going to file anymore appeals.

[Thinkmarble]

*snip*

You are wrong.
First off Terri is already dead, the only question left is what should happen with her body, and in that matter we should follow her wishes.

You are also wrong on a second account.
As surprising as it may sound starving to death is actually one of the better ways to go.
THere were studies done on this and the endresult is that even in states were euthanasia is permitted people regulary choose to die of hunger before other possibilities and report.

A more extensive review of the scientific literature relevant to starvation and dehydration appears in an article by Sullivan entitled, Accepting Death without Artificial Nutrition or Hydration.[Sullivan] Published studies of healthy volunteers report that total fasting causes hunger for less than 24 hours. Ketonemia occurs and is associated with relief of hunger and an accompanying mild euphoria. When ketonemia is prevented by small feedings hunger persists, explaining the obsession with food commonly observed during semi-starvation occurring in times of famine or war. Animal studies also suggest that ketonemia may have a mild systemic analgesic effect. Experimentally induced dehydration in normal volunteers may report thirst, yet this sensation is consistently relieved by ad lib sips of fluid in cumulative volumes insufficient to restore physiologic fluid balance. One study of healthy subjects suggests there is a decrease in the severity of experienced thirst associated with older age.

Want to read more ?

[The Spartan]

What matters is that Terri never left behind a written statement that would compel people to pull the plug on her.

Which is why the state allows for the spouse to express the wishes of the victim. So, NO it does not matter that she didn't leave one behind.

The state should have stayed out of it.

Agreed.

The courts should have stayed out of it too. Terri has commited no crime, yet she is sentenced to a fate we would not wish on our worst criminals and terrorists: death by starvation.

The courts were asked by her husband and parents to abitrate. The only reason they're still involved in this is her parents can't get it into their heads that she's dead. And for the umpteenth time on this thread 1) she's not there enough to feel the effects of starvation and 2) as has been said before, starvation is one of the more pleasant ways for a terminal patient to go. Hell, that's what killed Reagan. And it's what kills other Alzheimer's patients every day.

The politicians and the judges are playing tennis, trying to increase their power over the other party, and the only losers are the people. If Congress is trying to extend their power into the courts, it can also be argued that the courts have been extending their power into the lives of people for some time already.

Of course the politicians are "playing tennis." When do they ever stop? The courts are *not* extending their power, they're following precedent and law!

The law should be changed here. If the afflicted in question has left no written will on euthanasia, instead of granting custody automatically to a nearest spouse(husband), the responsiblity for taking care of him/her should devolve down. If the husband wants to give up the responsibility, the next concerned party steps in. And so on.

So that we can keep meat turnips breathing indefinitely, sacrificing valuable resources on people who have *NO* hope of recovery? Ever.

Ever.

If there is even a single person in the whole wide world willing to devote finances, time, love, and tears on another human being in this condition, then what right do we have to stop the good samaritan/s? Easy, we don't. We let them do their works.

See above.

I'm not religious here, being an agnostic, but my personal philosophy and the principles I live by convince me that saving an innocent life is not wrong. I don't need religion to tell me that. It may be silly, it may be stupid, even, but it'll be an individual's choice.

What innocent life? Listen to me very carefully, SHE'S DEAD! She's an animated corpse. Or does the giant goddamned hole in her brain not register to you? When they unhook all the plugs, they're not killing her, they're removing the fucking puppet strings. AGAIN: jtrun.mine.nu/cc/fox/catscan8cg.jpg

What's interesting is that the right and left both are split down the middle by this issue. There are right wingers arguing that the Florida court decision should be abided by, and that the federal powers have no business butting in. Then there are those on the left who support Terri's right to live, like Nader, and would support any decision by the federal powers to keep her alive. The Belmont Club had a very good post on this.
http://www.wretchard.com/blogs/the_belm ... hiavo.aspx

What the right and left think is irrelevant. There is precedent and law regarding this and the courts are the only ones who seem to be trying to uphold it.

The world is turned upside down because of this issue, and I think it is all the better for it. These are fundamental questions about the nature of modern society, civilization, the basis for law and government, and they should be answered.

They are answered. There is already law and precedent for all of this. Hell, there's even religious doctrine surrounding refusal of care and who gets to make the decision. When a person suffers brain death, like Terry Shiavo, without a living will their next of kin has the choice. THIS HAPPENS ALL THE GODDAMN TIME! Life support is taken away all the fucking time, on people who have a better chance than her for recovery.

[HemlockGrey]

If there is even a single person in the whole wide world willing to devote finances, time, love, and tears on another human being in this condition, then what right do we have to stop the good samaritan/s? Easy, we don't. We let them do their works.

If you did that to me, I'd come back from the fucking grave and haunt you. We step in when the Good Samaritan flagrantly violates the wishes of the victim.

[The Spartan]

edit:

THIS HAPPENS ALL THE GODDAMN TIME! Life support is taken away all the fucking time, on people who have a better chance than her for recovery.

Hell, here in Texas, it happens even over the objections of the next of kin when they can't pay because of Bush and his "Culture of Life" when they're *UNABLE TO PAY*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Assassin X]

There are facts that the National Media doesnt point out.

Our local news had her best friend from where she use to work long ago(confirmed) and she said that Teri told her that would want people to do whatever they could to keep her alive. I cant find the story on the news site now, its a few days old.

And im really confused as to hows she "brain dead" as you all say if she can speak?....

..See this from today:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... aged_woman

Personaly before you get all mad at me now i dont care about her... im a cold person even if she is technically allive. Im sick of hearing about it on the news. Now localy were hearing about a 15 year old who parents are fighting with their grandparents over a feeding tue in their kid. I hate when stories go on and on and on.

[Iceberg]

Amazingly, the media somehow managed not to record her saying this, even though they were swarming around the building on that day and Terri allegedly screamed it so loudly it could be heard well down the hall. And of course, she made no effort to fight off the doctors who were coming to remove the tube, or to communicate her alleged wishes to them.

[Darth Wong]

There are facts that the National Media doesnt point out.

Our local news had her best friend from where she use to work long ago(confirmed) and she said that Teri told her that would want people to do whatever they could to keep her alive. I cant find the story on the news site now, its a few days old.

And im really confused as to hows she "brain dead" as you all say if she can speak?....

..See this from today:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... aged_woman

Personaly before you get all mad at me now i dont care about her... im a cold person even if she is technically allive. Im sick of hearing about it on the news. Now localy were hearing about a 15 year old who parents are fighting with their grandparents over a feeding tue in their kid. I hate when stories go on and on and on.

Are you mentally retarded? All of the people who know her best say she would not want to be kept alive like this; the fact that they dredge up some half-assed acquaintance to back up their claims only proves how desperate they are to get the answer they want. And the fact that her parents claim she's trying to speak proves precisely nothing; reality and them parted ways a long time ago. There's a fucking swimming pool in her head where most of her brain is supposed to be, dumb-fuck.

[Aaron]

There are facts that the National Media doesnt point out.

Our local news had her best friend from where she use to work long ago(confirmed) and she said that Teri told her that would want people to do whatever they could to keep her alive. I cant find the story on the news site now, its a few days old.

The husbands decisions take precedence over what a friend says Terri told her. He's the next of kin, he gets the final say if she is unable to. And since her brain is mush it's pretty obvious who gets the final say here.

[Darth Wong]

There are facts that the National Media doesnt point out.

Our local news had her best friend from where she use to work long ago(confirmed) and she said that Teri told her that would want people to do whatever they could to keep her alive. I cant find the story on the news site now, its a few days old.

The husbands decisions take precedence over what a friend says Terri told her. He's the next of kin, he gets the final say if she is unable to. And since her brain is mush it's pretty obvious who gets the final say here.

And moreover, who said anything about "friend"? The correct term would be "ex-coworker". One who claims to know her better than her own husband

[Darth Wong]

Ya know, Michael Schiavo must be an incredibly tolerant person not have already launched a slew of lawsuits for slander against individuals and negligence against news organizations.

[Aaron]

And moreover, who said anything about "friend"? The correct term would be "ex-coworker". One who claims to know her better than her own husband

I only said friend because thats what Ass-X posted. I haven't actually read the article where she is introduced. I have activelly tried not to follow this case, it's sickening and her parents need to be beat with the reality bat.

[Aaron]

Ya know, Michael Schiavo must be an incredibly tolerant person not have already launched a slew of lawsuits for slander against individuals and negligence against news organizations.

Depending on the money left over from the settlement they got for her medical expenses he may not need too. However I'm willing to bet that those charges will be forthcoming after they finally sort out what happens to Terri.

[Edi]

Ya know, Michael Schiavo must be an incredibly tolerant person not have already launched a slew of lawsuits for slander against individuals and negligence against news organizations.

He probably would have, if US libel law did not work the opposite from what it should. If somebody spouts slanderous bullshit about you that has no basis whatsoever in reality and you sue, it works so that you must prove the allegations false (i.e. prove a negative) instead of the dumbfuck needing to prove that what he says is true. See the problem here?

No wonder anybody in the US can spout whatever shit they want about anybody they want and nobody can do a damn thing about it. If they changed it so that somebody making bullshit statements had to prove them when challenged, it'd clean up the media there really fucking fast.

Edi

[The_Nice_Guy]

If there is even a single person in the whole wide world willing to devote finances, time, love, and tears on another human being in this condition, then what right do we have to stop the good samaritan/s? Easy, we don't. We let them do their works.

If you did that to me, I'd come back from the fucking grave and haunt you. We step in when the Good Samaritan flagrantly violates the wishes of the victim.

Easy. Leave a written will that tells everybody to quickly administer a drug that kills your body. Or death by dehydration or starvation if you prefer.

It's when people don't leave any form of indication as to what they want that's the problem. Solution is simple too. Upon reaching adulthood, every adult has to register some document or somesuch as to their wishes in such events.

For those yet to reach adulthood, the responsibility still lies on their parents or legal guardians. Then maybe we can avoid such messes in the future.

So that we can keep meat turnips breathing indefinitely, sacrificing valuable resources on people who have *NO* hope of recovery? Ever.

Ever.

If it's not your money, why should you care? More money has been spent on even more dubious activities and causes.

There is already law and precedent for all of this.

The law and precedent are not always just. The whole mess could be interpreted as the courts claiming the power of life and death over individuals, and while I don't believe the courts would abuse that power, the possibility and opening exists.

I regard the courts as just another manifestation of Leviathan, and there has been some discussion concerning the gradual expansion of legal powers. If they can decide on pulling the plug on Terri, in a mater of life and death, they can very well decide to prohibit teaching the theory of evolution too.

That scares me a great deal.

TWG

[Mange]

While I think that the best would be for her to die, my personal opinion is that dying this way isn't worthy. It's harder for her parents and other relatives. I think there should be an other, more merciful and respectful option available.

[Iceberg]

I regard the courts as just another manifestation of Leviathan, and there has been some discussion concerning the gradual expansion of legal powers. If they can decide on pulling the plug on Terri, in a mater of life and death, they can very well decide to prohibit teaching the theory of evolution too.

They were asked to decide. The only reason this has gone anywhere is because the parents decided after the courts made their decision that they didn't like what the court decided, so they started to go verdict-shopping.

[Aaron]

Easy. Leave a written will that tells everybody to quickly administer a drug that kills your body. Or death by dehydration or starvation if you prefer.

It's when people don't leave any form of indication as to what they want that's the problem. Solution is simple too. Upon reaching adulthood, every adult has to register some document or somesuch as to their wishes in such events.

For those yet to reach adulthood, the responsibility still lies on their parents or legal guardians. Then maybe we can avoid such messes in the future.

Are you on crack? The whole reason why the next of kin is given the authority to make these decisions is to avoid this BS. There was zero reason for the courts to get involved in this. In fact they should have said at the beginning that it was already covered by the husband and that they wouldn't get involved.

[The_Nice_Guy]

But consider the possibility that the next of kin... could be wrong. For whatever reason. Nobody's infallible.

They were asked to decide. The only reason this has gone anywhere is because the parents decided after the courts made their decision that they didn't like what the court decided, so they started to go verdict-shopping.

When enough people get together, they can very well ask the courts to decide on the teaching of evolution as well, to reopen the case. Verdict shopping works, because of the power of the court. Which alone should say something.

TWG

[Aaron]

But consider the possibility that the next of kin... could be wrong. For whatever reason. Nobody's infallible.

Now your just grasping at straws to justify your position. The next of kin is empowered to make these decisions and is trusted to do the right thing because they love the person.

And in this case the medical evidence backs him 100% The parents are just to pathetic to understand that their daughter is already dead. I actually feel sorry for them, as they are obviously quite divorced from reality.

[The Spartan]

So that we can keep meat turnips breathing indefinitely, sacrificing valuable resources on people who have *NO* hope of recovery? Ever.

Ever.

If it's not your money, why should you care? More money has been spent on even more dubious activities and causes.

Because maybe I'd like to see that money spent on people who have a chance in hell of living. Maybe I'd like to see my dad and brother get cures for their diabetes. Maybe I'd like to see my cousin and aunt not have to undergo chemo and radiation to cure their cancers. I don't give a fuck if money has been spent on less worthy things; it's still being thoroughly wasted here.

There is already law and precedent for all of this.

The law and precedent are not always just. The whole mess could be interpreted as the courts claiming the power of life and death over individuals, and while I don't believe the courts would abuse that power, the possibility and opening exists.

THEY'RE NOT CLAMING POWER OVER LIFE AND DEATH YOU RETARDED FUCKWAD! LISTEN TO ME CAREFULLY, THEY ARE UPHOLDING A SPOUSE'S RIGHT TO CARRY OUT THEIR SPOUSES WISHES!

I regard the courts as just another manifestation of Leviathan, and there has been some discussion concerning the gradual expansion of legal powers.

This isn't a fucking expansion of judicial powers! They're practicing ones they already have!

If they can decide on pulling the plug on Terri, in a mater of life and death, they can very well decide to prohibit teaching the theory of evolution too.

That scares me a great deal.

Slippery-slope bullshit and totally irrelevant to this discussion. And at any rate, as has been said all along, the courts *ARE NOT* deciding to pull the plug. They are upholding Michael Shiavo's right to withdraw treatment, which he has every right to do as her husband.

[Iceberg]

The parents appear to have accepted reality, their attorney has announced that after Judge Greer rules (which should be in a matter of minutes) on whether or not to restore the feeding tube (based on case precedent, probably not), there will be no further judicial appeals.

[Iceberg]

Judge Greer ruled, as predicted, to deny the motion put forth by the parents. The 11th Circuit has informed David Gibbs, their attorney, that no further appeals will be heard, effectively ending the case.

[Knife]

Easy. Leave a written will that tells everybody to quickly administer a drug that kills your body. Or death by dehydration or starvation if you prefer.

*sigh* So instead of relying on you loved ones to carry out your wishes or best interests, you wish to create a large legal beuracracy to do it instead. You want to deminish the abilities of husbands and wives to take care of each other and have 'power of attorney's ' with each others to take care of each other's needs?

And they say gay's threated marrage. 'Right to life-er' bearing this sentiment would be a greater threat to the sanctity of marrage than anything else I could imagine.

It's when people don't leave any form of indication as to what they want that's the problem. Solution is simple too. Upon reaching adulthood, every adult has to register some document or somesuch as to their wishes in such events.

They shouldn't have to, thats why you have family, to look after your best interests. Granted, there should be a mechinism *and there is* for those who don't have family or a family that isn't for your best interest.

The problem in this case is the parents are challenging Mr. Shrivo's power of attorney rights over Terry. And it is this challenge that they have lost over and over again in court.

For those yet to reach adulthood, the responsibility still lies on their parents or legal guardians. Then maybe we can avoid such messes in the future.

So parents should have those legal rights, but not your spouse? WTF?

If it's not your money, why should you care? More money has been spent on even more dubious activities and causes.

It's my dime in the courts, it's my dime in the Congress. It's my dime Bush is spending to fly back to Washington to sign the stupid bill. It's my dime in the healthcare industry.

And honestly, someday, I might be in this perdiciment and I do not want my family running around like a bunch of fucking morons creating more grief for themselves in some deluded attempt to 'save me'.

The law and precedent are not always just. The whole mess could be interpreted as the courts claiming the power of life and death over individuals, and while I don't believe the courts would abuse that power, the possibility and opening exists.

The mess could have been avoided if some judge, some where along the ~8 years of litigaiting this would have taken the parents aside and said, "No more. You don't have a case, I'm sorry. Here's a number of a good shrink."

Because of the emotional heart strings of this case, it has gone on for too long and has received its fair share, if not more, of due process.

I regard the courts as just another manifestation of Leviathan, and there has been some discussion concerning the gradual expansion of legal powers. If they can decide on pulling the plug on Terri, in a mater of life and death, they can very well decide to prohibit teaching the theory of evolution too.

That scares me a great deal.

TWG

But no powers were expanded, if you don't count Congress. The court cases were never about 'killing or not killing' Terry. It was about who had the legal right to speak for her. As her husband, Mr. Shrivo has that right and he should.