Terry Schiavo

[Scottwax]

States kill innocent people after they spend YEARS on death row.

Name one in the last 50 years.

Most polls from varying news organizations show staunch support for the decision among Americans, the right of the husband and that the government should not be involved.

At one time, the majority of the country approved of slavery and that didn't make it right. If our government only did what polls recommended, we'd have a tyranny of the majority.

This is a private matter among the family, the courts on all levels have spoken, and people need to respect that. One's religious views should be kept to themselves and not define the manner in which this woman is to live out her life.

The 'family' isn't even a blood relative. He really isn't even her husband anymore, based on his life with another woman who he has had two children with. I find it very disturbing he is having the final say over her own parents.



Terri is not suffering and she isn't in pain. There is no harm in letting her live if her parents are willing to foot the bill.

 

[Roadster J]

What if she had a living will that stated she wanted no feeding tube if it came down to it? That she would rather starve to death than to spend DECADES in an oblivious zombie-like state void of ANY and ALL mental capacities that the cerebral cortex provides. Would you deny her that right based on your personal values?

Is avoidance, through death, of being in a âہ“zombie-like stateâ€Â� a right?



I donâ€â„¢t know. Iâ€â„¢m a civil engineer not an ethicist or legal scholar. If she suffered brain damage to the extent that her life was being sustained only through the activity of life support machinery, I think we, as a society, recognize that the advancements in medical technology are artificially keeping her alive and are denying her of her âہ“right to dieâ€Â� (assuming she made her desires known beforehand or that they were deduced legally from her prior actions or values).



In her case, she is alive without the direct intervention of medical machinery; that she is in a persistent vegetative state is tragic. If she had a living will as described, that would be clear and convincing evidence of her wants and desires in such circumstances, but is she (or her surrogate) entitled to implement those wants and desires if those circumstances actually occur? Just because an event or circumstances are tragic should we, as a society, allow individuals to commit suicide or allow others to let them die? Society already places limits on what we can do with our bodies (I canâ€â„¢t legally commit suicide, sell my organs, prostitute myself [gigolo myself?], take drugs, etc.)



At some point, we have to say âہ“hey itâ€â„¢s a shame life dealt you a crappy hand, but youâ€â„¢ve got to play the cards you were given, you canâ€â„¢t fold.â€Â�



Iâ€â„¢m asking these questions more or less rhetorically. The final outcome will be based on my personal values. It will also be based on YOUR personal values, and the guy down the streetâ€â„¢s personal values. We are all involved in society. In the end, our collective personal values will form societyâ€â„¢s mores regarding these types of issues.



FWIW: If I were in the same circumstances, I would like to be euthanized, If our society is going to say I have the right to die and that I wanted to die under these circumstances, I feel it then has the obligation to make my death as humane as possible. Allowing someone to wither away, persistent vegetative state or not, is just wrong.

 

[Spilchy]

From what I have read and heard from the last judge's ruling last night is that he indicated the evidence shown to him convinced him that she did not want to be in a state like she is in now. If you find it so disturbing that her husband has spent years and all his money on her and now he has the final say, then try to change the law.



As far as executions, FWIW, I support it in many cases - like that guy in Florida last week who killed that 9 year old. I was playing Devils Advocate. But there are innocent people on death row - that's unidsputable. What about executing people who are diagnosed with mental retardation? 34 people since 1984 have been executed who showed signs of mental retardation. What about executing those with mental illness? I have an aunt who is mentally ill - paranoid schizophrenic topped with a severe anxiety, OCD disorder for the past 33 years. She is a basket case; a ward of the State of NJ living in some group home. It's a miserable existence. Men like her are put to death. It's scary and my views on executing everyone changed real fast when I reached the level of maturity to comprehend on a higher level people's mental capacities. What about executing people who were children at the time when they committed the murder? Texas leads the way with the murderer being non-white 66% of the time and the victim white 65% of the time. As far as executing innocent people, I admit, I may have jumped the gun but I will do some research out of my own curiosity. But I know 14 innocent men were freed from death row in Illinois in 2001. 14!!!!



Here is what I found so far, FWIW:

In the last decade, 56 wrongfully convicted people have won release because of DNA testing, 10 of them from death row. (statistic from 1998)



Leonel Herrera died by lethal injection in Texas in 1993 even though another man confessed to the murder.



For every 7 executionsâ€â€œ486 since 1976â€â€œ1 other prisoner on death row has been found innocent. (statistic from 1998)



Also, I would not compare slavery to Euthenasia. There is a ZERO moral equivilincy between the two. It's apples and oranges. In my opinion, that's not really an argument.



Listen guys, I'm not some "Liberal Weenie" who goes around advocating sick people should die, all women should have abortions and killers shouldn't be executed!! I just feel that this has become insane and people should just let the family, in privacy, work through our judicial system to resolve this which they have. That's all.



Well, I for one, want to get back to detailing. I have my dad's car today and 2 over the weekend.



Happy Easter everyone! :up

 

[Acura_RL]

Terry Schiavo is not in a persistent vegetative state, nor is she on life support. Just some clarification.



Why is it that in our legal system, your are innocent until proven guilty, that in order to be found guilty it must be beyond a shadow of a doubt? Beyond any reasonable doubt? Many people though OJ Simpson got away with murder, but his jury had some shadow of doubt and now he's a free man.



So why is it that in this case, in which we're not dealing with a criminal but someone who's innocently disabled, we are not having a shadow of a doubt on the evidence presented about her "wishes" to cease living in conditions like she is in now? How do we base the findings on hearsay from a husband with a questionable character and a bunch of medical professionals who play god?



And why must the judicial system be the final say in these matters? Why are so many people willing to accept what a judge says at face value, regardless of its merits? This is why the judiciary is the most dangerous branch of government. Unelected officials who serve for a lifetime via appointment are able to implement their viewpoint and practically write law from the bench.



No offense but I can't comprehend the point of view of those people who prefer to see this woman die.

 

[III]

Read this people:



Renowned neurologist: Schiavo can eat with aid & is not in â€Ëœpersistent vegetative stateâ€â„¢



Mar 21, 2005



By Joni B. Hannigan



PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (BP)--A doctor close to the Terri Schiavo case claimed that the 41-year-old disabled woman could actually be fed orally if it were allowed.



"The important thing for people to understand is that she can eat and swallow right now,â€Â� said William Hammesfahr, a neurologist who has examined Schiavo. He is in many of the videos circulated through the news media showing that Schiavo is at times responsive and aware.



"They are truly withholding food from a person who is awake, alert, and can eat and swallow,â€Â� Hammesfahr said. After spending at least 10 hours with Schiavo several years ago, he told Florida Judge George W. Greer that she can improve with therapy.



Hammesfahr was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology in 1999 for his work in brain injury and stroke. He is a recognized expert in treating neurological disorders, having successfully treated thousands of patients using vasodilator therapy, which increases blood flow to the brain, thus healing conditions previously thought to be untreatable.



Standing with a handful of supporters outside of the hospice late in the evening Mar. 19, Hammesfahr told the Witness Schiavo previously has swallowed pudding and daily swallows almost two liters of water by virtue of being able to process her own saliva and sinus drainage.



"Thatâ€â„¢s liquid and thatâ€â„¢s the most difficult thing to swallow," Hammesfahr said of her saliva. "If she can swallow that she can swallow food or pudding."



Other doctors who testified before Greer in 2003 had limited exposure to Schiavo and did not complete standard evaluations for brain injuries, Hammesfahr said.



"Terriâ€â„¢s not that bad," Hammesfahr said. "She is like a child with cerebral palsy. She can speak. At least when I saw her, she would speak very slowly. She would sort of form words, she would move her arms and legs at command. She could understand questions in English.â€Â�



Hammesfahr said there are at least 50 physicians he knows of, in private practice and related to medical universities who have said Schiavo is not in a PVS or in a coma.



Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, as well as family and supporters have argued that she could improve were she provided rehabilitation services. Michael Schiavo has refused to provide those services since around 1993, they say.



Although Michael Schiavo says his wife would want to die, no written request from her exists. Terri Schiavoâ€â„¢s parents have challenged his continued guardianship of their daughter, citing conflict of interest. Michael Schiavo has lived with his girlfriend, by whom he has fathered two children, for 10 years.



Greer ruled Feb. 25 that Schiavoâ€â„¢s nutrition and hydration be discontinued and in subsequent decisions ruled she cannot undergo more medical testing and cannot be fed by mouth. Greer also rebuffed a request by Floridaâ€â„¢s Department of Children and Families for a 60-day stay of his motion so that they could investigate allegations that Michael Schiavo has abused and neglected his wife.



Hammesfahr said that about 30 percent of his cases are more severe than Terri Schiavoâ€â„¢s, and that she most likely could improve, whether by his approach or another.



"You can get almost anybody with a brain injury or a stroke better," Hammesfahr said. "I think thatâ€â„¢s the long and short of it.



"Itâ€â„¢s not that [Schiavo simply] deserves a chance, she deserves rehabilitation," Hammesfahr continued. "Sheâ€â„¢s not going to get the rehabilitation if she gets killed off here."



Each day Schiavo is off the feeding tube increases the chance that she will end up in a coma, Hammesfahr said. He described what happens to the human body when it is deprived of food and water.



"People who die of starvation, their acid eats through their stomach, they develop infections in their body, their body starts to dissolve from the inside out, they develop seizures, [and] frequently it breaks their back," he said. "They have to have medications to essentially put them into a coma to not have their body break their back or something of that nature."



He explained that the process of putting someone in a coma after withholding nutrition and hydration is part of an "exit protocol" that involves delivering powerful drugs like Morphine and Valium to the patient when they are expected to die.



"The danger for Schiavo is that if she is in a coma, she will not have the type of monitoring that could help her recover if the feeding tube is reinserted.



"Putting a person in coma is very dangerous,â€Â� Hammesfahr said, and after 7-8 days she might end up in an irreversible coma or with further brain damage.

 

[MongooseGA]

I'd like to know some more facts before I put my opinion in on this.



Who is paying for all of her medical bills? Husband? Insurance?



How much money has been spent in the last 15 years to keep her in the hospital?

 

[Spilchy]

Read this people:



Renowned neurologist: Schiavo can eat with aid & is not in â€Ëœpersistent vegetative stateâ€â„¢



Mar 21, 2005



By Joni B. Hannigan



PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (BP)--A doctor close to the Terri Schiavo case claimed that the 41-year-old disabled woman could actually be fed orally if it were allowed.



"The important thing for people to understand is that she can eat and swallow right now,â€Â� said William Hammesfahr, a neurologist who has examined Schiavo.

Read this about Dr. Hammesfahr ARTICLE



I've done some further research on him. If that's the doctor you want treating you, then by all means!



The dude recommends treatments that aren't allowed on animals yet.



Do a simple Google search on him.

 

[III]

Spilchy, I respect your opinion. However, let me say this. About 2 months ago there was a girl that got bit by a bat in my local area. By the time the doctors figured out what was wrong it was too late for a vacine. Plainly put, the girl was going to die. The doctors did something they NEVER did before which was put her into a comma. The end of the story is that she is alive and well. What am I saying? Simply that if there is a slim chance for a doctor to help sombody why not try it? Why not air on the side of life?



Here's food for thought:

While people enjoy their Easter lunch/dinner on Sunday, we have a woman starving to death. Just last night my 4 year old daughter woke up when I came home at about 1:00 am from work and asked me if she could have a drink of water? How can people deny someone the basic things in life to survive when we don't know 100% that she wants to die?

 

[Tasty]

I know how I feel if it were me. I don't want to ever exist in such a state. That ain't living. Do you honestly want to live out your life just laying there doing nothing and being a financial drain on your family? I wouldn't. As for how her husband and family feel...walk a mile in their shoes. None of us can know what they are going through.

 

[sQuashed]

Im tires of it.Im tired of seeing 10 year old video's of her. Im tired of the media. Apparently , Im Barry Bonds.

 

[White95Max]

That ain't living. Do you honestly want to live out your life just laying there doing nothing and being a financial drain on your family? I wouldn't.

Exactly. Why would you want to drain all of your family's money so that you could live in a hospital room for 20 years, being fed through a tube (not that the oral food is all that great anyway)?

I don't know anyone that would want to live like that (no surprise to me) and I believe her husband when he says that she wouldn't want to live like that. Is there anyone here that would?

 

[Thomas Dekany]

No offense but I can't comprehend the point of view of those people who prefer to see this woman die.

I don't think anyone wants to **see this woman die**



Would you want to live like that? I'd like her to receive an injection instead of starving to death, but why do people find it hard to believe that her wish would be to not live like that.



The only reason she is alive is because we are **playing god**.



Nature would have taken her a long time ago.

 

[Scottwax]

I believe her husband when he says that she wouldn't want to live like that. Is there anyone here that would?

Why do you believe someone who hasn't acted like her husband in years? He has two kids by the woman he lives with. He has been with her long enough to be her common-law husband. That is what really bugs me about this case...he is the one whose word the courts are taking. His assertion that she told him she didn't want to live like that is considered hearsay in a court of law and we don't execute people based on hearsay evidence (at least in the modern incarnation of the death penalty) but in this case it is enough to yank her feeding tube?

 

[White95Max]

I didn't say I trust the guy in every way. I just said I believe that she wouldn't want to live like that. I can't see anyone actually WANTING to live like that for one year, let alone 20 years.



So basically I believe the assumption that she would not want to live like that.

 

[III]

but why do people find it hard to believe that her wish would be to not live like that.

Because the only person that has heard this is a guy that is with another woman, has kids with this woman, and in my opinion, wants Terry dead for the wrong reasons. How do you think Terry would feel if she could realize that her husband has moved on with another woman while she is still alive and in her condition? There have been reports of perhaps domestic abuse years ago with Terry and Michael. This is why the tube should be put back in, and an investigation should be done.

 

[MongooseGA]

If I was in her position (not really her condition) and saw that my husband had moved on after me being a vegetable (I'll use the term lightly- God forbid I get called out because she's not actually being in a medical Vegetive state) for 15 years, what would I think? I'd be a little upset, but if she actually cared for the better of him, I'd probably want him not to be dragged down me his whole life. I don't know the history of the case because it happened before I was born, so if there was bad blood between them, I don't know about it.



If I was in the husband's position, I would have wanted to move on by now too.



Do I like the removal of the feeding tube? Not really. Do I think she should be a candidate for euthanization? Absolutely, but only if there's no way she could ever recover.

 

[Thomas Dekany]

Because the only person that has heard this is a guy that is with another woman, has kids with this woman, and in my opinion, wants Terry dead for the wrong reasons. How do you think Terry would feel if she could realize that her husband has moved on with another woman while she is still alive and in her condition? There have been reports of perhaps domestic abuse years ago with Terry and Michael. This is why the tube should be put back in, and an investigation should be done.

III - that is just it. It is your opinion. On Larry King the husband stated that they have friends who also heard her say that she wouldn't want to live like that.



You don't know that he wants her dead for the *wrong* reasons. *** does that mean? There is nothing that he can do for her, so why not let him *move on*? I hope that this doesn't happen to you down the road.



For me, I'd want my wife to get involved with someone that she thought was special enough if I was in a coma for 15 years.



Do you realize what it takes to be in his shoes?



It is very easy to judge others. You are not in his shoes & would be best to except things like this since it is really out of your hands. Do you know that he was offered $10 million by one individual and he refused it? So before you throw a stone, think.

 

[III]

Tdekany, your'e right, this is just my opinion and I respect yours. Just like you have an opinion that you would want your wife to get involved with someone if you were in a comma, I have my opinions. What about the vows you took when you got married? Didn't you agree to be with your wife in sickness and health? For better or worse? Till death do you part? My opinion is based on information that could play a key role into keeping Terry alive. There are some key issues here.



First let me say that if Terry had something written down that she wouldn't want to live this way I would have no problem with granting her wishes. But the point in this case is that she didn't do this and we don't know 100% that she ever said this. Since we don't know 100% don't you think we should air on the side of life until some key issues get worked out?



One of the key issues we need to establish is if Terry is truly in a vegetative state. We have doctors on both sides of the spectrum that say yes or no. We have a doctor who did some testing on Terry in which he told Terry's mom that he would need to roll Terry over on her side. Terry frowned her eyes and looked like she was going to cry. What this means to me is that she understands what is going on and that she was anticipating pain. Is this what we call people when they are in a vegetative state?



You're correct that's it's easy to judge others and that I'm not in his shoes. The $10 million doesn't really mean anything. Why is it alleged that Michael withheld treatment for Terry years ago when she was in the Hospital? Why did Michael want doctors to do nothing about Terry's urinary tract infection years ago? Why are there reports of nurses saying they heard Michael say when will this bi&%* die when he walked into the hospital room? Why are there reports of nurses saying that when they would mark improving in their charts, the charts were gone the next day? Some things just don't add up in this case.

 

[Thomas Dekany]

What about the vows you took when you got married? Didn't you agree to be with your wife in sickness and health? For better or worse? Till death do you part?

I love my wife, I sure wouldn't want her to suffer unnecessarily. She'd never leave me though and I'd never leave her.

 

[SilverLexus]

I think the big problem I have with this is that we have not seen a recent brain scan of Terri. What would have been the harm with having more medical evidence presented and then having the courts look at the evidence?



It seems this is the least they could have done for a life decision.



Another question is why has Michael denied her treatments on occasion?



Why not let her continue on if the parents will grant a divorce and pay for her care? Shouldn't he honor their wishes also? They are her parents.



*****



A local radio talk show host had a great insight on the possible aftermath of Terri's passing (I really hate to even type that. ) he said the next big thing will be permission for an autopsy...can you imagine the fight?