Terri Schiavo update

[American]

http://www.terrisfight.org/

So it looks like Terri's still hanging in there...


I'd like to hear some more opinions on this, especially from any newbies out there. In particular, if you happen to be in Florida and have followed this story with interest, this is the place to yack about it.

Let 'er rip.

[Zero]

My question is this: why not let the doctors decide? WHY NOT LET THE DOCTORS DECIDE?!?!

Oops, sorry about that...

Anyhoo, since the whole case seems to center around the actual physical condition of the woman, and a rather large collection of doctors and judges have decided on it, why does Jeb Bush think he has the right to ignore all of that, and the separation of powers upon which our government is based?

[American]

Originally posted by Zero
My question is this: why not let the doctors decide? WHY NOT LET THE DOCTORS DECIDE?!?!

Oops, sorry about that...

Anyhoo, since the whole case seems to center around the actual physical condition of the woman, and a rather large collection of doctors and judges have decided on it, why does Jeb Bush think he has the right to ignore all of that, and the separation of powers upon which our government is based?


Were you ever a moderator here? Don't lie.

[Zero]

Originally posted by American



Were you ever a moderator here? Don't lie. No, but I play one on TV.:)

[American]

She skillfully dodged my trap! I can't believe this...

[Zero]

Originally posted by American
She skillfully dodged my trap! I can't believe this... She?!?

[Dancing David]

Hmmm,

I like this line here:

help to save the life of an innocent, disabled woman.

Help prolong the life of a body with no brain just brain stem, against her stated wishes to her husband and his stated wishes.

Does this mean that soon we will live in a police state where cancer patients can no longer refuse chemotherapy, because as soon as they enter a coma the state will step in and give them treatment against thier wishes.

I have always stated that if I suffer severe brain damage then I would rather not live, I would deal with quadraplegia, parkinsons, etc, but if I am reduced to the level of dog or lower than I hope to be set free. Of course at that point I won't care.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Help prolong the life of a body with no brain just brain stem, against her stated wishes to her husband and his stated wishes.
Yep. This one's a no-brainer.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Of course at that point I won't care.

So, either you won't care or you will be so darn happy that someone senses that you are alive in your non-responding body.

Have you read this?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200312/CUL20031201a.html

Eight years ago, Adamson was lying in a U.S. hospital intensive care unit after a near-fatal brainstem stroke. Doctors described her as being in a "vegetative" state.

Unable to move or communicate, yet fully aware and sensitive to hunger and pain, the 33-year-old, New Zealand-born athlete and mother of two heard people around her discussing her condition, whether she should undergo surgery - and her death.

"It was terrifying," she recalls. "It the loneliest thing you could imagine. I had to find some way to be able to let people know I could understand what was going on around me. I was completely paralyzed."

[American]

Originally posted by Zero
She?!?


Oh, give it up Denise! 32 posts. You're talking about that Terri woman. "Zero", a likely name.... :rolleyes:

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Hmmm,

I like this line here:

help to save the life of an innocent, disabled woman.

Help prolong the life of a body with no brain just brain stem, against her stated wishes to her husband and his stated wishes.

There is no evidence of her stated wishes, only the word of her ex-husband.


Does this mean that soon we will live in a police state where cancer patients can no longer refuse chemotherapy, because as soon as they enter a coma the state will step in and give them treatment against thier wishes.

No. I don't think so. Can you describe how we would go from Terri Shiavo's case to the scary future you predict? Maybe you can sway me with your argument. :)


I have always stated that if I suffer severe brain damage then I would rather not live, I would deal with quadraplegia, parkinsons, etc, but if I am reduced to the level of dog or lower than I hope to be set free. Of course at that point I won't care.

If you have always stated that, apparently that is not enough. Get it in writing and have it notarized to be sure your wishes are honored.

[Dancing David]

TamiO,
I understand that the parents of terri S. have filed a petition to continue her life. In the US the power of attorney usualy devoves to the able spouse to make decisions for the unable spouse.

I have not read all the medical evidence but most reports are that this woman is brain dead above the brain stem, a very different experience tha someone who is still hearing and understanding the words spoken around them.

If there was reason to beleive that the husband was abusive or trying to profit from Ms. Schiavo's death then I can undertsand her parent's concern.

But I do not understand why the family has a right to keep Ms/ Schiavo alive against the wishes of her husband, especialy since there is no higher cortical functioning. I wonder if the surviving spouse will have to continue to watch the empty shell of his wife continue to live just because there is some born again in the Florida govenor's mansion?

This is stepping into a very strong legal right of american's, the right to chose to refuse medical treatment, it is part of the right to life mania. In the usa you have the unconditional right to refuse medical treatment, except for the case of a minor.

Why has the legislature chosen to interfere with the legal rights of a duly wedded couple, why should Mr. Schivo be forced to incur debt and agony. He is the gaurdian of his wife.

The danger in this is the same as always, the state stepping in to make a medical decision , in the place of the legaly designated spouse. Or by extension, the problem with a tort based system, into the legal right of any competant adult to decide thier own medical fate. What overwhelming concern is there for the state, if they could get a panel of twenty doctors of which 5 said that this woman had a chance to recover her higher brain function, then I understand.

But what right does the state have to just chose this one case and go against the wishes of the legal spouse's authority.

See there are many roblems with this kind of case, it is the extensions that is dangerous, will family memebers be able to over-ride the wishes of a comatose person and force them to have chemotherapy?

What about all the other family issues.

I mainly am concerned that this is a medical decision for Mrs. S.'s husband to make, the state has not demonstrated a clear reason to over-ride the right he has to make the decision he feels his wife wanted.

[Bentspoon]

Why is it that the republicans always state that they are for less government. And then turn right around and try to tell you how to live - or not die - or what you can shove up your butt - hell it is your butt

What business does Jeb Bush have getting involved. Why isn't there outrage?

This is an intrusion of government into a private decision with those that have the technical knowledge and/or an intimate relationship with those concerned. How does Jeb fit in.

And that would be the answer to TamiO's question: "Can you describe how we would go from Terri Shiavo's case to the scary future you predict?"

There it is riight in front of you. Because governors, particularly those with the inbred sounding name of Jeb do not know where the responsibility of government ends.

Bentspoon

[Zero]

Originally posted by tamiO


So, either you won't care or you will be so darn happy that someone senses that you are alive in your non-responding body.

Have you read this?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200312/CUL20031201a.html

Wow...a link to a semi-nutty right-wing religious site...also, the cases are completely diffferent, and therefore irrelevant.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Dancing David
I wonder if the surviving spouse will have to continue to watch the empty shell of his wife continue to live just because there is some born again in the Florida govenor's mansion?

IIRC, they are divorced.

I don't think Jeb Bush's religious beliefs are at issue here.

[Dancing David]

Could be TamiO, ah, a divorce, I didn't know that. Was this before or after the brain hemorage?

I still think it is a right to life thing, they will worry about the life of this person and just ignore all the ones who are intact and suffering.(Last statement not meant as a slam on Tami.)

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Could be TamiO, ah, a divorce, I didn't know that. Was this before or after the brain hemorage?

I still think it is a right to life thing, they will worry about the life of this person and just ignore all the ones who are intact and suffering.(Last statement not meant as a slam on Tami.)

He divorced her after her incapacitation; he has let go and moved on. He has someone else in his life now.

Sure, I bet a lot of the people who support letting Terri live also disagree with abortion (if that's what you meant). This is not about abortion, though. If you are saying this to color everyone who would like to see Terri live as sign waving abortion protesting jesus praising fundy whackos, well.... how about no.

This is really about parents who want to take care of their baby.

This is about a man who has fought tooth and nail and spent thousands of dollars to kill his ex-wife. The parents have spent all their money trying to save their baby's life. This has dragged out for years. Why is it so important to him that Terri dies?

It is easy to understand why it is important to her parents that she is allowed to live. They see life in her, they have doctors and nurses who have submitted affidavits to the court saying that she is not in a persistent vegetative state. That she has a chance of improving with rehabilitation. That there is evidence that she is conscious and aware of her surroundings.

She had no written wishes; just the word of her husband. He has moved on. Why can't he allow her parents to take care of her? Why is he doing this to them when he could just let them take over and get on with his life.

If he really thinks that Terri is somehow in pain or misery over still being alive, then he has to acknowledge that she can feel pain and that she understands her condition. If she is in a PVS, then she doesn't care.

[Dancing David]

I agree TamiO but he may have divorced here rather than accept the debt of her parent's continuing her life.

I want to know what an MMRI and PET would show, I haven't really seen evidence, so far just a lot of talking heads.

The question for me is not is she going to remain consious but is there really a cortex there?

And I grant you that what her parents are doing is sweet, but so is what her husband is doing, he obviously feels that he is trying to do what Terri would want him to do. I would hope that my spouse would do the me the same courtesy, because that is my wish. But as I stated , if I have no cortex, I won't care.

This just remind me too much of certain family situation, I would be terrified to think that I could be in a consious coma and being prayed over everyday by some babtists or something. Right now, I haven't adopted my step son because the lawyer said we should wait until we had been maried two years, and so my wife's very abusive family can fight the wishes stated in her will(goodness forbid) and try to take custody of my step son. Just too many screwed up families out there.

What evidence do you have that he just 'moved on' with his life? I have imagined that the divorce was to make sure that only half of the family assets would be used, or more likely to make her eligeble for Medicaid, spousal income of almost any sort would have precluded her recieving Medicaid.

[Clancie]

Posted by TamiO

He divorced her after her incapacitation

Hmmm....Any link to provide evidence that Michael Shiavo has divorced Terri?

Every news account that I've read indicates that he hasn't gotten a divorce....

[Zero]

Originally posted by Bentspoon
Why is it that the republicans always state that they are for less government. And then turn right around and try to tell you how to live - or not die - or what you can shove up your butt - hell it is your butt

What business does Jeb Bush have getting involved. Why isn't there outrage?

This is an intrusion of government into a private decision with those that have the technical knowledge and/or an intimate relationship with those concerned. How does Jeb fit in.

And that would be the answer to TamiO's question: "Can you describe how we would go from Terri Shiavo's case to the scary future you predict?"

There it is riight in front of you. Because governors, particularly those with the inbred sounding name of Jeb do not know where the responsibility of government ends.

Bentspoon It is because Republicans are liars and hypocrits.:D

[reprise]

Point one is that Michael Schiavo has no authority whatsoever to act against the order of the Guardianship Court that Terri's feeding tube should be withdrawn. The Court was effectively acting ad litem when it determined Terri's wishes and best interests, and Michael Schiavo could refuse to act has her guardian tomorrow but it wouldn't change either the Guardianship Court order or the rulings of the appeal courts which upheld that order.

There are many other threads on this board which link to the court documents which have accumulated over the many years this particular case has been before the courts which detail the medical findings which have been presented by both by the doctors engaged by the parties to the dispute and also the doctors engaged directly by the court.

There has been no divorce, but nor is Michael Schiavo's status as guardian dependent upon his continued marriage to Terri, and nor would his divorcing her change the ruling of the Guardianship Court. The reason why the Guardianship Court would not appoint Terri's parents as guardians if Michael Schiavo dropped dead tomorrow is because guardians are legally bound to act in accordance with the wishes and best interests of the incapacitated person and the Court has already determined that what Terri's parents want for Terri is in direct conflict with Terri's previously expressed wishes.

And yes, one has to wonder why if the "general concept" of withdrawing supportive care was so abborhent to the people of Bush's state, the legislature did not debate and pass laws about this issue during the many years this case has been before the court. There has been ample time for the general issue to be debated by and decided upon by the legislature during this time.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Clancie


Hmmm....Any link to provide evidence that Michael Shiavo has divorced Terri?

Every news account that I've read indicates that he hasn't gotten a divorce....

Actually, I don't see anything about divorce; I inferred it from the timeline section of Terri's website:

1997

May - Judge Shames approves Schiavo action to remove Terri's nutrition and hydration.

Jul - Schiavo's engagement to Jodi Centonze announced.

Aug - Attorney Felos's letter notifying Terri's parents of action to remove Terri's nutrition and hydration.

http://www.terrisfight.org/timeline.html

On the same page, over on the right hand side is a blurb that says:

Terri is not entitled to a divorce. Instead, her guardian must allow her a dissolution of marriage.

[American]

I am so sorry I started this thread.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by American
I am so sorry I started this thread.

why?

[American]

Originally posted by tamiO

why?


I thought Denise would take the bait like a sucker. But so far, Zero is the third Denise I've positively identified, which means I'm only 33.3% right. (34%, if you let me round up a little.)

I'll go double-or-nothing on the half, if you're willing to back me up here...

[reprise]

Originally posted by tamiO


why?

In some ways I'm glad you started it because at least it demonstrates that people still think about the Terri Schiavo case now that it's no longer topical or politically expedient to do so. People tend to forget that the Florida legislation which was passed in order to reinsert Terri Schiavo's feeding tube is the subject of a Constitutional challenge meaning that this particular case, and the principles it represents, is far from "over".

[Zero]

Originally posted by American



I thought Denise would take the bait like a sucker. But so far, Zero is the third Denise I've positively identified, which means I'm only 33.3% right. (34%, if you let me round up a little.)

I'll go double-or-nothing on the half, if you're willing to back me up here... Maybe Terri Schiavo isn't the only one with permanent brain damage around here? I don't know who this Denise person is, but I'm not it. :p

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by American
Oh, give it up Denise! 32 posts. You're talking about that Terri woman. "Zero", a likely name.... :rolleyes:
I thought I asked you not to post ungodly stupid things like that.

American, why dont you try something completely out of the norm of human behavior and respect a person's right to privacy.