actually it was 3 individuals on 2 separate occasions (funerals) that heard her wishes, including her best friend ... not just husband. Age (26) seems old enough to me to know what you want. I do agree it would be best to have had it in writing, look what would have been avoided. But if you are relying solely upon the parents' side of the story ... remember that emotions can wreak havoc and there are 2 sides to every story. For every claim the parents make, there is a countering version from the husband. I don't care to restate it blow by blow as it wouldn't change anything ... including your opinion or mine. Since neither one of us can know the entire story, and countless courts, judges and doctors have come up with a consistent ruling ... we should abide by the law and their judgement and let the woman die in peace.
Terri Schiavo petition on site
by missy04 67 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
LoverOfTruth
The point is that we start with people like Terri who are called "vegatative"...and then we see movies like "Million Dollar Baby" where the person was not vegatative but simply didn't want to live with a disability and yet the movie glorifies that her friend killed her, as a gesture of love...WHAT NEXT....each case leads to another and another and another...and each one make it easier and easier to justify ending someone misery if they are not considered "Normal". THAT is my concern...the overall view of society that this is okay. I don't want people deciding for me that I am not normal enough and need to be put out of my misery.
I couldn't agree with you more. This is frightening.
Hitler started his extermination process by convincing the public that disabled people were less than worthy of life. He used the media to promote this attitude.
-
LoverOfTruth
Oh and Missy....thanks for the website. I've casted two votes. One for my husband and one for me.
-
lauralisa
And reporters are now raising questions about a right-to-die law Bush signed as Texas governor, contradicting his position in the Schiavo case. Just last week, the law was applied for the first time, allowing doctors to remove a critically ill infant from life support against his mother's wishes. According to the Houston Chronicle, this marks the first time in American history that courts allowed a pediatric patient to die against the wishes of their parent.[7] As the Knight Ridder News service reports: "The mother down in Texas must be reading the Schiavo case and scratching her head," said Dr. Howard Brody, the director of Michigan State University's Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences. "This does appear to be a contradiction." Brody said that, in taking up the Schiavo case, Bush and Congress had shattered a body of bioethics law and practice."[8] HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section: Local & State March 16, 2005, 12:10PM Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care By LEIGH HOPPER Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips. "I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive." Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died. "I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake." Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts. A similar case involving a 68-year-old man in a vegetative state at another Houston hospital is before a court now. "It's sad this thing dragged on for so long. We all feel it's unfair, that a child doesn't have a chance to develop and thrive," said William Winslade, a bioethicist and lawyer who is a professor at the Institute for the Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. Paraphrasing the late Catholic theologian and ethicist Richard McCormick, Winslade added, "This isn't murder. It's mercy, and it's appropriate to be merciful in that way. It's not killing, it's stopping pointless treatment." The hospital's description of Sun ? that he was motionless and sedated for comfort ? has differed sharply from the mother's. Since February, the hospital has blocked the media from Hudson's invitation to see the baby, citing privacy concerns. "I wanted y'all to see my son for yourself," Hudson told reporters. "So you could see he was actually moving around. He was conscious." On Feb. 16, Harris County Probate Court Judge William C. McCulloch made the landmark decision to lift restrictions preventing Texas Children's from discontinuing care. However, an appeal by Hudson's attorney, Mario Caballero, and a procedural error on McCulloch's part prevented the hospital from acting for four weeks. Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient's family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient. Texas Children's said it contacted 40 facilities with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. Without legal delays, Sun's care would have ended Nov. 28. Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny, doctors said. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth, genetic counselors say. Sun was delivered full term at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, but Hudson, 33, said she had no prenatal care during which his condition might have been discovered. He was put on a ventilator while doctors figured out what was wrong with him, and Hudson refused when doctors recommended withdrawing treatment. Texas Children's contended that continuing care for Sun was medically inappropriate, prolonged suffering and violated physician ethics. Hudson argued her son just needed more time to grow and be weaned from the ventilator. Another case involving a patient on life support ? a 68-year-old man in a chronic vegetative state whose family wants to stop St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from turning off his ventilator ? was scheduled to be heard Tuesday by the Houston-based 1st Court of Appeals. But the case was transferred to the 14th Court of Appeals, which promptly issued a temporary injunction ordering St. Luke's not to remove the man's life support. No hearing date has been set. Chronicle reporter Todd Ackerman contributed to this report.
-
DanTheMan
The GOP's evolving creed:
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/11204998.htm
"I don't care what her husband says" - Tom Delay
-
bebu
If I have to err, I would absolutely prefer to err on the side of life. History has simply waaaaay too many sad examples of our making absolutely regrettable decisions concerning other people's lives. I would hate to think of potentially adding another irreversible mistake to the list.
Missy, thanks for bringing this site to the attention of those who wish to petition.
bebu
-
BlackSwan of Memphis
I have a daughter with down syndrome, because of her infant classes she had, I had the pleasant oppurtunity to meet with parents of children who were terminal due to various chromosomal disorders. Many of these children could not do anything other then lie there and let there mothers and fathers take care of them. They would never learn to walk, would never be able to feed themselves...nothing. They were fed by their parents with feeding tubes or something similar. One beautiful little girl has a disorder that left her without pupils to see. Really, these children were completely disabled. Physically and cognitively. Now had I not the oppurtunity to meet these parents and children, I would have thought for years to come... "what quality of life?" and "how sad". It was a friend of mine whose son had a case of cp due to medical negligence that helped me understand what keeps a parent's hope alive. She said that when her son was born and things were going horribly wrong, all she could do was pray and say "God, let my son be born" "I don't care how disabled he is, I will love and take care of him the rest of my life." She was a strong Catholic and her faith, I swear, could have moved mountains. You know, maybe you guys are completely right. Maybe she (Terri)will never be anything in this world, will never have anything to offer to society. I won't disagree with you. But I will say this. If she is not suffering and her parents, out of desperation and love and undying hope, are willing to take on the responsibility of her care, why not? If it gives them hope just to walk in her room and see a shadow of smile and that gives them a small little ray of hope and Terri is not suffering, why not say, sure? This is Michaels wife, should he have the decision? Sure. But it seems to me that he should be able to see that Terri is not a burden to her family. They love her. They have hope. To say she is not adding anything to society...That is where we start walking a very fine line. I respect the right to the opinion. But if that is true... Then why not just take the kids I mentioned at the outset, take them from their parents and starve them to death? After all what will they ever offer to society? If they don't die before they're 18, what could they offer??? Maybe, and hey, this probably sounds dumb, but maybe what they have to offer is to teach the human race not pity, but something greater. Maybe they help complete the larger picture of what we deem is life. Hey we are all entitled to an opinion. I don't completely disagree with what many people are saying. If I were dying of a horrible disease and it made me completely miserable, I want to be able to decide For Myself how to leave. But that isn't the case. We are going by Terri's husband. I'm sure he is a great guy who really loved her. But it seems to me that if Terri is Not suffering and her parents are willing to take care of her, why couldn't he have compassion for the living and let her parents take the responsibility and let everyone move on? The concern lies with her "right" to die. Well, Terri did not put it in writing and if there is one thing I have learned, when it comes to taking the word of another, be careful, because the very people you think you can trust to tell you the truth of the matter is quite possibly the very person who has ulterior motives and is willing to sell your soul to the devil for a penny. peace
-
doogie
To say she is not adding anything to society...
that;s not the reason why they decided to remove the tube.
my girlfriend SPECIFICALLY told me last night that she would want the same thing done to her if she were in terri's situation. she does not have a living will filled out. let's say that she slips into terri's condition tomorrow. let's also say that we're married.
her parents may want her to stay on life support, but i know that my love for her would FORCE me to carry out her wishes no matter what. i would be her primary legal guardian, so it would be my decision to make and live with. the guilt of walking away from her and making her parents happy would be far greater than the guilt i would have for carrying out her wishes and letting her die.
since there is no living will, we have to assume that this is the scenario taking place with terri schiavo. if you don't believe it or if you think her husband has ulterior motives, that's fine. it doesn't change a thing. sorry if i;ve offended, just my thoughts.
-
siegswife
What if this was a child?
Feeding tubes are removed from children that are in the same condition.
I personally know of a seven year old boy who's feeding tube was removed and died the same way 8 years ago. It isn't anything new and has been done to thousands of children and adults for many years. That is the problem here.
When society first started starving brain damaged people to death years ago, nothing was done to stop it. Starving people to death has been acceptable in this country for a long time and all of a sudden people are outraged. Instead of focusing on one woman, the people who are against her starvation death should be trying to end the practice altogether.
Personally, I think it's barbaric. People are charged with murder if they withold food and water from their children. They're prosecuted for animal abuse if they don't feed their animals. I don't see how starving a dependent person can somehow be sanctified by the law.
On the other hand, as long as it's legal, I don't think that the federal government should be involved in this case unless they are going to make a federal law that prohibits killing a brain damaged person in such a way. Terri isn't the first and she won't be the last as long as it's acceptable to society in general.
-
BlackSwan of Memphis
I made that statement directed at people who carry that belief, not at people who do not.
Your girlfriend along with millions of others have that right. It is a right. To protect that right she, along with the millions of others need to put it in writing.
I really understand where people are coming from in regards to her husband. People worldwide are split down the middle regarding his motives. My concern with her husband along with the doctors and the lawyers involved is....
I have had to deal with several doctors. As a mother of a child with a disability (which I am Not comparing my daughter with Terri) I know for a fact that right up until this day qualified Doctors have said the most stupid things regarding people with disabilities of All kinds. 2 years ago doctors (not one doctor plural) told my niece that since my daughter had down syndrome her unborn child was likely to have down syndrome. Any qualified doctor (one who has been to medical school) would know that that is so untrue. But this scared the living hell out of her. Doctors continue to suggest to parents to put their cognitively and physically impaired children in institutions rather then help them see what a loving environment can do for these kids. Point is: Doctors do these things every day, despite the vast amounts of information that will say contrary. Doctors do not know everything and many times they think they are God. I have worked with an equal amount of doctors who are the exact opposite. Same thing with lawyers, some you can trust some you can't. I am seriously all for a persons right to die they way they want. I live in MI where Kevorkian was imprisioned and still want to beat the living hell out of the Oakland County prosecutor who snagged him. People should have that right, I agree.
Now with the husband. Doogie... as much as I really want to agree, I have seen firsthand where one day your best friend is getting a divorce and it's the biggest shock in the world. Everything seemed perfect. Everything. Not one person except for Terri and her husband really know if their marriage was perfect. I'd like to honestly believe that yes, they had a great marriage. Everything points to it. But, that might not be the case. Who is there to contest it? Friends? Well, sometimes and many times, friends only know half the story, or they are unwilling to believe that a person is capapble of something unreal.
I used to trust Doctors. Now.... I am careful who I let care for my kids.
Doogie, I personally didn't think your post was offensive. Your girlfriend made a great point. Most people would not want to live for 15 years in a state like that and they would choose to end it, I believe they should have the right if they have made it clear in a written form. I was addressing a vast number of people (not necessarily those who are posters) who have made comments that since people in vegetative states have nothing to offer to society they are better off dead. I simply think that since she did not have it in writing and she does not appear to be suffering, what is the harm in letting her parents care for her? Several people have said that was her wish and who better to know then her husband. I think it was tickled pink who made a great point about parents making decisions for a person can be a bad choice as well. That's very true! But in this case the parents are making the choice to care for their daughter not let her die. Terri, I'm sure would not want any of this to be happening. But it is. I think as a parent it would be very difficult for me to allow my child to die. Regardless of it meaning the removal of a feeding tube or oxygen. I am looking at this from the perspective of parents who love their children unconditionally and choose to continue to have faith. Her wishes were not in writing, I think it is scary to take someone else's word on such a serious issue. We are not talking about a situation where the person in question has made it clear to all, including family doctors and other members of the family. Had she done so, then the situation would be completely different.