About Terri Schiavo and Disability

by Yizuman 32 Replies latest jw friends

BrendaCloutier

Terri Schaivo is not the first, nor will she be the last to have life support removed because she is no longer there. Only a body with no higher brain function. See also
Karen Ann Quinlan
http://www.who2.com/karenannquinlan.html
Nancy Cruzan
http://www.who2.com/nancycruzan.html
While your at it, you might want to check our Oregon's Death With Dignity Law, in force since 1997, which that has caused Ashcroft to have a personal vendetta against Oregon.
http://www.dwd.org/
I am a firm believer in the right to die preferably with dignity. Poor Terri Schaivo with or without feeding tube, has had no dignity in the media circus surrounding her. I do NOT believe that this non-legislation has anything at all to do with people with disabilities.
I am disabled. I have FibroMyalgia, a chronic pain syndrome, and I am unable to work or do the physical activity things I used to be able to do. I can no longer do simple things at times, like hold a fork, because of pain. My disability is not life threatening, and I thank gawd. I see and feel no threat by the government nor medical society toward me.
Double Edge

your condescending tone certainly should.
oh pleeeeeze .... it's their argument ...
bisous

D.E. what a crack up .... i call your and raise you a and a . Now it can be our argument!
IronGland

Terri Schaivo is not the first, nor will she be the last to have life support removed because she is no longer there. Only a body with no higher brain function. See also
Karen Ann Quinlan
http://www.who2.com/karenannquinlan.html
Nancy Cruzan
http://www.who2.com/nancycruzan.html

Tom "reinsert the tube" DeLay's father....
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay27mar27,0,5710023.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Yizuman

It isn't just the husband's word, there are two other people who claim that Terri specifically stated that she didn't want to live in this kind of condition. That is a fact, and whether or not you choose to believe them, it doesn't change the fact that more than her husband says they heard this directly from Terri. The people who have said the husband "rejoiced" in the thought of Terri dying have all been discredited. As a matter of fact, Yiz, the hospice once tried to get a restraining order against Michael because they felt he was trying to get them to focus too much attention on Terri, to the detriment of other patients. That's a fact.

Who are these people? Why should verbal agreement override written agreement? Specifically a written will by Terri? Since they're Michael's friends, of course a friend would back up a friend, so anything could be said just because he's a friend. How do we know they're telling the truth?
There can be only one truth and that has to be from Terri Schiavo and in written form and in her signature. Otherwise, verbal words means nothing. Same with a verbal agreement and shaking hands is not enough in the court of law. If an agreement is to be made, it's better to have it in writing.
If you were say "I want to live" and something bad happened to you, I could easily walk up to the doctor and lie to him that you want to die. "Oh she said that? Ok." *unplug!* *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPP!!!* Anyone could do the same to me. So here lies the danger. We can't just take verbal wordings and call it a legal claim. It just doesn't work that way and it shouldn't be.
You think it's ridiculous that a country like the US couldn't or never would become what Germany was like from 1933 to 1945. Don't bet on that. What happened in Germany can happen in any country at any given time. It doesn't happen overnight, it takes years for a country like Germany to become what it was then. It's already happening here in America, although very slowly.
On Sunday morning, in November 28th, 1993, those last two hours before she died, my sister was having an argument with the doctor who was caring for my mother. The argument was about the blood transfusion that was needed to save my mother's life. The doctor's point of view was that my mother was too old (she was 67 years old) to have this badly needly blood transfusion. He also felt it was a waste of resource because of her age and condition.
My sister could not believe her ears hearing the words coming out of the mouth of a doctor who's job is to save lives, not to dictate who is worthy of a life saving blood transfusion regardless of age, race, sex , handicap and religion.
After she left the hospital, my mother died within' the 2 hour time frame. What we will never know is whether or not the doctor purposely allowed my mother to die. Something that still angers me even to this day. My mother had been in ICU for over a month before she died.
There was an article from the Sunday Edition in my local newspaper, the article spoke of "code blue" which means that doctors are purposely letting patients flatline for approx 10 minutes before they went out to perform CPR "just for show". I was very disturbed by the article. I keep reading articles about doctors "playing god" on patients. Not every single doctor does that, but there are a good number of them out there. What's even more disturbing that the numbers is slowly growing out there.
The value of human life is slowly (and surely) deteriating, a year at a time.
I remember reading an article years back that a teacher was teaching some kids in elementary school about some people in a life boat. The boat is seriously overweighed by too many people. The leading boat "Captain" had to make a decision on what to do and how to keep the boat from taking in too much water and sink. She then explained to them that the Captain decided to toss out (showing chalk board magnets of figures in a boat) a wheelchaired person, an elderly man, a blind person, a sick man, etc. etc. At the end, she left only the young and healthy looking people that remained in the boat.
So what are the kids learning from this lesson? Only the strong, healthy and fit people are more worthy of living than those who have some kind of disability or those that are too old and too ill. So how are these kids learning about the value of human beings? Who is valuable and who isn't? By what right did the teacher have to teach kids that some people have value and others do not??
Like I said before, the kind of society that Germany was took many years for it to be what it was. So now here in America as well as the rest of the world, all it takes is time and education to change the face of society into something that will very well resemble what Germany was back then.
Too many people are sticking their heads in the sand and are not paying attention to what's going on around us in our society. Some are, but not all of them. We are at this point are at an "awakening" point because of Terri Schiavo, it brought about two sides arguing at each other about the sanctity of life and what it means to us. How long this will last and what direction this will take us as a society will remain to be seen.
Yiz
CeriseRose

I have my own opinions about the Schiavo case, but have (in many places and on many boards) not said anything because, really, I have no experience with her condition and quite frankly wouldn't want to speculate on what I might do in that instance. However, this thread specifically mentions terminally ill people and their right to die. I would like to also point out that this subject is an extremely difficult one for me, and because of the fact that I'm saying what I am, I would appreciate it if I were not "attacked" for this.
My Mom was diagnosed with lung cancer in 1998 and given (unknown to her and the rest of us as my Step-Dad didn't tell us) 2 months to live. She lived for 2 1/2 years more, spending her time crocheting beautiful heirlooms for her family, and travelling as she was able. Out of all my siblings, I visited the most. I watched her slowly decline. My flesh and blood sister (the only other member of my family who was a JW with me) was very upset that my Step-Dad didn't let her be a part of the decision making (she would have made sure my Mom didn't have blood; I was of the mindset that she was an adult and able to make her own choices), and was vehemently angry at his not disclosing how long Mom had. When my Mom lay dying at Easter of 2001, I was scheduled to visit (they lived 5 hours from me) for the weekend. Upon seeing my Mom in palliative care and the state she was in, my Step-Dad and I conferred and agreed that the family should be called to come. It was a devastating and emotionally exhausting time. My Mom was my friend as well as my beloved Mother.
I'm ashamed of my sister, and I think that this was a huge catalyst in my eventual leaving JWs, or at least seeing how wrong they are about treating people. Upon being called on the Friday afternoon that it was time to come, my sister opted to wait until Sunday so that she could go to a party for her JW inlaws on the Saturday night. I have NO doubt that my Mom hung on until she could say goodbye to everyone. Shortly after my sister arrived, my Mom started losing "consciousness". She began having seizures. Every 5 minutes for 14 hours straight. Each seizure required her to be propped up and given oxygen to be able to breathe. Throughout, and as she was able, she, a not particularly religious person, kept BEGGING for Jesus to just take her and crying. The morphine wasn't doing a thing anymore. She was delirious from the pain, exhausted from the disease.
A month after she died, my Dad went off work with a shoulder injury. Except it turned out that it was also lung cancer, only advanced to 4th stage (the shoulder injury was actually cancer having infiltrated the bone). I was his primary caregiver and I held his power of attorney. After a couple of health scares in which he was hospitalized, he was finally diagnosed with 6 months to live. He lived 4 months after that, with septic wounds and pneumonia. The night before he died I walked into his hospital room and knew by his look that he wasn't long. I confirmed with a nurse and again called the family to come. I then went back to his bedside and told him that he didn't look good and that I didn't think it would be much longer. He looked at me, and said that he was tired, and he was ready to go, but didn't want to be alone. He asked me to stay. I 'didn't sleep" in a chair all night by his bedside. That night, my Daddy, who had managed his cancer with tylenol and ibuprofen until the day before when he went on morphine, asked me to ask the doctor to give him something to go with. He was simply ready to; he'd said his goodbyes, made his peace. Because they can't do that (give him something), he drowned in his own fluids and agonizing and painful 24 hours later. By the time family came the next morning he was not cognizant of their presence.
I guess my point is what is the point of prolonging it when the person is ready to go? My parents were neither one of them suicidal. They were exhausted and sick. What were those extra hours for? For us? For those who couldn't be bothered to rush to their bedsides? For those who were too selfish to put the dying person's needs above their own? The place my parents were at when they were dying was zero quality of life.
And I guess the last thing I'd say is that before experiencing their deaths up close and personal, I was an not an advocate of euthenasia. It's a world of difference to have a viewpoint and not have ever been in the position of being the decision-maker or a related supported of a decision-maker. To be quite honest, I wouldn't have wished what they went through, on my worst enemy, much less loved ones. It's not pretty, and in both of their cases, they were adults expressing their wishes. And if it had been in my power, I would have assisted them when they begged to be released.
You can debate the morals and rights as much as you want. It all really goes out the window when it's someone you love and they have a wish.
EvilForce

Michael Schiavo has often expressed under a court document by a witness who happens to be a nurse who cared for Terri. He stated, "When is the bitch gonna die?" and if something went wrong with Terri, Michael's face would light up like a Christmas tree and stated, "I'm gonna be rich!" which indicates that Michael had put out a life insurance on her that would allow him to inherit a very large sum of money in the event that she dies

Since they're Michael's friends, of course a friend would back up a friend, so anything could be said just because he's a friend. How do we know they're telling the truth?

There can be only one truth and that has to be from Terri Schiavo and in written form and in her signature. Otherwise,

Okay Yiz you completely contradict yourself in the above statements. You accept as FACT when someone is saying what they heard when it supports your belief structure, yet dismiss other testimony when it doesn't support it.

Various courts have ruled CONSISTENTLY for over 7 years now what they believed to be the wishes of this patient. 15 seperate judges have passed down judgement, in each and every time supporting the end decision to cease artificial life. I was not in any of these judcial actions yet I have to believe that 15 seperate judges spanning 7 years have dutifully considered all the facts.

A "code blue" IS NOT "code" for showing up 10 minutes after a patient lapses and needs CPR...it is for an immediate and full response to restore cardiac function. However, it is not uncommon for patients who are nearing life's end to code 3, 5, or 10 times AN HOUR. Some families just cannot grasp the idea that their loved one is ALREADY gone and insist on "heroic" measures to keep them alive. While the entire medical staff knows from experience that they are only prolonging the inevitable and in fact doing more damage to the patient by allowing contiuing measures, ie,,, multiple broken ribs from CPR and such. The patient's is dead, but the body just hasnt' quite figured out yet because of the life sustaining machinery doing it's work. You sound like you are bitter from your own loss of a family member and have an axe to grind with the medical staff.

From my experience I have found Christianity to be one of the worst offenders at preparing their followers for their mortality. JW's included. You would think that since these people believe in a Earthly Paradise or Heaven that they would want their loved one's to move on to the next step of existence. But I find this not to be the case many times. I don't want to make gross generalizations here, but in my 15 years in the medical profession it seems to be mostly accurate.

Now Yiz you do make a great statement about Terri needing to have her wishes in written form! Doctors, judges, and family are not mind readers. It is OUR OWN responsibility to make sure we have "living wills" and that we have let our loved one's know what we would want in the "what if" worst case scenario happened.

Also, I find the arguement of abortion and Terri to be uncomprehensible. Terminating a child before birth is denying that child a full and rich existence. Terri will never have anything remotely resembling a shear fragment of existence. We allow our own pets to die with dignity and grace when they are facing a terminal outcome. Why can you justify that in your mind, yet not allow a far more advanced life the same dignity and respect? Terri has been in this state for over a decade and a half. Not a year, not two years, but over a dozen years. She will not be recovering.

But I have heard the other arguement... "If only one life could be saved it would be worth it." This is a self serving arguement. I have to ask you if you drive a car? If everyone quit driving we could save over 40,000 lives EVERY YEAR. But does this stop you from driving? No! Also, if you are taking your position of keeping her alive and that doctors make life and death decisions based on monetary consideration you are correct. As cold as that may sound we must weigh the benefits of treatment vs. the outcome. As expensive as health care is would you like your premiums doubled to allow people like Terri to survive? If you are married w/ 2 children either you or your employer pays approx. $ 800 to $ 1000 a month for your healthcare. Would you like to pay that extra money each and every month for such "heroric" measures.

Also, I would like to point out the hipocrisy of your arguement. Keeping the body of Terri artificially alive could literally take away desperately needed monies from poor and indigent children who are fully functioning people who die every year because they didn't have the access to healthcare that they needed and deserved. "Heroric" measures are extremely expensive. So by keeping "alive" a person's brain stem in a persisten vegetative state would cause the death of 10's of others who need the healthcare that she is using. Which is more cruel? Can you honestly tell me that a kind, loving God would expect and want his people to live like that? I don't think so.

So while you may fault the medical professionals, it is not our faults. We are not perfect, we PRACTICE medicine. We do our best. We did not create sickness and death. We simply do our best to beat it back a few years, or to allow our patients a fuller life to spend with their loved ones. But we ALL die. Each one of us needs to make sure we are living our lives to the fullest extent possible so that "heaven forbid" our life is snuffed out tomorrow we can say we did the best we could with the limited time we had."
the_classicist

I guess my point is what is the point of prolonging it when the person is ready to go? My parents were neither one of them suicidal. They were exhausted and sick. What were those extra hours for? For us? For those who couldn't be bothered to rush to their bedsides? For those who were too selfish to put the dying person's needs above their own? The place my parents were at when they were dying was zero quality of life.

But Terry is not on life support, she is simply on a feeding tube as she is able to have her organs and everything else function without support. She could live about as long as the next person if she had that feeding tube. How would it be selfish not to remove the tube if she were just a vegetable, or an empty shell?
Human beings are meant to experience suffering, we can't just cower out and kill ourselves.
Abaddon

Yiz
What you have totally ignored is the lack of her stated will of what she wants done with her life if she ever became what she is now. There is absolutely no written record of her stated wishes on file with her attorney or any written will in any form. It's all about the voice of one, her husband, period.

Well, either the judge is a fool, and has been deceived by her husband's lies, or he has correctly determined that her husband is telling the truth.
Do you know anything about the record of this judge? Why do you feel he is wrong? And what about the $1 million the husband turned down? Surely this puts neat little speculations about him having a profit motive under the heading of 'unfounded speculation' or 'character assassination'?
The assumption under law is that next of kin have the rights in a situation like this. That means her husband, even if you do not agree with him carrying out her wishes.
How can you be selfish to use her as an example to prove a point of what it is YOU want in order to create and grant laws based on solely of what it is that you want with your life, should you ever come to state that you cannot express your wish verbally or physically or both that you rather be dead than be bedridden for life in some medical facility?
Yiz, I got offended when I saw you spreading lies. There is no evidence he has any insurance on her life. Nasty little lobbyists are using that lie to boost support for their stance. Nothing to do with the woman's life you see; all to do with getting support for their stance - even if they have to make up stuff to do it. And you spread the lies as it suits your agenda. Nice.
If you wish for the doctor to pull the plug on you if you ever become incapacitated to express your wish and desires to be dead so you don't have to wallow in bed in self pity (woe is me) because of your current state of condition. Make sure you have a written will first and foremost now with your attorney.
Ah, so you believe that anyone who is incapacitated to the extent you describe and wants to die does so so they don't have to "wallow in bed in self pity". Nice attitude. Really fills me with assurance that you respect the right of others to determine their own life.
Of course, you are presuming that there is enough of a person left to HAVE any "self-pity" to wallow in. Obviously if someone is so brain damaged they no longer have any sense of "self", let alone "self-pity", your argument is meaningless. They wouldn't be incapable of expressing their wishes, they wouldn't have wishes.
What's wrong with the idea of people in general that is willing to LOVE and CARE for someone and treats that someone as a human being??
Utterly irrelevant. This is not about the ability of people to love and care for the sick. This is about the rights of a spouse to ensure their partner's wishes are carried out when they are no longer able to express those wishes.
You stated that unborn children (I assume *there's that word huh?* at any stage up to 9 months) is nothing but a blob of nerve tissue.
I clearly state that I think a good health system is one where abortions take place prior to there being more than a couple of grams of nerve tissue. If you carry on making false statements about what I say (which is foolish given what I say is there for people to read, and I am sure they don't have the comprehension problems you seem to have). If you are right, surely distorting what I say is unnecessary?
I'm sure that you would even have no problem with the idea that a woman would give birth to a full 9 month old baby like that Prom Queen Mother did and strangle the baby to death, put the baby in a trash bag (as I would *assume* that you think a baby in a trash bag is appropriate way of treating a baby, a piece of trash), depose of the baby in a trash can and then walk back to the dance floor as if everything is all normal.
More lies; you don't "assume" this, you use character assassination as a method of making my stance seem unreasonable. Of course, you are not saying anything I have ever said. All it does is make me wonder how a so-called Christian can think blatant distortion, misrepresentation and lying is compatible with their belief system.
So unborn babies aren't human beings Abaddon?
More distortive bull from Yiz; where did I say that? Is it even worth having a discussion with you if all you do is distort what I say? I'd have more honesty dealing with a coven of witches.
Humans are Homo sapiens. An H. sapiens zygote is an H. sapiens zygote, and carries on being H. sapiens through all developmental stages.
What about Terry, Abaddon? Is she human or is she no longer a human being but rather a vegetable instead Abaddon?
More stuff I never said. How can she not be a member of H. sapiens? Why the distortion Yiz?
What about me, Abaddon? I am deaf, so am I just a walking piece of trash Abaddon?
Yet more stuff I never said. You might be a lying piece of trash (I make this comment based on your continual distortion of what I actually said; view it as an observation rather than a criticism), but you are a human being. Your deafness doesn't reduce your neurological activity, sense of self or personality, any more than my skeletal deformity reduces my attributes in those areas or my daughter's talapies reduces hers. After there is enough brain to count as brain in any meaningful sense to our species (which occurs during pregnancy), even if the person is severely mentally disabled they should have equal rights to life as a Nobel Prize winner as even severely mentally disabled people have brain function and personality.
Your continual attempts to portray me and those with my opinion as people who would willingly end the life of a thinking feeling aware being cannot be successful as no one is arguing for the right to end the life of a thinking feeling aware being. Apart from supporters of the death penalty that is...
How do you define who is human and who isn't Abaddon? I like to know exactly what your thoughts are as to what is defined "human".
A member of the species Homo sapiens is human. However, you are equating 'being human' as an absolute thing; you have the DNA, BING! you have the same rights.
Imagine two bed-ridden patients, one that had not communicated for years and who, in the opinion of the majority of experts consulted was in PVS, and one who was merely bed-ridden. There's a fire. You can save one. Your silly little lies and distortions cannot hide the fact in such a situation you would differentiate between two humans based upon their measurable neurological activity.
Now, you may believe due to your religion that it is worthwhile and commendable to keep people in PVS alive, despite the fact they are no longer capable of anything approaching thought. Fine. Apply that rule to those you have responsibility for.
Accept that just as you would leave a person in PVS to burn in a fire because you would differentiate between them and someone who was just bed-ridden, so to other people would decide to withdraw care, stop feeding, or use drugs to bring a life to an end of someone in PVS. Our "self" is in our minds Yiz; when we have no minds, we might still be members of H. sapiens, but "we" are gone.
So too you might hold the rights of a embryo with less brain tissue than a pet rat, who is so undeveloped that they don't even have skin, to be equal to that of the woman carrying the child. Feel free to impose your opinion on anyone you breed with. Other people, on account of the fact there is no "self" yet, would decide differently.
And do stop doing this;
How about my being a Christian Abaddon? Am I no longer a human being because I gave my life over to Jesus Christ and made Him as Lord and Savior of my life?
It is offencive that you continually try to use misleading and distorted arguments to slur me. It also makes you look like a hypocrite, as you associate yourself with the supposed father of the lie, Satan, rather than the person you claim to follow when you do this.
Obviously your beliefs, even if they include forcing others to follow your beliefs, do not stop you being a member of H. sapiens.
Because I now care about human beings and love them unconditionally just as God loves everyone unconditionally? That makes me less than human Abaddon?
Oh, we can get sectarian if you like. For a start, I don't see what is particularly 'unconditionally loving' about allowing severely disabled children with no hope of anything other than a very short and painful life to be born. If they can be aborted before 22 weeks, when the connections carrying the sensations of pain to the cortex are finally made, then 'unconditional love' to me would mean a different course of action.
Secondly I don't see god as being particularly loving if you base your definition of it from the Bible. Nice chap; "here, take this town, kill all the men and the women, kill the boys... but keep the virgin girls alive". Nothing like having girls reduced to sexual slavery at god's command is there? So that is loving and letting a PVS patient die isn't. Right, okay...
I didn't give a flying frak about people before I became a Christian Abaddon, simply because I was bitter and hateful towards everyone and blamed everyone for the messy life that I was in many years ago. I guess my previous life was more human to you than what I am now, wasn't it?
Lies lies lies. Never said that, never thought that. You must be a PRACTISING Christian. You're really not very good at it.
Quite frankly I have always given a flying fuck about people. If religion is the only way you were capable of doing this, good for you. Just try to practise what Jesus preached, eh?
Does my caring and love for others make you sick in the pit of your stomach Abaddon?
More lies. Disguise it as a question if you like; your intent and deviousness are clear.
How is your "care and love" for others displayed in your continual and persistent lies about what I have said or think? Woe unto you blank, blank and hypocrites, wasn't it?
You think it's ridiculous that a country like the US couldn't or never would become what Germany was like from 1933 to 1945. Don't bet on that. What happened in Germany can happen in any country at any given time. It doesn't happen overnight, it takes years for a country like Germany to become what it was then. It's already happening here in America, although very slowly.
Funnily enough the greatest risk for the USA is having a totalitarian religiously biased government that will hold human rights to be less important than the imposition of certain group's religious beliefs on the entire population.
Now, what would be interesting if all people who believe in keeping people in PVS alive paid for the establishment and running of places for the people to be kept.
Now, what would be interesting if all people who believe in keeping people in PVS alive said what they should think happen in situations where public funds paying for the care of a person in PVS meant that there were not funds for life-saving operations or life-transforming procedures on people with full brain function.
Which is kinder? To let people with intact personalities and intelligence die or suffer due to lack of funds whilst people with PVS and no hope of recovery to a state of even partially intact personality and brain function are kept alive? Even if it was private funds, would Jesus advise a family to live in poverty and do without the chance of a good education to keep someone who no longer had personality or thinking ability respirating?
"Let the dead bury their dead" is perhaps the only relevant guidance for us in that situation, if one is trying to take a Christian position.
CeriseRose

But Terry is not on life support, she is simply on a feeding tube as she is able to have her organs and everything else function without support. She could live about as long as the next person if she had that feeding tube. How would it be selfish not to remove the tube if she were just a vegetable, or an empty shell?
Human beings are meant to experience suffering, we can't just cower out and kill ourselves.

Um, I was very clear that I was not commenting on Terri, but on terminally ill people. The original post spoke of them and the right to die. I also said I wasn't qualified to make comment on Terri or her condition because I don't know enough about it (although I'm sure, as most people here have, I've read a ton on it...the difference is, I don't choose to make myself any sort of an authority on the issue based on reading from the media, court transcripts, etc.).
I also asked that I was not attacked for my comments. They are food for thought, and contribute only from a the angle of a person who has been a caregiver to a terminally ill person. I personally don't think that human beings are "meant" to experience suffering, and your response about "cower out and kill ourselves"...well let's just say I hope you don't EVER have to go through one-tenth of what my parents did. Neither was a coward nor suicidal. Their bodies were done and their minds were ready for it.
In light of what my post was about (terminal illness), your comments are really irrelevant to it.

About Terri Schiavo and Disability

Share this