Yeah it does seem pretty stupid to have her starving to death while her case is still up in the air. Even though I don't agree with the federalization of the case, what is done is done and you shouldn't put someone on a slow road to death if there's a possibility that there will be a verdict to keep her alive.
Posted at 2005-03-23 11:44:40 [PermaLink]Her case ISN'T up in the air. It's been decided by at least the last two courts that have looked at it. If the other side wants to attempt to change the outcome by taking it to another level, that's their perrogative but it doesn't change the current outcome. It isn't a criminal offense with a sentencing issue. (The Right To Life folks would probably argue that last part.)
Posted at 2005-03-23 13:03:38 [PermaLink]Actually one thing that strikes me as the worst part of this case is the absolute moral cowardice of removing the feeding tube. If you're going to end someone's life, make the decision, end it, and be up front and humanly decent about it.
Much like abortion proponents, the husband's side of this is hiding behind nomenclature. "Removing the feeding tube" is a euphemism for kill her. This euphemism happens to hide the terrible death in store for her (Since her cortex is intact, there's no reason to think she wouldn't feel the pain of starving to death).
I'd have much more respect for the husband and for the court if they advocated ending her life directly and painlessly, with an injection. Then there might be a reason for all the executive interference in a judicial matter.
Of course, I wouldn't expect anyone to jump on that political landmine to save a woman from a horrible death, but moral cowardice isn't a rare disease.
Give me strength! She's been the recipient of extreme medical intervention for 15 years. It's up to her Drs. to make the MEDICAL determination as to how and when to say "Enough!"
How and why Lawyers are involved is a mystery to me.
This BS of her lying in bed suffering while she dies of thirst and starvation is emotional blackmail. People with stomach and colon cancer are going through the SAME circumstances and they AREN'T in a vegetative state. They receive palliative care until their final moment and so will Mrs. Schiavo. Analgesics, morphine and other pain relief treatment are routine.
The more I see and hear of the Save Her at Any Cost campaign, the more convinced I am that her Husband is the White Knight.
Kudos to the Judges that have looked at this circus with calm and empathetic wisdom and come down on the side of what's natural and inevitable (for us all). Just let her go.
Her EEG is flat. By any reasonable definition, she is already dead and has been for years.
Posted at 2005-03-24 09:09:54 [PermaLink]This "Joel" creature left the same comment in a post over at Amy Welborn's blog. I didn't know that comment spambots could have opinions.
By the way, DaninVan, feeding someone, even through a tube in the stomach, isn't exactly "extreme medical intervention." The problem with Terri Schiavo is that she didn't up and die like just about everyone seems to have wanted her to; in fact, aside from her brain damage and the physical infirmities brought on by years of minimal care and no physical therapy, she is (or was) healthy as a horse.
I really don't understand why people like you are so furious at the idea that someone doesn't want to kill her. No one is asking you to take care of her, after all, and it's not like her remaining alive will cause someone else to drop dead.
Dan, according to reports, Terri was denied therapy by her husband. She was reportedly denied a great number of proceedures and courses normal in minimally conscious patients used to regenerate brain and body functions. Her husband from the beginning has permitted only de minimus survival care required by law.
At one point, she had been semi-concsious and using words. Showing expressions. IF she had indeed been allowed an EEG, and IF it indeed showed a flatline, one has to ask some questions.
This woman has been dehumanized by her husband. She's been turned into a "vegetable" by Chris Mathews. The ACLU and NOW have nothing to say on her behalf.
Shiavo has made it clear from early on that he has resented her mere existence. White Knight? No. Sandman.
IF Shiavo had tried to save her... IF he had offered to permit therapies, treatments, had made special efforts to regenerate her from the beginning, then the term "White Knight" wouldn't have such an horrific irony.
P.K.; assuming all of your info is correct (and not disinformation from the parents) what has any of this got to do with the present condition?
I'm not going to defend hubby if what you claim is accurate, however the rest of what I wrote applies.
The Supreme Court, this morning, refused to intervene so apparently I'm in rather good company, Andrea Harris's opinion not withstanding.
Andrea; my resource person is my wife, a 30 year R.N., all of it spent in the hospital environment and most of that as an I.V. Therapist. There isn't a whole lot that she doesn't know about this topic
and as for your comment re "killing her" that's more of the emotional blackmail. The patient can't survive without constant intervention and support, withdrawing that treatment and letting nature run it's course is NOT the same as deliberately euthanizing a patient. (Not that I have a problem with the latter if that's what the terminally ill patient has requested).
Oh yes, I forgot to mention, Andrea, I'm not "furious", in fact I'm totally detached. I've done my own Power of Attoney, Living Will, and D.N.R. so in my case I'm 'walking the talk'.
Dan, I don't know if my info is valid. In a way, I hope it isn't. It may well be a moot point anyway if, in fact, she'd been in a permanently damaged state and had slipped away ages ago. This issue isn't clear from the facts as presented by anyone so far, given the mud of contradictory statements.
I agree with you on most of this. I'm not even sure Schiavo could have prevented this from happening to Terri. Wouldn't be fair to totally vilify him without more data. (Though I don't have the least shred of respect for him thus far.)
DNR's, living wills, POA... yeah. Good point.
P.K.; Wifey, R.N., tells me that D.N.R.s and Living Wills are regularly ignored by hospital staff. You NEED an ADVOCATE to insist that your wishes are followed (apparently). Just thought I'd brighten your otherwise (probably?) wintery day.