Terri Schiavo (Page 2)

The cerebral cortex is where we do our thinking/feeling, it's where our awareness and consciousness resides, where WE reside. Terri is gone; she's been gone for 15 years. Only her body remains, and a functioning brain stem.

I don't advocate that Terri be taken off of life support because she's checked out. I advocate that the state/political opportunists and hacks/media/POTUS stay out of this; nobody should be involved in this painful decision besides the family.

Years ago, my former husband and I had discussed what decisions we wanted the other to make on our behalf in the event the other had to make decisions. My mother recently told me that she thinks parents should make those decisions. She also told me that she would want to "take care" of me or my sisters if we were in Terri's place. I explained to her that I did not want to be kept in Terri's place; that Terri was long gone and that I did not want her to keep my body alive by any/every means possible. If anything had happened to me, my mother would have fought my husband even though I told him what to do - and he would have been in Michael Shiavo's shoes. My mother would have been wrong to do so. When I have my annual physical next month, I am discussing with my doctor how to word my living will so that my mother does not have to make decisions for me while she is distraught; she will only have to honor my wishes as spelled out in my living will. Have I mentioned lately - Get a living will.

p.s. The Florida Dept of Children and Family services is making noises about "taking custody" of Terri Schiavo. This state has gone despotic.

"In a brief conversation with reporters, Secretary Lucy Hadi said the department is considering all options, but specifically pointed to a provision that she said would allow the department to take a vulnerable person into its custody without prior judicial approval.  The provision states: ``[if] a person is likely to incur a risk of death or serious physical injury if such person is not immediately removed from the premises, then the representative of the department shall transport or arrange for the transportation of the vulnerable adult to an appropriate medical or protective services facility in order to provide emergency protective services.''

The department would first have to file a petition with the court, but could act before the court is able to schedule a hearing. Asked whether DCF would be hindered by years of litigation that have upheld the right of Michael Schiavo, Terri's husband, to remove her feeding tube, Hadi said: ``We're not required to look at prior judicial proceedings.''

p.p.s. Get a living will.

I knew there was a reason why I need to go to law school. I didn't put it all out there like you did but I am on the side of the rule of law. (Read my blog if you want to know more about the rule of law as it stands in this case http://righttoquestion.blogspot.com) I am a pro-life advocate don't get me wrong I want Terry to live. But it's not about what I want, the Congress, the President, the Florida legislature, it's governor or even the janitor at the statehouse who seems to be able to weigh in, it's what Terry wanted. And barring any living will or document we have only her husband's word (however nefarious his may be). Michael Shiavo will meet his maker soon enough and the case will definitely be settled.

Speaking as a pro-life Democrat but conservative strict constitutionalists and Locke-minded gal it is a sad day when we depend on the government for our private matters. The government and its officials make a lot of mistakes. Tuskeege, McCarthy, Monica all come to mind. That's why in their brillance the founding fathers created a three-pronged checks and balance system. And it is a very scary day indeed when one branch usurps the authority and decision of the other just because they don't like what they decided. (The courts do it all the time!) That's a recipe for anarchy. What if all those Congressmen were eugenics who wanted Terry to be killed instead of alive?  Sure we can sympathize with them trampling the rule of law because they have a "good cause," but if we let them trample the rule of law will we then have any defense against the evil-doers who want to do the same? No we wouldn't.

Don't like the law change it. Don't like a judge's ruling, fight to appoint ones you do like. But throwing out the rule of law, no matter what your motivation even if it is for saving a life is a recipe for anarchy. You want that type of revolution then be my guest. As for me and mine I'll stick to the system set up by men far more brilliant than I.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2115218/ --This one makes a good point about the sanctity of marriage as it relates to this case.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2115064/ -- General info about the case. In particular, read what it says about laws applying to only one person. Interesting.....

I have learned something from this and from a more personal experience that it is so very important to have your living will and all legally necessary documents prepared.  We cannot know if or when we or someone close to us will need them.

Someone very close to me experienced a catastrophic event that could have left that person in a very incapacitated state.  At the time, this person was estranged from someone and was very concerned about that person's actions and motivations.  The injured person had not disclosed this information prior to the injury. In the critical moments before an extremely dangerous surgery, ALL the necessary documents cannot be completed.  The documents that this person was able to complete may not have been sufficient to prevent the estranged spouse from making medical decisions.  Fortunately, the injured person recovered and the potential nightmare never came to be.

This is a very personal, very difficult issue.  And one that most of us probably do not address.  Please put living will issues/documents on the "To Do" list.

All I can say is, those that want to keep Terri alive are doing her a disservice. It has become so political that, no one is looking at what is actually happening.

The government only allows the people of the US to decide their own fates, until that choice can become a political tool. Congressmen and women do not want to be labled as the preson who "killed" Terri during the next election.

That's it. This is what the entire arguement boils down to.

Terri is not alive. However, her body continues to function. She will not get better. She will not wake up. She has no brain. It is liquid.

Anyone who says they are fighting to "save" Terri, is full of $#!+.

This has become a control issue. This is about the right to choose. And if you choose wrong, the government is ready to step in.

I don't want or need more government interventions in my life.

Anyone who thinks this is not a right to life issue, funded on both sides by Pro Life and Pro Choice camps, is mistaken.  I am very sorry for the woman, her family and her husband, but I find my sympathy dissolved in the face of these two groups and their idology.

And F*** anyone who says shame on me for having an opinion other than theirs.  Shame on you for daring to judge me, or anyone who differs from your view of the world. You are what is seriously wrong with society. You're wearing blinders if you don't think we are already on our way towards religeous fundamentalism. Judge me for differing from you? It's not your political views or your ideas about life, but your ignorant conviction that you absolutely know better than me what is best for me to such an extent that you feel you have the right to decide how I should live.

*applause*

Terry is not alive???  Her brain is liquid???  Who the hell are you and when did you examine her brain?

I suppose you know much more than the Mayo Clinic doctor who examined her and stated that she responds to light, feels pain, and show brain activity when spoken to.

You should hide your ignorance by not posting anymore about this topic.

Hey Mr. "Daytona Bill" I have an idea....why don't YOU go without food and water for 4 days.

Jerk.

I will do my best to express myself so as not to be labelled by a political term.  I enter this discussion with the intention of only addressing it from a human level, not an agenda or party line, etc.

I have to wonder of the "will" of Terry Shaivo.  I understand that medical experts have determined that she is brain damaged.  But I wonder why she has stayed alive for so many years.  The human will has caused people to go beyond their own expectations.  Is there any chance that it is Terry's will to survive that has caused her to endure so many years?

Is it true that she has been denied therapeutic treatments at the wishes of her husband?  I wonder if she would have responded to therapeutic treatment and at some point reached a level of cognition where she could have expressed for herself that she would not want to continue to live.  For example, what if there was an attempt to have "taught" her to swallow.  Hypothetically, if she responded to the therapy, and acquired the ability to swallow.  Then, whether she swallowed nourishment or not, would be a sign of her own wishes.  Now of course, there is the issue of whether she was consciously or involuntarily not swallowing or swallowing. 

I know that no media available to me will tell me the objective truth.  I have read that she has been in a hospice for five years.  My personal experience of having friends and family members in a hospice is that the time there has been considerably shorter and the process was the process of dying.  Has Terry been in the process of dying for five years, or has she been living in a hospice?  If she has been living in a hospice is it appropriate?  Would it have been cruel and against her wishes to provide thereuputic efforts after 2000? 

I only ask, and enter this discussion from the human level.  Not at a political level. 

Well said Welshy. There's a word for those people: Ayatollahs.

The Schiavo case is something that people of good will can disagree on. To me, the measure of our society isn't so much the outcome, but how we get to it. The exploitation of this family by politicians, the media and others with an agenda is what I find most disturbing here. To me, Bill Frist in particular has shown himself to be an opportunist without conscience.

I've been thinking more about this issue and this particular debate as a microcosm of the larger debate over Terri Schaivo's life or death. There is one thing that seems unrecognized: both sides of the debate have arrived at their opinion from a place of compassion. Everyone feels bad for Mrs. Schaivo and wants the best for her. Some people think that the best thing for her is continued life, in whatever state that may be, some think that the best is the decision she made before she got into this state. That said, both sides are coming down a little hard on one another.

Now, if I may stop being objective here and follow where my logic takes me.... There is the question of what Terri wants now, to live or to die. It seems that the majority of doctors don't think she is capable of wanting at all, but that's beside the point. Terri will never be able to communicate what she wants. Therefore, we have nothing to go on but what she said she wanted over 15 years ago, before this all began. So I really think that unless one believes that preservation of life in all cases trumps personal wishes, there is no choice but to do what she wishes. This, also, is all the judges have had to go on. And according to the law, personal wishes trump preservation of life in this case. That's all we're left with.

You have assumed much about me ASA22  that is not accurate.  Surprised, no.  The Shaivo case would not be where it is today if there was a living will.    I have no business deciding Ms. Shaivo's fate.   But in ANY case, Shaivo's and others, having a living will go far in ensuring that a person's wishes are carried out.