Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nephythys
Links from someone who rants on this better than anyone else I have seen-
Lots of Good Points
I would suggest those who think the husband is such a loving man carrying out her wishes should check the link from the nurse- or like Rachel says, maybe she is just another political hack  |
I am going to quibble with the link you provided. That link relies heavily on the testimony of a particulary doctor, William Hammesfahr. If this is the best medical support the parents can come up with, well, frankly it's unconvincing at best. I spent some time this morning googling the good doctor, and he's not exactly respected amongst his peers. The term "quack" came up more than once, as did sanctions from the Florida board of health (sanctions for overcharging patients for treatments not received were later overturned, as the Board did not prove they were intentional. The appellate court addressed only the overpayment issue, and not the finding by the Administrative Law Judge that Hammesfahr's treatments were outside the generally accepted standard of care.)
In fact, his name comes up almost exclusively in connection with this case. No presentations at medical conferences, not even a single publication listed in MEDLINE. Nearly every time he's mentioned, he's alleged to be a "Nobel prize nominee." And yet a quick google on the Nobel prize nomination process reveals that nominees are not supposed to be informed of their nomination, and that all nomination records are sealed for 50 years. Therefore, there's no way to validate. He does provide a copy of his alleged nomination letter, written by his congressman. Members of "national assemblies and governments of state" are allowed to nominate candidates. Any candidate they like. So it is possible his congressman nominated him. We can't verify this with the Nobel folks, and there's no minimum standard anyhow, so it's not that swell a qualification. (It actually smacks of desperation.)
I don't have a problem with people who reach different conclusions than I do. Some people here have made very good, well-reasoned statements distinguishing feeding tubes from "pulling the plug." I do have a problem with misleading, biased, and/or marginal information being passed off as hard science. Maybe it's the latent librarian in me, but it's not just what's said, it's who says it.
Why am I "picking on" this side of the argument? Because it's the one flying in the face of mainstream medical opinion. I would be absolutely willing to read and consider other medical opinions, but they'd better have better credentials than Dr. Hammesfahr.