The Schiavo issue

[Nephythys]

I also think alot of people are going to do their damndest to believe the Dr's who say she feels nothing, and believe the husband is doing what she wanted- because to believe otherwise is too horrific to handle.

It's amazing what we will do to justify, even when we only know the small details fed to us through news stories.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

I also think alot of people are going to do their damndest to believe the Dr's who say she feels nothing, and believe the husband is doing what she wanted- because to believe otherwise is too horrific to handle.

It's amazing what we will do to justify, even when we only know the small details fed to us through news stories.

I can't believe that people are trying to circumvent a law that your spouse is your next of kin and makes all medical decisions regarding your care because to believe otherwise is too horrific to handle.

It really is amazing what we will to justify, even when we only know the small portion fed through news stories.

[Mousey Girl]

I have read through this, even the blogger link that was posted earlier. BTD, I agree with everything you have said. I only wish there was another way for her to go... Locally this is getting some extra air time. A woman who was sideswiped while coming down the grapevine 2 years ago and had been in a coma ever since is now awake and talking. Any hope for Terry's recovery is long gone.

[Morrigoon]

I think where this becomes an issue is because his behavior does not seem to support the idea that this is what she always wanted. If this is what she always wanted, why was she on it for so long? If this is what she always wanted, why did he make promises for getting her care during the lawsuit he filed for damages? Why, after being awarded damages in said lawsuit, did he immediately place her in a hospice and refuse all recovery-oriented treatment for her?

Having seen Terry herself in all these many tv clips, I for one, do not consider her to be completely "gone". There does seem to be something of a reaction in her, and she requires only the feeding tube to keep her nourished. It's not like she's on a breathing machine or anything. Nor does she appear to be in any physical pain.

Now, you could argue that if he wasn't watching out for her best interests, why wouldn't he just divorce her, hand her over to her family and get on with his life - simple: money. First of all, there's the money he was awarded in the lawsuit, if divorced, half to all of it would be awarded to her, along with her half of all their marriage assets. Second, if she has any kind of a life insurance policy worth anything, and if he's not specifically mentioned as her beneficiary (eg: if it's just in her "estate", as many policies are), then by divorcing her, he would not get any of that upon her death, whenever that would be. On the other hand, by legally "allowing her to die", he stands to receive all the lawsuit money, all their marriage assets, and anything in her estate.

Lest you misunderstand me, I am all for euthanasia, where one is terminally ill and the remainder of one's life is so painful as to render it unworthy of suffering (eg: where there's no hope of feeling any better, and every expectation of feeling worse until death comes - different from a permanent, static disability). She is not terminally ill, and is but a feeding tube away from living out the rest of her years. Years, which ought to be funded by the money won in the lawsuit, which we all know he'd rather keep to himself despite his promises to use the money to care for her and try to help her improve.

Administering euthanasia by lethal injection or by cutting off a breathing machine (yes, I know suffocation isn't pleasant, but at least it's only a few minutes) is one thing. Making someone starve to death or die of dehydration, especially when they are unable to tell you if they feel the pain of that method of dying, and when there's at least a 50/50 chance that they DO.... that's just every kind of wrong.

I'm not cool with letting her die in the first place, because I think there is at least some consciousness on her part, but if they MUST do it, then for heaven's sake, end the suffering with lethal injection!

[scaeagles]

Great and incredibly well thought out post.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I really try to see both sides here. I realize that I don't know Michael Shievo's intentions or motives any better than any of you do. Really, Michael is the only one that knows the answer to that.

I also don't like that it will take weeks for her to die. I really wish there was a way to end her life sooner but that isn't going to happen.

The thing I keep falling back on though, is that this case has been heard something like 23 times in the courts. They have always reached the same verdict. Terry cannot recover from this, her wishes were to not be kept alive, and Michael has the legal right to act on her behalf. I have a very hard time understanding how, out of all of those courtrooms, a reasonable doubt to the contrary was never persuasively made if there actually was reasonable doubt. I don't believe that the courts have any sort of "death wish" for Terry. That just doesn't make sense. What makes sense is that they have heard the testimony of her loved ones and of impartial medical experts and have decided that, based on that evidence, this is the proper course of action. I believe that most judges are good, impartial, people who of course would err on the side of caution if they felt any of the contradicting arguments had any merit.

What Terry's parents have presented though is heavily edited video footage trying to show their daughters condition in the best possible light. It isn't enough though that in the video she can appear responsive. The question is, is there any evidence of it being repeatable, or are these merely random movements. The consensus among respectable doctors is that her actions are entirely random and not unusual for someone who has lost their cerebral cortex. Yes, the parents have doctors on their side, doctors that are being paid because they will say what the parents want. There is no impartiality there. Still, the courts heard their side and dismissed it as not being credible.

Then the right to lifers jump in full force and paint anyone that disagrees with their stance as having a "death wish" for Terry. Sorry, but it isn't as simple as that. The politicians see the opportunity to further strengthen their base and jump in "to help" when they really have no authority to do so. It is maddening.

I can only speak for myself but I don't wish for anyone to die. I do believe in erring on the side of caution, whether in this case or a capital punishment case. But exactly how much caution can you exercise? If we keep this woman alive for the rest of her natural life through artificial means, we are going against her wishes. We are going against the wishes of the person who has the legal right to make these decisions for her. What does that say? You have rights unless we disagree with them? That's not how it works. You either have legal rights or you don't, and in this case, the law is on Michael and Terry's side.

I understand how much the parents love their daughter and I feel an enormous amount of pain for them. How horrific this must be. I also know that when you love someone that much, you may not make the most rational decisions. Are they trying to keep Terry alive for her or for them? When my mother was suffering from terminal cancer, I wanted the doctors to do everything possible to extend her life for every moment possible but she had no quality of life. She was no longer able to function anymore. She wasn't going to get better. At some point I realized that it was for selfish reasons that I wanted to keep her alive. I realized that she wouldn't want to continue in the condition she was in. Luckily, we never had to make that decision because the end came very quickly and there was nothing anyone could do about it. And as heartbroken as I was when she passed away, there was also a strong sense of relief. I hope the parents experience that one day. Once the healing process begins, maybe they can see that they really lost their daughter a long long time ago.

[CoasterMatt]

Wonderful post, Morrigoon

[Not Afraid]

I'm just wondering how long it is going to take her to die. Does that make me a bad person?

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I'm just wondering how long it is going to take her to die. Does that make me a bad person?

I don't think it does....unless you are wringing your hands while wondering

[Not Afraid]

No. Not yet. But I hope it doesn't take long for her sake.