The Schiavo issue

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

My mom...

Sorry about you mom, Leo. My mom and sister are in the same boat. They both have lupus.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Couldn't the same be said of a lot of lifesaving medications? Or nearly any technological advancement that can save lives?

Absolutely, and courts have upheld the right of an individual to refuse medical treatment of any kind and by extension, the right of the closest family member (Spouse, adult children, parents, in that order of priority) to make the decission if the patient is unable to.

Here is a good perspective on it from someone whose profession is these kind of ethical questions.

[BarTopDancer]

If anything, I hope this case encourages everyone out there to make your wishes in a legally binding contract, be it a living will, a PoA, anything. I know it has me.

[BarTopDancer]

Grrr. This whole calling her as a witness just irks me. I belive it is yet another case of the government getting involved where they shouldn't be. This whole issue is a matter for the courts, the family and the doctors. Not the government. At all.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Sorry about you mom, Leo. My mom and sister are in the same boat. They both have lupus.

I am so sorry to hear that. One was bad enough, but two at a time would be unfathomable.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Terry is dead, for all intensive purposes. I've read doctor after doctor on this. She has no functioning cerebral cortex. It cannot be repaired, it cannot be fixed. Terry cannot suffer because she cannot feel.

When her and her husband were married, it became his decision to make concerning what would happen in the event something like this happened. It is not her parents decision and it shouldn't be a bunch of grandstanding politicians decision either. I thought sanctity of marriage was soooo important in Florida. Why not in this case?

This whole case sickens me. The husband wants to move on because his wife is dead. She is not coming out of this. He isn't in it for money. Any money he received so far went to her treatment and anything left over, he says is going to charity. He has turned down millions to relinquish his rights and has refused. That says a lot to me. Let this man have some peace, let his wife have some peace, and let these washington politicians stay out of what is a personal decision that this man has every right to make.

[scaeagles]

Feeling is a brain stem function, I believe. The cerebral cortex is for higher reasoning functions. I am no neurologist, so I could be wrong, of course. Those who spend lots of time with her - meaning her parents - seem to believe there is a certain amount of interaction from her. Of course that is probably from hope driving what they believe they have experienced with her - I accept that. The flip side to that is, of course, that if she has no feeling or higher brain function, how can she be suffering by being in the state that she is?

Sanctity of marriage taking precendence over a basic human right to live? I know you were making an attempt at sarcasm, but I think it fails there.

I have never said it is about the money to the man. However, he has certainly put himself in the position that he doesn't function as her husband, choosing to move on. I do not fault him for moving on with his life - what a tough situation for him. But if he's going to move on, it's an all or nothing proposition.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

But if he's going to move on, it's an all or nothing proposition.

But this all started well before he moved on. It should have been done then and there. Next of kin (spouse) should have had the right to make the decission. He was denied that right and has been fighting ever since. So just because his life circumstances have changed due to the absurb amount of time, he should still have that right.

[BarTopDancer]

[derail rant]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

I thought sanctity of marriage was soooo important in Florida. Why not in this case?

Because it's only important when it is conveinent to them (read will get them votes). [government official to voters]well the sanctity of marriage must be defended at all costs. Allowing gays to marry will destroy it.[/]= more votes

[government official to same voters]Terry must not be allowed to die. Her husband (in a heterosexual marriage which I promised you would only be allowed in this country to preserve the scantitiy of marriage if I had anything to do with it) should not be allowed to make the decision regarding her care in this case. Her husband, her caregiver, her next of kin by LAW should not be allowed to make this decision to kill her. Don't worry voters. We won't allow her next of kin to make a decision to carry out what he claims are her wishes. Never mind the law. You all know we can and will change it on a whim to support our agenda.[/]=more votes.

[derail rant]Gee, With this being yet another *right* that comes with *marriage* that seems to be taken away by our government why bother fighting for marriage rights? Pretty soon the goverment will be telling us what to wear every day. [/derail rant]

[BarTopDancer]

They removed her tube

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...maged_woman_69