Jeb Bush just won the right to have the comatose woman's

feeding tube reinserted.

How do DUers feel about this?

BTW: The judge declined to hear an appeal from the woman's husband.

one of those ugly situations that is so complicated as I see a series of briar patch issues (things it touches) on both sides.

AFAIK, so it's fine by me.

She is brain damaged, but still semi-aware and responsive to some stimuli.
Taking this womans life like they are planning to is cruelty to the nth degree.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

Most of her cerebral cortex is gone. She has no consciousness or perception. All she has left are some reflexes.

watch the tapes


www.terrisfight.org

This is exactly the same situation as with Nancy Cruzan a few years ago. Her cerebral cortex was gone, also, but some people kept insisting she was conscious because she had facial expressions, eye blinks, movement, etc. But the brain scan showed clearly there was no brain there.

What's happened is that there is enough brain stem left that neurons keep firing, causing facial expressions, eye movement, etc. But it's all reflex. If in fact her cerebral cortex is GONE, as the BBC reported, she cannot possibly be aware, conscious, feeling, or experiencing anything, because there is no "she" there anymore. There are just aimless, random reflexes firing away. Her parents can edit the tapes to make it appear she is reacting TO something, but it's a sham.

I have only registered to post to relay information that is being posted on Free Republic and have no intentions of being disruptive. We know that some of you are as concerned about this woman as many of us are and one of our folks that has been at the vigil has been keeping us updated. I suppose some of this information you could find on your own, but it was requested that one of us on the board keep y'all up to date. Here is the post: (I hope the formatting works ok):

Subj: TV ALERT: Peter Deutsch on "Hardball" with Chris Mathews TONIGHT! Date: 10/22/03 3:11:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Deutsch@xmr3.com (Peter Deutsch for US Senate) TV Alert! U.S. Rep. Peter Deutsch on “Hardball” with Chris Mathews tonight! 7:30 pm – MSNBC Peter Deutsch will join Chris Mathews on Hardball tonight to discuss the recent decision by the Florida Legislature that empowered Gov. Jeb Bush to order the reinstatement of intravenous fluids to Terri Schiavo. Congressman Deutsch spent 10 years in the Florida Legislature and was involved in the ethical, moral and legal issues regarding the “right to die.” REMEMBER TO TUNE IN TONIGHT AT 7:30PM ON MSNBC Paid for by Deutsch for Senate

Another proud PREMATURE DEATH ADVOCATE..." (end of FV's post)

Also, if you care to follow the latest, as far as I know, most of it is still being posted on this thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1006219/posts

There is a lot of discussion, but there is also a lot of factual information if anyone is interested.

No one should have to starve to death.

The husband stands to make some money.

I'm not comfy with the governor making life and death decisions.

I find it odd that Florida's legislature has voted to give the governor the power to decide this.

This case sounds fishy. The man stands to inherit a six figure sum from her death.

Medically she is in a coma and her condition is not likely to improve. It sounds to me like she is trapped in a broken body. This is just existance and nothing more.

even if it is.

He's got a girlfriend that he wants marry and I'm sure
the six-figure sum would come in handy.

From what I've read and heard Mrs. Schaivo shows signs
of being cognizant of her surroundings. I don't favor letting
her starve.

My understanding is that what little money she had was eaten up by medical bills years ago.

www.terrisfight.org/downloads/Money.pdf

on edit: note the money was not spent on medical bills, but rather on legal fees by the husband to kill Terri

So, in other words, he wants to kill his wife so he can inherit her money, but he had to spend the money on legal fees so he could kill her.

You want to go back and think up another ugly rumor to smear this man with? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Rumors are not based on fact. I am not thinking up nor spreading any rumors here. I'm reading the documents.

Newspaper clips from who knows what newspapers, and for all I know, they're a pack of lies. They are not court documents or audits.

For just a brief, shining moment -- think.

You are saying that Mr. Schiavo wants to kill his wife to get the money from the malpractice suit. However, you also say most of the money has been spent to fight lawsuits. If the money is gone, why does he want to kill his wife to get the money from the malpractice suit?

You see the difficulty, here? It's an inherently stupid claim. According to you, he wants to kill her to get money that's been spent on legal fees.

Hello? Anybody home?

Now, according to Time magazine, which has some credibility, in 1992 Mr. Schiavo was awarded $700,000 for Mrs. Schiavo's medical care and another $300,000 for loss of companionship.

Mr. Schiavo has had to fight off lawsuits from Mrs. Schiavo's very bizarre parents, which forced him to dip into the $700,000, but in ten years that $700,000 would be gone, anyway. Also, I think if Mrs. Schiavo's brain cortex is indeed gone, Mr. Schiavo is doing the right thing by fighting her parents and letting his wife die. It's the best thing for Mrs. Schiavo, that is.

There is no longer any advantage to Mr. Schiavo, because, as you say, he spent all that money in lawsuits.

Look, if a person has a right to die then that's fine, but this case isn't so cut-and-dry. First of all, she's left no will, no DNR, nothing like that. Secondly, her husband is the only person that is able to claim that she expressed any kind of desire in the matter either way. Her husband also stands to come into a significant amount of money. And her husband has another woman waiting in the wings, so to speak.

I'm not really sure about her medical condition, but given the facts surrounding the case, why are we so quick to let her starve to death. Starving to death is not a pleasant way to die. I think that the husband has stopped looking out for her best interests and is now looking out for his best interests, but in any case, if there's any doubt (or at least this much doubt) then play it safe. Don't be in such a hurry to pull the plug (or tube in this case).

"I'm not really sure about her medical condition, but given the facts surrounding the case,"

The facts surrounding the case, according to a physician interviewed by the BBC, is that her brain cortex is gone. Where there used to be brain, there is just fluid. If this is true, then she feels nothing, knows nothing, is consious of nothing. Her facial expressions and movement are reflexes caused by randomly firing neurons.

"why are we so quick to let her starve to death."

And she's been like this for thirteen years.

"Starving to death is not a pleasant way to die."

It's hard to know if there would be any discomfort in her case. Pain requires a brain. She has enough brain stem to maintain involuntary processes, such as heartbeat and breathing, but there's no "she" there anymore.

then spends a week caring for a comatose woman. Then multiply that anguish by the 13 years or so that the husband has had to endure it.

In hindsight if he did that he would probably help her fill out a few dozen absentee ballots for 2004 too.

He has most likely been paying thirteen years worth of medical bills, keeping her alive.
If he has a girlfriend now, great he has emotional support from someone, to get him through this.

She's been in a nursing home, then was transferred to a hospice by the husband's orders. Terri's family was against the move.

It a wise move.It is possible that the specialist care required was to much for the nursing home or maybe it cost more money.
Terri could not be treated without, constant attendance from doctors and nurses,that all costs money.(Her family didn't take her home either,it was not possible.) My grandfather lived in a nursing home for five years, his house had to be sold to pay for it and nothing was left when he died. Can you try to imagine the cost of care, for 13 years? Can you imagine the strain of having to fight your in Laws at every step?
If the man did not love his wife,nothing would make him endure the fear, the guilt,the pain, the constant fight,the finicial burden, being vilified or this life dystroyed.

When she was still in reasonably good health that she did not want to be kept alive in that manner, that, to me, constitutes an oral "living will", and so his wishes--i.e. hers--should have priority.

As an earlier poster stated, this is one I'd like to see the Florida Supreme Court overturn on appeal.

B-)

about this case. But from my readings, the husband came up with the "she said" defense years after she initially entered the state she is in when he "suddenly" remembered the conversation.

And this was after he won a law suit that provided a large sum of money for her continual care.

If she wanted to not live this way, why then the lawsuit to provide money for her continuing care?

To me, her wishes are not all that clear.

somebody had to pay for it. Can you name any insurance that would pay for the cost of keeping someone under continual care for one year, let along thirteen?
He had a case for a law suit, if all he cared about was money, he could have taken in a walked away then.

I agree that "she said" is never going to win a case to let her die, nor should it. However she should be allowed to die,waiting for a sudden healing is not helping anyone, the people involved need to able to move on.
BTW Bush's intervention is dangerous.

... that the only person on Earth who ever heard her (allegedly) utter those words is the person who a.) has not spent the malpractice award on her care and b.) stands to inherit the remaining $700K of it that he hasn't speant on his own personal legal fees?

The State didn't know that women from adam .
The husband knew his wife .

I think this is a lesson for all of us to make a living
Will ...So the state can't interfere in these family matters.

Go ahead and make it, but realize it sometimes isn't respected.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

There are suspicions surrounding what caused her lack of oxygen in the first place. Closed head injury caused by trauma--possible stangulation. Many broken bones were documented...and consistent with a history of trauma.

I suspect spousal abuse history.

This particular item is only temporary, and only applies to this case.

In March 2004 the Florida Legislature will consider passing a more permanent law in regards to this subject.

1. No Living Will
2. No DNR papers
3. Objection of another close familiy member
4. Use of dehydration or termination of nourishment

So people of Florida and other states with a one party system, be prepared to be denied your rights to make decisions in regards to your loved ones, because the state will take that decision out of your hands.

Just think of the hours for lawyers, in cases where family members disagree.

The fun is just beginning!!!!!

upon his wife's death.

you can back it up.

From one of many articles on the 'six figure sum of money' awarded in 1993:

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20031013-114523-9493r.htm
>snip<
"There used to be some money, but Terri's debts far outweigh the small amount of money. Her husband will not receive a penny as a result of her death," Mr. Felos said yesterday.
Asked why Mr. Schiavo was removing the feeding tube now, Mr. Felos said, "Because the Schindler parents have run out of appeals." He said Mr. Schiavo waited eight years after his wife's medical mishap to file suit and obtained the right to remove the feeding tube in January 2000."
>snip<

On the face of it this is a subversion of democracy plain and simple. No matter what you think or care about the particulars of this case. It is a cold political move again by Bush to subvert the courts and the will of democracy.They did it in 2000, he did it with the class size amendment This is not a decision he gets to make, it should be up to the family, if not them the courts. Despite what his Bible-belting supporters think, he is not God.

This is classic Bush pandering to thee right-to-lifers.

This woman didn't leave a living will or DNR order. If those papers were there I would have no problem with having it removed.

I don't understand these people. I cannot abide by those who feel that they have the right to impose their moral code on others. Especially when they often do not abide by that same moral code they are trying to inflict.

... stay out of Florida hospitals if they don't want to live in a permanent coma for ten or fifteen years.

I can certainly understand that someone would not do anything to make death happen sooner than whatever is natural, but I don't understand why people must be kept alive by all means possible when clearly their bodies are worn out. No DNRs? Totally inhumane!

I do tend to think that parents, while still living, should have more of a say in what happens than a spouse. Parents generally love their children no matter what, while spouses... well they aren't always faithful and true. But that's generally speaking. There are always exceptions.

We keep DEAD (yes folks, shes dead dead dead dead dead!) folks lungs moving and hearts beating.

Shes a zombie.

Mmmmmm brains.

her own blood pressure, pulse, etc. The feeding tube is the only "artificial" care she receives.

Most of her cerebral cortex is GONE and replaced by fluids. What's left of her brain provides some reflexes, like breathing, but she has no consciousness, no perception, no experience of life any more, and these things will not come back.

Good BBC article here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

I hate to sound maudlin about this, but it seems the real battle in this case comes down to money. Whatever is really in his heart Terri Sciavo's husband stands to end up better off financially the sooner Terri dies. That does not mean that he isn't trying to respect her wish not to be kept alive by artificial means as well. It's too bad her wishes were not codified in a written living will. It can be difficult to get doctors and nurses to honor a DNR order, but at least if you have one a judge can ultimately order your wishes to be carried out.

The inequality and uneven distribution of medical care in this country is appalling. Right now I have a 95-year-old grandmother who has heart problems and keeps getting jacked around almost to the point of death by the bean counters running her HMO. But within the last year I had an uncle who was a retired Naval officer burn up about a half million dollars in a futile attempt (orchestrated by his family) to keep him alive for an additional six months after he was diagnosed with incurable brain cancer. Why can so much of our valuable resources be spent on hopeless care for one wealthy person while so many poor or middle class people go wanting? People are literally dying every day because of that kind of waste.

So I have to ask this horrible question: Will the state of Florida be picking up Terri's medical bills from now on if Jeb orders her feeding tube to be replaced?

This is a private misery and he has no right to interject his pandering fat face into this. Its like that woman in New York <?>
who was pregnant and in a coma and there was an abortion planned to
save her life. This wasn't something easily decided. Then some strangers who were right to life stepped in and tried to get guardianship through the courts. The family had to fight like tigers to keep control over their wife-daughter. It was AGONIZING and terrible and INTRUSIVE and MEAN.

No one enters these things easily. Bush has no business interfering.
They went the court route. The husband won the right. If you can support this, then you have to support what the anti-abortion freaks tried to do. There is no difference to me.

This is a no win. But Bush is flat wrong here.

Her husband will inherit what's left of a $1.3 million court settlement, money that's supposed to go for her care. Why not spend the money for her care?

Husband can divorce her and marry his girfriend, now pregnant with their second child together. He has chosen to start a new family while Terri's parents and siblings still consider her part of their family.

Who is her real family? I say that they are the people who want to keep her alive.

Or would want, or would have wanted. Her husband's financial axe to grind will always make his position suspect.

Why not spend the money for her care?

One possible answer is that money might be better spent caring for a vibrant, growing family, for one or more children who might benefit from a decent life and a college education.

Who is her real family? I say that they are the people who want to keep her alive.

Your viewpoint is quite valid, you would rather err on the "safe" side. A commendable conservative approach if you will pardon the use of that word.

To me the ultimate tragedy is that we apparently can never know what Terri would say if she could be miraculously granted 60 seconds of perfect lucidity.

of preserving human life and the environment! And I see no reason to call it liberal or progressive to put people to death.

This is not a case of a brain dead person being kept alive by a host of machines. I don't support hooking people up to all those machines to keep them alive a bit longer. I support everyone's right to refuse medical treatment for themselves, but no one's right to say that a severe disability is a reason to starve someone to death.

As for Mike Schiavo having his wife starved to death and then taking the money that was awarded by a court to be used for her care and using it instead to support a new wife and to care for "a vibrant, growing family, for one or more children who might benefit from a decent life and a college education" -- YUK! That's saying it's fine to toss a disabled person on a garbage heap because you have healthy people you'd rather be with. His fiancee and his kids had better guard their health carefully because his way of dealing with disabled family members is clear.

What would Terri want?

If she's been in a vegetative state since 1990, a mere $1.3 million (if that's not just another rumor) would be LONG gone by now.

many years ago in the VA in NY state. It is not pretty and very sad for all of the family involved. I have seen patients in varying degrees of consciousness (that we Know of). My take after seeing the tape of this woman is that is is absolutly the right thing to do to keep her alive. She is way more responsive than most of the patients I had. I think she may very well know what the hell is going on and that scares the crap out of me. I then learned more about the husband and that makes me more concerned for this woman. Why not err on the side of caution? I rule with the parents and sister, they obviously want what is best for her.

people who are in various states of impaired consciousness. There was a fascinating article in NY Times magazine last month, suggesting that there may be more going on in their brains than we realize, which to me definitely supports erring on the side of caution. I'll look for the link

she looks directly at her parents and smiles, etc. I think it would be inhuman to starve her to death simply because she is unable to feed herself. According to her father, she supported the decision to keep her grandmother on life support, she never had a living will, etc. I think her husband's claims are questionable.

she looks directly at her parents and smiles, etc. I think it would be inhuman to starve her to death simply because she is unable to feed herself. According to her father, she supported the decision to keep her grandmother on life support, she never had a living will, etc. I think her husband's claims are questionable.

Only because once again, just like in 2000, the Florida legislature is sticking it's nose in where it doesn't like what it's elected judges have done. I don't believe for one second that the FL legislature is doing this for humanitarian reasons. I think they've seen an opportunity to grandstand on a "right to life" type issue and play to their nutcase "christian" base.

As for the actual facts of the case, I've mixed emotions about it as I've seen conflicting stories about this woman's actual condition. I don't know enough to say one way or the other if this woman should or should not continue to be sustained.

I read somewhere (probably FR) that this woman's rehab after her heart attack was running $4K per month and that's why the husband moved her to a hospice. I just want to know since the Freepers and everyone wanted this, who's going to pay for her care? Freepers and the "christian" groups want her confined to her private hell, but they don't really care who pays for all this.

Furthermore, the legislature had no medical evidence and certainly not to the extent that the court would have in it's possession. This was done to grandstand.

My memory must be fuzzy, could you please refresh it. What exactly was Florida's legislatures roll in the 2000 election that has you upset? I don't remember them being involved in any way.

Has twice turned down the appeals to prevent the tubes from being removed. Bush disagreed with them, so he got a law passed.

In 200 they asked the hand counting a votes. Bush ignored them then. (too)

to say that all of FL's presidential electors must cast their electoral votes for Bush. The speaker started saying this almost from day 1 of the FL debacle. He said it didn't matter what the courts would say as far as the recount went, because the legislature was going to mandate the electors to vote Bush. He was going to do this by the legislature selecting who the electors were going to be.

And, of course, the legislature has this authority.

she smiles. She severely mentally handicapped, not comatose. I am sorry the Florida legislature is grandstanding, and the right to life people WILL take advantage of the case, but something needed to be done and the judge did fuck up.

I'm wondering when in the last 13 years those videos were taken. Last week? July 1991? 1996? There's a lot of spin going on and I take those videos as so much spin.

What is she like right now?

The husband has not allowed any footage/stills to be taken since then
(to the best of my recollection).

She grimaces; she has reflexes. But according to the BBC, most of her cerebral cortex is GONE, which means there's no consciousness or perception. Just reflexes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

you'd recognize that what YOU see as a grimace is a smile.

It's obvious to me and others who are have daily contact with a number of people who have severe disabilities.

Remember, the brain does contol our muscles. When it's damaged, the messages sent are different than the messages received.

... the cerebral cortex is gone. The cerebral cortex is gone. The cerebral cortex is gone.

Are you with me so far?

What's happening is very rare and no doubt outside your experience, unless you were one of the people taking care of Nancy Cruzan a few years ago.

There's enough brain left to keep her breathing and her heart beating. And, she has facial expressions, eye movement, hand movement, etc., but these are just reflexes caused by randomly firing neurons.

How do I know that? Because the cerebral cortex is gone. No other explanation is possible. She is no longer sentient.

My mother is in late stage Alzheimer's, and I've been around other severely impaired people, so I know that what you are saying is true MOST OF THE TIME. But in this situation, if indeed the cerebral cortex is gone, then it's just cruelty and futility to keep this woman alive.

She's not dead. She's brain damaged. Taking her off of a feeding tube is killing her by starvation, it's not letting her die, the way taking her off a breathing machine would do if she was dependent on one. Perhaps she did tell her husband that she didn't want to live like that, but she didn't feel strongly enough to put it in writing. His statement about that is suspect, anyways. He gets $$$ if she dies. If she is allowed to live, perhaps he will finally divorce her and get on with his life and let her family take care of her.

She smiles and stuff. I don't trust her husband, and think that living wills should be written down.

to courts saying it's OK to kill a disabled person.

Terri Schiavo sustained brain damage but has never been in a coma. Some doctors say she is in a "persistent vegetative state" and won't recover, others say she is NOT in a "persistent vegetative state" and may recover.

Her husband filed a suit which resulted in an award of $1.3 million for her care. Soon after the money was awarded, he "remembered" that she had told him she never wanted to be kept artificially alive and started fighting to have her feeding tube removed. She is not on a ventilator -- the feeding tube is the only artificial support she has received.

Terri did not have a living will or any sort of advanced directive so the idea that she would want to die comes from her husband, who will inherit what's left of the $1.3 million when she dies. The husband has had one child with his "fiancee" and she is now pregnant again. He could divorce Terri and move on with his life but then he wouldn't inherit the money.

Terri's parents and siblings have been fighting the husband for years now. He has complete control, has been able to ban them from seeing her at times, will not allow Terri to have therapy, will not allow anyone to attempt to spoon feed her, for example, or do therapy that might help her communicate.

What does Terri know? Is she aware of what's happening? Her parents and siblings say yes. Videos show her smiling and responding to people. It seems unlikely that she'll ever be "normal" again but that is true for most disabled people. Terri is severely disabled but not terminally ill, not brain dead, certainly Not Dead Yet!

I have some difficulty believing that. Your source, please?

Her cerebral cortex is gone. They may move her body around a bit to prevent pneumonia and bed sores, but she's way beyond "therapy."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

she is paralyzed, but that is no reason to starve her to death.

Let's try again. She is NOT in a coma. Instead, what's happened is that most of her cerebral cortex is GONE, putting her in a vegetative state from which there is no possibility of recovery. That's VERY DIFFERENT from being comatose.

She has enough of a brain stem left that involuntary functions, such as heartbeat and breathing, continue. And, as in the Nancy Cruzan case a few years ago, she has facial expressions, her eyes blink and move, her arms and legs move. But these are just reflexes caused by neurons firing randomly from her body to the brain stem. It's very hard to understand that from watching her. But if the BBC report is true, and her brain cortex is gone (exactly as in the Nancy Cruzan case), then there can be nothing other than reflex. She is no longer sentient.

even though she is responsive and may very well be capable of responding to therapy. She is NOT comatose.

The BBC reports that brain scans show her brain cortex is gone. As in, gone. As in, not there. This is entirely different from being comatose.

Schiavo's facial expressions, eye movements, etc. are just reflexes caused by randomly firing neurons. You can no more "teach" her anything than you could teach a shoe to tap dance. She is no longer sentient.

This is a well known documented fact.

www.terrisfight.org

Sorry, but you aren't high on the credibility list.

I'm supposed to forward you my resume now, eh?

You are clueless.

You are neither a physician nor a scientist with some understanding of human physiology. That is obvious.

children before. They were fed through tubes, couldn't talk or walk. They needed total care. But they were "alive."

That said, it bothers me that the Legislature usurped the Court's decision because they didn't like it.

I feel sad, seeing your Kucinich icon, that we have to disagree.

The doctors that say Terri is not in a PVS are either totally partisan or hired by the Schindler family. They have biased interests in this case.

That 1.3 million was cut down to $750,000 and most of that money is -gone-.

He -can't- divorce Terri.

He -has- allowed attempts at therapy. The therapy has simply been -unsuccessful-. And eventually he says enough is enough, and throws the quack of the week out on the curb, and the family goes to their website and the media and cries that he's not allowing therapy.

The videos do not show her smiling and responding to people, they show her lying there and blinking when people blow on her face. People with no cerebral cortex whatsoever would do that too.

like to know what sort of therapy has been allowed.

And why CAN'T he divorce Terri?

I've read that most of the money that has been spent has been spent on lawsuits, not on care.

The facts are that she is alive, not brain dead, not comatose, not on a ventilator, and did not have a living will.

I think the parents probably see her as being more responsive than she really is but the husband seems to see her as nothing but an obstacle and that's not love.

I would support allowing her death if she were brain dead but I do not support putting the disabled to death. If we permit the killing of the severely disabled, eventually someone will decide to extend it to the moderately disabled.

If her brain cortex is gone, there's no point. Might as well teach your shoe.

I cannot believe I am saying this, but JEB was correct.

This woman's husband seems kinda sleazy.

for the disabled and their advocates.

The misunderstandings people have about her condition frighten me. There is consciousness in this woman; I know, I have worked with those in similar states.

From the BBC:

Mrs Schiavo's brain scans have not been made public but Dr Walker has followed the case closely through media reports and court records.

"The majority of her cerebral cortex - the part of the brain that thinks and feels - has been destroyed and replaced by fluid," he said.

"She doesn't have any perception, there is no reason to believe she can suffer."

Unlike a patient in a coma, Dr Walker believes there is no hope for recovery for someone in Mrs Schiavo's condition - known as permanent vegetative state - because the cerebral cortex does not regrow once destroyed.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

most of her brain has shrivled away and been replaced by fluid. Brains do not grow back. She has reflexes, and that's all.

I believe genuinely disabled people would be better served by picking another fight. This doesn't have anything to do with disability, but with keep somone alive artificially.

and you quote:

From the BBC:
Mrs Schiavo's brain scans have not been made public but Dr Walker has followed the case closely through media reports and court records.

The man who is making the statement is not a doctor intimately involved with the case. He has not examined her and he has seen media reports and court records only. He has not seen her or her labs. He is hardly qualified to make such an assessment as he has made without actually seeing her brain scans.

No one knows what Terri truly wanted. Reports have indicated that the husband has never had therapy provided for her at all since being awarded the malpractice decision and not "remembering" that she had said she didn't want something like this until after the money was rewarded. Is all this true?? I have no idea but I wouldn't condemn a disabled person to death if this kind of doubt exists.

Also for those who ask who is going to pay for this: what price to you put on a life and where does that life fail to exist and according to whose standards? This is not unlike the case against censorship, where do you draw the line??? Where does it stop??? Who gets to decide?

Her parents want to care for the daughter they gave birth to, raised, and loved. I say let them.

They think they know more than doctors because they see her "smiling" on the videotape. Once again, people know more than the experts.

Sad fact is that plugs are pulled on people everyday. This one gets attention because she looks like she can respond to stimuli.

Bush is just grandstanding. Here's one of the Lord High Executioners of the world who looks so benevolent and caring. What a load of crock!

And people made exactly the same arguments about Cruzan then that they are making about Ms. Schiavo now.

In Cruzan's case, the brain scans were made available to the public, but even after it became common knowledge that her brain cortex was gone, people still refused to understand that she was no longer there. They kept saying, but she smiles! But her eyes move! So what if most of her brain is gone and replaced by fluid? Look at her face!

It was very difficult to grasp that her facial expressions, eye movement, etc. were just reflexes caused by randomly firing neurons, but once the brain cortex is gone, that's the only explanation.

If the BBC report is wrong, and if in fact the brain cortex is still mostly there, that's one thing. But this is SO much like the Cruzan case (which I followed closely) I am inclined to think the BBC report is correct.

The woman's parents want her to live. The woman's husband doesn't want her to. He claims that she would want this, but he doesn't know for sure. She left no living will, therefore we MUST err on the side of caution and keep her alive. To remove the tube is murder. This is not a pro-choice/anti-choice thread. This woman is grown up. To kill her is MURDER - deal with that fact before you go spouting off, people.

just like his brother. we should all feel safer now in the usa knowing the two bush boys have the power of life or death over all of us.

doing something that has nothing in it for him? That just doesn't sit right.

But, that aside, I don't think her husband is looking at this as it might make him some money, cuz he didn't arrange for her to be hurt originally and has endured 13 years of a nightmare I would want no part of. It is possible to heal from loosing someone to an accident, but how does one heal in a situation like this. It would hurt me to see my husband like this for 13 years and he has told me often never to let him lay around like that if something were to happen. But, starving her doesn't seem right neither. But, I wouldn't want the governor making that decision for me if it were me. I'm wondering if he could divorce her and therefore not have to pay her bills in which case he deserves credit for not doing that. Could he have walked away and let her folks deal with it. I don't know all the legalities, but I think if my spouse stuck by under circumstances like these for 13 years, I think I would want him to make the decision, right or wrong, good or bad. If it were me I would want the tube removed and if it were my husband I know he would want it removed. But if it were my kids I would not allow them to remove it. It is hard to know what is right.

I want the woman to live...but how the hell did Jeb of all people step into the limelight on this one? They Bush's have no shame. Anywhere there's a photo op there they are--trying to "win" at any cost.

An editorial from CBS News

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/23/opinion/meyer/main579620.shtml

(CBS) This has been terrifying week for people who are concerned about big government meddling in families’ most personal and painful decisions.

I would say it’s been a terrible week for conservatives, but most of the people who call themselves conservatives are celebrating and crowing. I think they’re radicals.

I’m referring, of course, to the unprecedented intervention of Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature in the tragic case of Terri Schiavo, and to the Senate vote, supported by President Bush, banning a certain type of procedure to terminate pregnancies in cases where the mother’s life or health are at risk. The idea of legislatures, governors and presidents dictating what families can do in these most private situations is mind-boggling. It is as intrusive as government can be. It is, in both cases, almost certainly unconstitutional.

(continued at link)

You have to think about what Bush is doing. He is using the executive power and the legislative power to circumvent the judicial. This is not representative government. This is not democracy.

This is a political ploy. They did it before and now again.

If it sounds like pandering, looks like pandering, and smells like pandering...

A legislature is not equipped to make this kind of decision. This has been in the court for years and has been carefully considered and "upheld" by appeals courts not choosing to hear appeals.

It's just politics and emotions.

It may be a political ploy, but it is going to be successful. I happen to think that that woman's life is more important than the complexities of a representative government. We can let her live, and THEN address the separation of powers issues.

You're so right, we deserve GWB. If his lil' bro rides the christian crusade to the WH, we deserve him too.

"a Christian crusade". Given the complexities of this case, it hinges on ethics just not on someone's self defined morals.

Given what is known and not known here, who would like to be the one to decide this...for real, not hypothetically. Can you take a woman's life based on what is known or reported to be known in this case?

Terri Schiavo should not be the sacrificial lamb to defeat bushco's usurption of democracy.

Nor should our troops, as a matter of fact.

Jeb Bush wouldn't have a thing to do with it. The bu$hes are all a bunch of opportunists. I don't for one minute doubt that Jebby sees this as one step closer to being the heir apparent to the throne.

Read up a little bit more and it appears she has some higher level brain functionality

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/5-17-2003-40507.asp

Still, its hard not to have a knee-jerk reaction when so many veggies are stupidly on life support.

no offense but... veggies? *shudder*

'Permenant Vegetative State' is a pain in the butt to write out.
Veggie isn't nearly as bad as the terms doctors use amongst themselves about patients!

reflects a rather callous laziness - but hey... to each his own. And the docs in this family, fortunately are not prone to refering to people as inanimate objects. Yuck.

In case your curious:

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7031676%5E13762,00.html

And I agree the statement "reflects a callous laziness". Language is important. So if people around you start calling blacks "n---ers" then that makes it ok?

A neurologist intern at a very prestigious hospital once referred to my daughter as an "it". His overseeing dr certainly got an earful from me.

Sorry. Totally unacceptable.

certainly know that.

In fact, you weren't wrong.

"vegetative state".

It was a mistake for the judge to condemn her to die in the first place. I hope that being off nourishment didn't damage her too much more. It is not up to the state to decide that someone is too disabled to live. Her family (parents and sister) want her alive. I think that they care about her more at this point.

I would be indifferent to the idea if she was on a machine keeping her alive but this is just sick to starve someone to death.

If she was brain dead or could express her wishes to die it would be another story.

She is smiling, she looks happy. We don't starve people because they fail to reach a certain IQ. That is what Hitler did.

She is not suffering. Feed her.

Mike

She will never get well. She cannot function. She need ariound the clock care. Her parents are mad at her husband and don't really care about her. How many young people out there have living wills? I don't even have one. Get real this is just a bad joke on the people of Florida. If she were on Medicaid she would have been off life supports ten years ago. Jeb would have insisted. Those parents hould be ashamed of them selves. They are vicious, vindictive people.

She has had inadequate rehabilitation. She could learn to feed herself, possibly even talk.

Like I have been saying, before you "decide" what she is capable of, volunteer to help take care of a lower-functioning developmentally disabled person. I have done this professionally, and I can tell you that Mrs. Schiavo is indeed conscious, and sadly, probably aware of the crap that is going on.

She would most definitely NOT have been off life supports 10 years ago, she would have been in an institution (and that is not a bad thing). Not to mention, SHE IS NOT ON LIFE SUPPORT NOW. She maintains her own essential life functions. She was being starved to death.

She can't learn to feed herself, she can't learn to talk. Geez. I've been following this case for years. She's in a PERMANENT vegetative state.

Some bimbo on the tube last night said they believe she can be given physical therapy and live "close to a normal life." I realize their hearts are broken, but if her brain is shriveled away it CAN'T happen.

That said, I have mixed feelings about the feeding tube issue. There was a case in Rhode Island years back wherein the entire family was in agreement and the feeding tube was eventually removed, with the support of the Catholic diocese. The woman died very quickly and peacefully. I don't know if this outcome is a rarity or typical.

Perhaps what they meant by that was they could go on with a life of caring for her daughter without having to live a rollercoaster life of going to court constantly to fight someone who wants her to die.

Perhaps they meant a life without the media hounding them day and night.

Perhaps they meant resuming a life that has joyful meaning and hope and having the time and energy to spend quality time with their daughter--listening to music, talking with her, making her smile, taking her for walks, reading books together.

Doesn't that qualify as normal to you?

If what you say is correct, they are thinking about themselves, not their daughter or what her wishes might be. Sounds like extreme selfishness to me. And as other posters have said, she will NOT get better. When the brain is gone, it won't grow back.

So what if she won't get better? She can still enjoy life's pleasures, including the love she receives from her parents and others.

anything. Mom and Dad are projecting their own fantasies on her.

Most of her brain is missing and replaced by fluids. Brains do not grow back. What's left of her brain provides some reflexes, like breathing, but eventually these too will shut down. She will never experience life again, and she will not get better. There is no hope at all.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

She has been " A lower-functioning developmentally disabled person," since she was a baby, she is now in her fifties.
She can not walk,talk or feed herself, but she communicates in the way she moves her arms, she can be spoon- fed, has never been able to feed herself because the movement of her arms is limited,she can smile and make sounds. She recognises people too.
I also know that her parents that raise her,were incredable people, devoted, loving and strong too.

Mrs Schiavo is not like Joy, she is hasn't a fraction of the brain function, no therepy can make her better, I don't class her as disabled,she is damaged beyond repair. It will take an act of God to make her talk and feed herself. Keeping her alive, while waiting for some divine intervetion is prolonging the suffering for all involved.

If starving her to death is too cruel, is there another way that can let her die??

So talking and feeding yourself are the criteria for killing someone?

The husband does not want to "let her die". She is on no life support and has actually received substandard medical care (even denied typical stuff like pap, mammogram, teeth cleaning, antibiotics). She wants her to be PUT TO DEATH.

Astronomical difference,Jen.

Who is suffering? Parents? Husband? Terri? Brother/sister?

The only suffering I see is being caused by the husband's aggressive steps toward ending Terri's life.

The critieria for making the decision to end her life, should does she have any chance of regaining any of the bodily functions?
How long can you allow someone alive in this condition, without hope of any slight recovery? Is thirteen years a long enough time to wait for a miricale to bring her back?
The woman I mentioned on this thread, is 50 and has never talked beyond a few grants and can't lift a spoon to her mouth. Buy she can
chew and swallow food, she has a spark of life inside her, she is healthy in everyother way. I would never think she should not be alive.
Terri however has none of the minimal functions, that Joy has as minimal brain function, has no awareness and no chance of a life outside of a hospital, no chance of recovery, no chance to be anything more than a medical problem.

The medical care she recieve would have been dependent upon finaces avalible. How many extra hours did her husband have to work, to pay for basic care for thirteen years?
If he did not care for Terri, he would not have endure 13 years of hell, going broke, being vilifed, breaking his heart, he would have just walked away.
Where did you get the info on withheld treatment?
If they found a Cancerous lump, would they them add chemo to the trauma, when she is bearly alive.
If she has an infection, it may kill her and end the suffering, without starving her.

Death if she has to be diapered? :wtf:

Why is the able to chew and swallow food such a big deal about whether this woman should be put to death or not? Over 800,000 people in this country are fed via gastric tube. So what?

Who's talking about a miracle recovery?

Terri has life inside her. Watch the videos. See the sparkle of love in her eyes for her mother. Listen to her laugh in delight when she listens to music. Hear her respond with vocalizations to her father talking with her.

She is very much aware.

Her husband did not slave away to pay for medical bills. They were covered by Medicaid, insurance, and the trust fund. Read the documents. Where are you getting your information?

13 years of hell? He "went on" with his life withing 2 years after her "accident". Broke? Hardly.

Have you taken any antibiotics in the past 13 years? Why should you have them and Terri not?

I get my information from www.terrisfight.org

Check out all the documents there. Read. Enlighten yourself.

not want this to be you. Hardest thing I ever did was to sign each of my parents' living will (there's stated no feeding tubes) and thinking of the painful death - even if they were not cognizant. But it was their wish, and the doctors suggested that they got the signatures (that we understand that wish) from each immediate family member.

But it takes this drama away. Conversely, you do not want this - then put that in writing as well. Let your wishes be known.

a blood vessel "leakage" and damaged a large section of her brain. my sisters and i had the choice of feeding tube or letting her die. since she was 85 and had other problems ,we decided not to give her the feeding tube. we knew it was the right thing to do,but it didn`t ease our pain. she was put on pain medicine and died a few days later. personally i hope to god i never have to make that decision again but if i have to i know that i will do what the wishes of my loved ones would want or have told me..it is not up to the state to decide life or death in these situations. if the family can`t decide then i guess it`s up to the judges and doctors..

I had to watch my mother in a coma for about 3 days. She came out of it. But I could never tell anyone to pull the plug on my mother, or close family member. It would be too hard to do.

I wish nobody ever had to do that.

I think this case is much different though. This women is pretty young, is happy, and is not comatose.

Mike

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

Most of her cerebral cortex is gone. As in, gone. As in, not there and never coming back. The part of her brain that was used to think and experience and perceive is gone. She has no consicousness, no perception, no experience of life. There are just reflexes. She will never get better.

:thumbsup:

I would hate to think of myself lying there in a vegatative stage. I think I would rather be allowed to die with dignity and see what the next world is like.

Its better to live on your feet than die on your knees

... death is not the enemy.

No one wants to live through months of pain knowing there is no hope of recovery or respite. I've seen people hang on until a child graduates from college or a baby is born but for them that event is the meaning in their lives. Enduring the pain somehow is worth the trade of getting to be present at that milestone.

In this Schiavo case, I imagine pneumonia will eventually take her life.

He's still a douchebag, though.

LOL! :P

medical decisions?

Or anyone else in his perverse rotten degenerate "family"?

Besides, removing only the feeding tube would leave her suffering for weeks. There are plenty of PAINLESS, HUMANE methods to use.

I'd tell you what the judge can go do as well...

This ruling is in the best interest of the selfish family, arrogantly deciding what the suffering person is thinking. (okay, as I'm prone to depression myself, I'd personally find any excuse to be free of this wretched world, but who knows - maybe the sufferer wants to live?!)

It's not his place. The husband is carrying out the woman's wishes.

This is not a place for elected representatives.

My mother passed on through hospice care, it was humane and in accordance with her wishes.

Emergency intervention could probably kept her suffering on for additional months, she had the insurance and funds to pay for it.

She and the doctors decided it was time to stop. As much as I wished it were otherwise, I also knew it was time to respect her wishes.

I have to ask how would I have felt if JEB had decided to step in and interfere with this decision?

Last year I had to make similar decisions regarding my mother...first with a DNR and then removing her feeding tube. It was a quality of life issue as here was a woman who was a prisoner in her own body and prolonging her life beyond her own ability to exist without drugs or in pain was our only priority.

This is an extremely personal and traumatic time for a family...and in our case the last mile in years of seeing a once vibrant person decline to total dependence. It was always depressing walking down the hallways of the nursing center seeing so many people whose outlived their bodies.

The government has NO right in interfering with the confidences of a doctor and the immediate family in the treatment of a terminally ill patient. Especially grandstanding Repugnican and Christian Reich zealots like Jebbie and Randall Terry (Operation Rescue). These people have NO concern for the care and comfort of this poor woman or any consideration for the ordeal this has put on her immediate family...and it appears obvious this includes her parents.

Had her parents really understood the torture their daughter has had to endure inside her living hell...and not become captives to religious dogma and demagogues, then they'd let nature take it's course.

We worked closely with a hospice during this process who were always open about what the situation was and that the choice to pull the tube was to alleviate the final suffering this woman has had to endure. Fact is without the tube, the woman would have starved to death...naturally...years ago, and that she has been artificially sustained...and my bets are, as was in our case, the tube now created discomfort and irritation and the "nurishment" provided was virtually wasted as the body no longer was expending much energy. It took nearly a week for my mother to pass peacefully...and the sense of relief for her suffering and then ours was intense. Jebbie Bush has never had to deal with humanity anywhere near this level.

The ultimate question is what is the benefit of keeping this woman alive with any means necessary? A hope for some miracle cure? The "all life is sacred" crap? Dare to bet once the cameras are off, this family will be more alone and debt-ridden for their "efforts".

Why can't these hypocrites actually practice what they preach about the power of the individual over the state. Ooops...that's only when you write checks to the RNC.

who are dead set against removing the feeding tube because they still have hope that she can be rehabilitated. Maybe it's not realistic but I can understand how they feel.

I really have no empathy for the husband because he stands to gain financially from this woman's death.

His motives made me suspicious that he is not really considering her well-being as much as his own. He supposedly has a child by another woman with another one on the way. If he wanted to marry this woman all he has to do is get a divorce.

The parents wishes should be considered above all others, right or wrong, because in spite of what the doctors say the woman appears to follow objects with her eyes and smile. It's hard for me to believe that these kinds of facial gestures are just "reflexes."

The doctors could be wrong, and I mean COULD because sometimes they are wrong and this could be one of those cases.

The husband needs to file for divorce so he can be free to marry this other woman. Of course if he does this he won't get the money.

One of the most important aspects of this case is that removing the feeding tube is not a humane way to end life. She would essentially be starved to death and it would take about two weeks for her to die.

The fact that her husband would subject his wife to such an agonizing death speaks volumes.

like a banshee.

Ain't love grand?

BBC news story (better info than you can get from US news)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

The salient points are these: The woman's cerebral cortex is mostly gone. This is not a matter of opinion or something doctors can be "wrong" about. A brain scan tells the tale.

The parts of her brain that used to be "her," which she used to think and experience, are gone. They cannot come back. Physicians say she does't have enough brain to experience pain <i>with.</i>

She has no consciousness and no perceptions. She does have reflexes, and people watching her who want to believe there's intelligence there project on that to "believe" there's intelligence. But if you don't have a brain, you don't have a brain.

It would be really easy for him to divorce her and put this behind him.

He must have really loved her, because he's suffered quite a lot to respect her wishes.

The fact is, though, it doesn't matter what we think - it matters what she would have thought (and since she can no longer think, since her cerebral cortex is shot, and she's just a shell with reflexes, I think he's the best person to know what she thought.)

The "two weeks" that it took her to die would be be harder on those around her than on her - for her (were she sentient) it would be a release from keeping a shell of her body alive. Her spirit is with God, let her earthly remains rest in peace. Put an end to this travesty of his will.

... use some MORE of the malpractice money and DIVORCE HER, if he wants to 'move on'? Oops, silly me---- he couldn't inherit all of it when she dies! :eyes:

where it doesn't belong.

... it when they stop a perfectly good wife killing? /sarcasm off

That was cold (but good!)

Newsflash: Every day, all over the world, lots of loving caregivers help loved ones along the way to a humane, dignified death. And it's none of your or the government's business.

Another newsflash: Death is part of life, and we're all going there. I don't believe that life, no mater how horrible or unnatural, is necessarily better than death.

BTW, since you're best friends with this woman and her husband, and know them well enough to judge, perhaps you'd share their thinking on this with me?...no? Didn't think so.

Every day husbands murder their wives; some even profit from it in 6 figures.

...and your conversations with the principals.

Thanks!

Early in the day to be so self-righteous, isn't it?

If you'd bothered to inform yourself, either in this thread or at any time over the 18 months that *I* have been aware of this case, you wouldn't be arguing from a point of ridicule, but from one of knowledge.

Try googling "Terry Schiavo" and get back to me in 2 or 3 days after you've read all the articles, etc. .

Death is a natural part of life and this is no more anyone elses business, anymore than a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy of a disabled fetus should involve anyone else.
The money he would get will mostly cover the debts he has incured paying for 13 years of treatment. If he was a wife killing, sleazy,
uncaring scumbag, that some imply that he is, he could have walked away. If he did not love her or care about her condition he would have deserted her, not paid the medical bills, not spend 13 years dealing with destressed and difficult in-laws.
Think about it she has been in this state since Bush I was in office.
13 years of visits,of pain and frustration that the woman he loved,
suffer and knowing she isn't aware of him. That fact that his has a girlfriend is his business, if she helped him survive, giving something to give him the will to live his life, it can only be a good thing.

She has not improved in that time,keeping her alive is not helping anyone involved.

here in Florida was to purposely subvert the rule of law and violate the Constitution. Members of the house here in Florida admitted that what they passed was blatantly unconstitutional and they were positive that it would be overturned. They wrote a new law and made it retroactive to over rule a court decision in a civil matter.

I have no care one way or the other as to how this case turned out, what I do care about now is that law makers that swore an oath to uphold the constitution would knowingly and purposely ignore it for their own personal feelings. What they have shown is that the law doesn't matter.

I personally hope that the state gets sued for millions, and if it was up to me, everyone that voted to pass this bill would be responsible for paying that suit plus the state should be responsible for every dime that was spent taking this case through the courts over the years.

On Edit: This reprieve is only temporary and as soon as it is over turned the feeding tube will be removed again, it has been speculated that this womans body is already starting to die and that reinserting the feeding tube can cause more harm to internal organs thus assuring non recovery if at all there was a chance.

This action today may have caused more damage to this woman than leaving the tube out and letting her go

FYI: The judge refused to hear the appeal today only because it was the wrong court for the reasons stated as to why it was before the court.

I did NOT know that * had a feeding tube in the first place.

Is that because of the pretzel incident???

This is a pattern I've seen at least a dozen times. Persistant vegetative state, spouse agrees to cease treatment after the passage of time, then the parents demand that everything be done, trash-talking the spouse endlessly.

Fine Christian lot down in Tallahassee. Now this woman gets to spend the next 5-30 years in a hellish twilight zone of reflexive activity interrupted by occasional sensations of awareness of the hell.

The part that people don't seem to understand is that the woman's cerebral cortex is mostly gone. It has whithered away and been replaced by fluid. She is not going to get better. She is not going to experience "life" again, because she the part of her brain that perceived is gone. There are just reflexes. She is not going to get better.

IMO it is absolutely absurd to think of this case as some kind of victory for the "disabled," as some on this thread have. She is not "disabled." For all practical purposes, the person she was iss "dead." Some functions of her body have been prolonged artificially, so there is life there, but the person that she was is long gone. And nothing is going to change that.

But I'm glad you did. :)

.

But I will refrain. I have a passionate hatred of ignorance. Science doesn't know everything, but there are some things it does know. And if it's true this woman's brain cortex is gone, then she is no longer sentient. And that's that.

!

Thanks for pointing it out!

It's like they just can't deal with facts. Amazing isn't it.?

like this. It's hard to blame them.

I do as well. Perhaps you should do a separate thread with info on PVS and other landmark cases. Ppl just don't seem to get it that there is no rehabilitation. If you do a thread you could use Christine Busalacchi or Nancy Cruzan as references. You're doing a great job.

I'll repost some mags for you. It's been a very closely-watch case for some time.

www.mouthmag.com

www.raggededgemagazine.com

http://www.internationaltaskforce.org

Her brain cortex is gone. This is not a "disability," and you are being extremely foolish to equate this with a genuine disability issue.

The woman is no longer sentient.

what gives?

My wife was in a coma for 21 days as the result of a terrible accident. When she came to, she was different in so many ways and had to learn everything over again...the smallest things we take for granted. She spent the better part of a year after her accident learning it all over again just to able to function in a daily way.

Now, almost 4 years later, she progressed so far if you met her you wouldn't readily recognized that she may have been in an accident. Im not religious at all but its the closest thing to a miracle I've ever seen.

We talked about this the other day, she told me that the woman should be allowed to die, that closure is needed in a case like this and I agree to an extent (and from what limited knowledge we have about this - one radio report and one news report). By the same token I can't comprehend making that final decision, even though my wife has told me that if this were to happen to her again she would want me to move on (as I have also told her to do for me) At the same time it is extremely sad to see this woman being treated like an object. I saw before and after pictures of her this morning and it made me reminicse about my own predicament.

It is a very hard decision to make and I don't envy anyone closely involved but I can empathise with them a bit and hope that in the end there will be closure for the family so that they may move on or adapt as need be...in whatever form it takes. Whatever path they take it won't be easy.

People can wake up from comas after many years. But this woman is not in a coma; she is in a persistent vegetative state. This means that most of her brain isn't just damaged, it is GONE. A large part of her cerebral cortex has withered away and been replaced by fluid

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3141058.stm

There is no possibility that this woman will ever get better or even experience herself again. She's gone already, for all practical purposes.

"Let us err on the part of not condemning this woman to a painful death that she can feel," said Republican Sen. Anna Cowin.

When did the Republicans become socially conscious? When did they decide to increase their interest in someone's personal death? Why don't they care about the hundreds of millions and BILLIONS we all effect every day?

OnEdit: LIVING people, PEOPLE! People who will be alive for a very long time!

I posted it in another thread, but it's so timely and comforting. It incorporates medical science, literature, and even humor in places. I hope you all will read it.

Terri Schiavo seems to be a classic case of PVS--although this essay is not about her specifically. Here is an excerpt:

http://seeingthedifference.berkeley.edu/schneiderman.html

Now, just a brief lesson in neurology. You have in your brain the cerebral cortex, which is actually a very thin structure on the outer surface of your cerebral hemispheres. Four to six minutes of anoxia, lack of oxygen, destroys that completely. The rest of your brain, particularly the brain stem, can survive for fifteen or twenty minutes without oxygen. That disparity accounts for what we now see in as many as 30,000 to 40,000 people being kept alive in permanent unconsciousness. Usually the cause is failed CPR, or occasionally a stroke or a motor vehicle accident of some sort. What happens is that that part of the brain, the cerebral cortex, which is us, our personality, who we are, how we think--our capacity to experience, see, hear, think, emote--that may be permanently destroyed. Whereas the rest of us, the brain stem, which gives us the ability to breath, digest, all the organ functions, that could be kept alive, and in many cases has been kept going for decades. And so that has given us this condition which was first diagnosed in 1972. It's really interesting, that that's a very new disease as far as medicine is concerned, and, in fact, it's an iatrogenic disease. Vegetative state is the condition, as we call it, but persistent or permanent is what we do to keep that condition going. So in a sense, that's a very important notion.

Now, all of us who do ethics consultations, have had the experience, and I've had several, where families have insisted that their loved one be kept alive in a permanent vegetative state, permanently unconscious. And this is a clinical diagnosis. If someone, for example, has persistent vegetative state, where their eyes may open and close and they have all sorts of reflex capacities, that's because that part of the brain stem, the reticular activating system that's responsible for sleep/wake may be temporarily impaired, but then recover. And so they're unconscious. Their eyes may open, and they sleep, but they're completely unaware. Families will sometimes demand that physicians keep such patients alive--and it's very simple, a feeding tube and good nursing care will do it. There's nothing more that has to be done, if that's the condition we're talking about.

Now, I've either been involved in or heard of cases where families have demanded that this be done, and the patient has been kept alive for eighteen months although there is no realistic chance that the patient will ever recover. I have to admit that today, hearing about embalming made me think of the parallel, that this was a family that needed to see that person in an embalmed state. It's truly nothing less than that, if you consider the person, the capacity of the person to interact.

I've also heard this described as a tragedy: "Oh," one says, "the person who had this happen to him, it's a tragedy." And I have to say that I'm with Martha Nussbaum on this, that this is not a tragedy: this is hubris, this is a failure to recognize our mortal limits. I refer here to a very rich and perceptive essay, "Transcending Humanity," where Nussbaum talks about Odysseus, whom Calypso was trying to tempt to stay with her. Calypso says, "You stay with me and you will have immortality and ageless love." What could be better? But Odysseus, even knowing that his waiting wife Penelope is far beneath the beautiful goddess in form and stature--and I'm quoting Nussbaum:

Please take time to read the essay. It's worth it.

Exactly

I feel for the husband. If there really is not chance of that woman
ever coming around, they should let her go. It is prolonging the suffering. The parents clearly are waiting for a miricle but it would be kinder to face reality and for the churches involved to encourage that.
The way the fundies hi-jacked the issue, which is none of their business, was sickening and self satisfied. Jeb Bush was also sickening, he has cold eyes and seems to have demostrated the power he has over the legal system in his state. Chilling stuff.

... about what's going on in the U.S. Sad, isn't it?

Take the time to read it.

maybe there are other things I agree with Jeb on but this is definately something I agree with.

You have no problem with politicians' making medical decisions?

Surprising.

This is ridiculous! This sets a dangerous precedent...

...and read this line from one of Florida's ELECTED officials...what were they smoking when they elected this fool? "Whether it's legal or not, I'm telling you, you should support this bill." Whether is is LEGAL or NOT??? That was Rep. Don Davis, R-Jacksonville folks...rememeber that the next time an election comes through. Your Rep is willing to BREAK THE LAW to get his way...typical RepubliKKKan.

EMAIL THEM NOW and tell them to CUT THE CRAP...NOW!!!

Listing of Florida House Reps:

http://www.myfloridahouse.com/Legislators.aspx

Florida Senators:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Legislators/index.cfm?Mode=Find%20Your%20Legislators&Submenu=3&Tab=legislators


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-fschiavo21xoct21,0,1741105.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

House votes to let Bush step in Schiavo feeding-tube case

By Bob Mahlburg & and Maya Bell
Tallahassee Bureau

October 21, 2003, 9:14 AM EDT

TALLAHASSEE · The Florida House late Monday fueled a national debate over the right to die by approving a bill aimed at saving Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged Pinellas County woman whose feeding tube was removed six days ago.

The House voted 68-23 for the measure, after Speaker Johnnie Byrd summoned his chamber for a late-night session on the first day of a special session that was supposed to focus on economic incentives for a biomedical company.

Today, the Schiavo bill will go to the Senate, which is expected to approve it and send it to Gov. Jeb Bush for his signature.

"President King, Speaker Byrd and others in the Legislature recognize the unique and tragic circumstances of Ms. Schiavo's case, and I am hopeful the Legislature will pass a bill immediately," Bush said in a Monday statement expanding the session to include Schiavo.

The measure would allow Bush 15 days to order that a feeding tube be reinserted, but his power to give that order would be limited to cases where a person has left no written living will, is in a persistent vegetative state, has had nutrition and hydration withdrawn and has a family member who has challenged the removal.

That describes Terri Schiavo.

:snipped:

but until I learn enough to convince me (a) the husband isn't lying his ass off or (b) the law that was passed will be applied to situations that are not like Terri's and used to further a right-wing agenda, I'm with the Schindler family.

My Mother was in a "Vegetative State" and they kept taking her feeding tube out of her belly so that she would die. She was only 59 years old and she died the day of the Waco Fire which was one day before her insurance ran out.

I loved my Mom and I know that they killed her in the hospital because her records vanished after she died and no one could locate a single page of her records.

It took a while before I broke down from it but I have recovered now and I am willing to fight for patients rights.

The husband needs to be pushed aside and her parents and siblings should make all of her decisions.

She is not dead and she has a possibility of getting somewhat better.
We shouldn't decide who can live and who should die. The insurance company doesn't want her to live and she is a burden on her husband because he wants the insurance money.

God Bless Jeb Bush for taking care of the lady.

tried and imagine that your mother was in a vegetitive state for
13 years.Try and grasp how long this woman in the news has been suffering, how long her husband has had to witness her condition. Imagine visiting her throughout that time, listening to her doctors tell you week in, week out that all they can do is feed her through a tube. She will not get better unless you are counting on divine intrevention. ( I am not mocking those that believe in God,in anyway.)
And since when does being a parent mean that a person knows what is best for their child?
And what happens in her husband, who has no doubt paid endless bills for this woman's care? The money he would get would be swallowed into the debts he incurred.
I don't believe it is unreasonable for the husband to want to end this, he has a family and maybe desires to be able to give his full attention to his children, as well as the woman that has given him emotional support.

Jeb Bush did something that should scare the crap out for people in Florida. He throw out a legal decision because he didn't like it.
He has demonstrated that once again the Bush family, have no respect for the law, unless it is bent to suit them.
Jeb Bush should burn in hell, he has done nothing heroic.
If he had stepped in to prevent a teenage girl from having a abortion.
it would be outrageous. If he recieved information that showed that a
death row prisoner, may well be innocent and went ahead with the execution, most people would be horrified. They should be horrified by this intervention too.

n/t

Is her cerebral cortex gone? Has it been replaced by fluid?

In all seriousness, I am uncomfortable with the removing of the feeding tube after it has been inserted, especially if there is a dispute over her wishes or her family's wishes. It may seem like splitting hairs, but I would not have objected if the tube had never been inserted in the first place.

Could we please stop referring to Terri Shiavo as comatose?
She has brain damage. Enormous difference.

Keep in mind how much credance we have in mainstream's news accuracy re bushco, iraq, etc.

She is not comatose. She is not in a persistive vegetative state. These are terms (as well as "houseplant"--yes she was actually referred to as a houseplant by the attorney) used by the husband and his lawyer in order to sway public opinon.


www.terrisfight.org for information

and nothing they can do will change that.

miraculous recovery back to how she was before her brain injury?

You're right.

Is there hope for a continued life surrounded by love, joy, stimulation?

Absolutely.

And what it does? Any clues at all?

The woman is no longer sentient. She knows nothing, she feels nothing, she is aware of nothing. It would be a kindness just to let her go in peace.

Terri is sentient. She has a soul and a will to live.

Maybe you could find one for yourself at the 99 cent store.

We Buddhists don't have souls; we are void of intrinsic being. If you have a soul, look to it; but don't bother me about mine.

However, "will" doesn't not have anything to do with "soul." "Will" requires sentience, and sentience requires a brain cortex.

No brain cortex, no will. That's science. All your histrionics will not change that.

If your religious beliefs tell you that there's something immoral about allowing Mrs. Schiavo's body to die, I can respect that, but please understand that's an entirely subjective judgment on your part and has no place in legal or scientific fact.

End of story.

The part of her brain that can coordinate and access memories is no more. Love and joy are likely to elicit no particular benefit for her on a physical level. Most of what she feels is probably joint position fatigue, bed sores, and the feeling of spit dripping down her throat, intruded upon by the occasional fever, fecal impaction, wet diaper, spasm, and uncomfortable body position.

I thought liberal-minded people cared about the plight of their fellow human beings. ha

YOU are the one callously ignoring what Terri Schiavo really needs. This has nothing to do with being "liberal"; it has to do with you willfully ignoring medical and biological fact.

I gave you an accurate accounting of what she probably feels. Sure, it's not pretty, but considering the parents' video of reflexive activity, it's a necessary check of the compass of reality.

But if she could know what has happened to her body, you can bet she wouldn't be happy.

This Bush business is very serious. The Bushes don't respect the law; they circumvent it.

The Florida Senate took control of the matter without even knowing the facts of the case or interviewing anyone. The Senate president assured everyone that they were being given documents that would explain everything. They voted half an hour later.

The histrionics ensued from the usual fundy culprits, objections were ignored, and the train rolled on.

This decision, coupled with the "partial birth abortion" ban on the federal level, means that NOW, right NOW, government has intruded into our personal lives in very significant ways.

It's not a matter of "if" anymore. It has happened.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/23/opinion/meyer/main579620.shtml

(CBS) This has been terrifying week for people who are concerned about big government meddling in families’ most personal and painful decisions.

I would say it’s been a terrible week for conservatives, but most of the people who call themselves conservatives are celebrating and crowing. I think they’re radicals.

I’m referring, of course, to the unprecedented intervention of Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature in the tragic case of Terri Schiavo, and to the Senate vote, supported by President Bush, banning a certain type of procedure to terminate pregnancies in cases where the mother’s life or health are at risk. The idea of legislatures, governors and presidents dictating what families can do in these most private situations is mind-boggling. It is as intrusive as government can be. It is, in both cases, almost certainly unconstitutional.

(more at link)

They want to keep her in this state so they won't have to deal with the heartbreak of her death. Understandable, but selfish and ghoulish.

http://www.jud10.org/2ndDCA/jan01/2D00-1269.htm

The evidence is overwhelming that Theresa is in a permanent or persistent vegetative state. It is important to understand that a persistent vegetative state is not simply a coma. She is not asleep. She has cycles of apparent wakefulness and apparent sleep without any cognition or awareness. As she breathes, she often makes moaning sounds. Theresa has severe contractures of her hands, elbows, knees, and feet.
Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid-1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this
state for many years.

Jeb should get out of the GOD business.

Aren't conservatives the ones that want government out of their personal lives???

so...the legislature can pass a quicky law (ref:edict/fiat/courtly favor) to overrule the Courts and the Law...
So what else can they do?

To hell in a handbag...and to hell with the vegetable and LIFE args

there's a difference between stopping treatment and starving someone.

It must be bad.

Im for letting the woman pass away on her own.

I'm bothered by this whole thing. I was watching Hardball with Chris Matthews the other day, when they were debating this issue. Sanctimonious Bible-thumper Flip Benham was on, basically accusing anyone who wanted to debate the issue of wanting to kill this woman. Terri Schiavo's been functionally brain dead for like 13 years hasn't she? If I'm wrong, let me know. Her husband asserts it was her wish not to be on life support for this long. It seems to me that we should have looked at all the evidence, before the government threw its weight around.

P.S. If it's true that the husband's only doing this for money, then that's another story.

Terri Schiavo is not comatose, she is brain-dead. If she was in a coma, I would support the efforts to keep her on life support. After all, this past year we saw an Arkansas man come out of a 19 year coma! Sadly, these two cases are very different. I feel for her parents but I also think that if she indeed has "no significant brain function", than she is not aware of her surroundings and stimuli as "evidenced" by the videos. It is a shame that such a sensitive family issue has been co-opted by the Right to Life zealots. It is my strong belief that no individual or institution has the right to dictate what I can and cannot do regarding my own person, be it the issue of abortion, gay rights, or "the right to die" (yes, these three issues are interrelated.) The real tragedy here is that no one knows Terri's true wishes. I have no desire to languish in a vegetative state for 13 years and I am making this known to all my loved ones!
Still, I'm intrigued by her parents' insistence that her condition can improve. I've never heard of such a incident and am skeptical, but I'm not a physician. Does anyone know of a case where an individual was rebilitated after being brain-dead?
Finally, I dedicate this entry to Mr. Vladimir Constantinov--one of the best Red Wings in history who sustained a severe head injury in a car accident that ended his career. I am only a fan, and it has been heart-breaking to see a man onced named the "terminator" on ice have tremendous difficulty learning to walk again.

I'm intrigued a bit myself, because it is impossible. The only thing I can think of is that they are holding on to what is left of her body and can't let go.

Her husband said she wouldn't want to live like she is. The family says different. I believe the husband. The family is coming out with all these unsubstantiated accusatons that he beat her, he caused it, he wants the money (which by the way there is none), etc. The family, by it's own admission is anti-abortion, which leads one to think they are also anti-euthanasia (unless you're convicted of a crime and got the death penalty, which I still don't understand the thinking behind that line of pro-life).

I had to literally cut my family, which I love completly out of anythig to do with my health care because of their beliefs. As it was told to me... "you wouldn't even know anyway". So I believe the husband.

For Jeb Bush, Mr. Pro-Family, anti-governent involvement to stick himself into he middle of this, is 1) WRONG and 2) hopefully political suicide.

You bring up an interesting point about the parents. Why all of these unsubstantiated allegations of beatings, money-mongering, etc.? Why do they have to resort to such tactics? And then of course there are the pathos-filled video clips of the neurons firing from their daughter's brain stem.

I think there were even allegations about Michael Schiavo's actually having strangled his wife.

When the right-wing fundies got involved in this, these rumors and accusations grew exponentially.