You are incorrect. Michael Schiavo cannot possibly have another wife, he’s currently still legally married to Terri. He has a woman he loves, who has stood by him and borne his child, but she is NOT his wife. It’s none of our business if he does marry her after he has carried out his duty by Terri, and seen to it that her wishes have been met either.
“Pleasant” implies the ability to feel pleasure, an ability that Ms. Schiavo lost over a decade ago. As far as I can tell, what remains are Ms. Schiavo’s remains; there is nothing of her left in them. To speak of starvation as less pleasant is akin to saying that being buried is a more pleasant fate for your remains than being cremated.
I think that her loved ones ought to have some consideration into how her body is disposed, and the first step of that involves ending the residual life in that body (again, a life that contains nothing of Ms. Schiavo). I believe that starvation is probably less pleasant for her survivors than other methods, such as morphine shots; but our society is inflicting this cruelty on the survivors.
Daniel
Wow, that is an extremely easy cop-out.
If you are not interested in serious discussion, what the hell are you doing in Great Debates?
Me neither. That’s why Judge Greer’s ruling was appropriate and things like Terri’s Law were abhorrent. Greer’s ruling was on what TERRI would decide. Terri’s Law was all about taking that choice away and giving it to a politician.
No, I want doctors to be able to tell others that I am in a state that I may have told those others I don’t want to be artificially maintained in.
Suffice to say, lekatt, if consciousness is something that can survive after the destruction of the brain, why should you be so worried about the death of the body?
I am not worried about death, I have been there, and I will enjoy returning when my life’s work is finished. I am worried about Terri’s family, on TV they look ever more distraught as the days go by. I can’t imagine how it would feel if that were my daughter. Doctors don’t know what consciousness is or what it is capable of, they are only using past experiences. However, each individual is unique, no doctor can say when someone should die. A doctor told me I probably wouldn’t last six months, when I had a heart problem. That was 18 years ago.
The family had agreed to sponsor Terri, taking on all her experiences and work with her. Why shouldn’t they have that right.
Her husband has a new common law wife and kids. Also when the paramedics arrived to aid Terri, they called the police saying it looked like a homicide.
Did any of this get discussed in court?
But most of all I object to starving someone to death. The body begins to eat itself, and the doctors don’t know what she is feeling.
This is a horrific situation, and shows the callousness of our judges. I believe it will convince a lot of people that our country needs to turn back to ways of morality, and God. Look for more religion and law conflicts in the future.
We feed Terri, not because it’s the law, or not the law, but because it’s the right thing to do.
The family=her parents. From what I heard, the family had asked that she be spared this mockery of life and be allowed to die in peace.
That question has an answer. Have you researched it yet?
Replace “judges” with “representatives,” and I’ll agree. I don’t think people’s turn to morality will be toward your morality, though.
Daniel
Tell me again why we’re supposed to believe you instead of doctors, or indeed anyone who knows what they’re talking about?
Because she clearly explicitly said to her husband that she wouldn’t want to be kept alive in a situation like this.
This is simply not true. Please research.
So you are saying that the soul can suffer physical pain?
Than why do our souls seem to leave our body, when we are in extreme physical pain?
You are contradicting everything you seem to stand for.
And which God are we talking about?
The Christian God? :rolleyes:
I was just listening to Terri’s brother on TV. He restated what I say and added that she had been denied a MRI by her husband. She has never had an MRI which seems strange to me. There are a lot of things that don’t add up, but the judges are going to kill her anyway. Very sad.
Just believe anything you want to Marley23.
Terri’s wishes are unknown. She said nother to her family, she left no writings, we hav only the word of her husband. Which in my opinion is worthless.
I am not a Christian
For the rest of it believe anything you wish. This is a sad moment in the history of America. She will probably die on Easter Sunday. Maybe her life meant a great deal more than most think.
Hi..
I'd like to offer a different perspective, if I may...
Regardless of religious affiliation, when did humans decide it was up to us to decide when and how people would die or live. It seems to me that no one "wants" anyone to be starved to death or to die, but we are mortal and we all will eventually succumb. Isn't this a matter between the person and their "higher power"? It certainly does not belong to the government or theological leaders.
In the days before we had the ability to prolong "life" people simply died in peace. there were no wires or tubes or machines forcing our bodies to remain "alive."
I witnessed this first-hand. My partner was dying and he and I had agreed not to be put on any type of life support. He was able to slowly slip into a natural slowing of the bodily functions and fade slowly away ... in dignity.
And if you do believe in a god, then isn't it up to him/her to decide when the person should be "taken" not some Hillbilly Texas Congressman?
I feel sad for all the parties involved, because there is no clear and easy decision, but I know dragging it out on national TV and the public is NOT the way to treat a decent human being. The parents of that poor woman should protect her dignity and let her rest in peace until it is her time to leave this world.
Peace to all.
...Rowdy!As usual, you’re wrong. If only you could get paid for it!
Oh, another question you don’t feel like answering. Very persuasive.
This is the only thing you’ve said in this thread that does make some sense to me. Based on my knowledge of the case (e.g., the CAT scan appearance), an anatomical and/or functional MRI would be likely to provide the husband with yet more evidence that Schiavo’s but a shell[1].
One reason he might be reluctant, I suppose, is if the anatomical showed that a scant portion of grey matter was still extant. This, although insufficient to support consciousness, might nevertheless provide the parents some ammunition. A similar problem might arise with a functional scan - any brain activity would be open to misrepresentation, misinterpretation and obfuscation by the family’s lawyers et al.
BfT.
[1] Well, apart from her spirit, which has recently set up a small reading room in her lower intestine, allegedly.
That’s a lie. She spoke to her husband, and her husband is her closest family.
Nitpick? Sure, because by consistently excluding her husband from her family, you set asunder what God has joined, so to speak. You’ve got a vested ideological interest in this case, and so you’re behaving dishonestly.
Daniel
The real issue is that her parents have been unwilling to accept the outcomes of any previous tests, and have basically testified in court that it doesn’t matter to them anyway: they will keep her alive no matter what.
So there is plenty of reason to believe that demanding more tests is merely a stalling action.
They reported on TV a nurse from the hospice said she heard her husband remark: “When will the bitch die.”
As for my interest in the case, you wouldn’t understand in a million years.
Well, yes - and I suggested some problems with accepting more tests in my previous post. Still, I think that for most (impartial) observers, such tests would strengthen the husband’s position, rather than the parents’.
Impartial observers? Who am I kidding?
And here I thought doctors did the interpretations of the scans.