What happens after her feeding tube is removed? What will her death be like?
regards,
widdley
It’s my understanding (Doctor J, please feel free to slap me around if I’m wrong) that since she doesn’t have enough brain left to feel hunger or thirst, it will be a peaceful death for her.
In other meddling news, a California businessman has offered her husband $1 million to turn over guardianship to her parents. I disagree with most of the talk show pundits on this matter, (except Neal Boortz, who thinks they should pull the plug) who are applauding this man’s offer. Talk about butting your nose in where it doesn’t belong. It’s not about the money!
In other developments, (can’t find a link just now) a judge has ruled that DCF cannot intervene and investigate alleged abuse charges against her husband. The judge said it was a delaying tactic and it would be a violation of the separation of powers.
The tube is scheduled to be pulled March 18. We’ll see.
Needless to say, he’s already turned it down. According to the news he’s received offers like this before.
When I was in a coma, I would have never known had they begun harvesting organs. The three weeks after I woke up, but was delusional, they could have put me down and harvested organs, I would have never known. The organ procurement people were always hanging around - an organ donor that’s brain damaged but young and in good health is a good catch. (In South Carolina, even if you carry an organ donor card they can’t harvest until the doctor declares and the next-of-kin signs the papers!!!)
More important than having a living will is talking with your family about your personal wishes.
AIUI, a determined family member can, and often does, prevent organ harvesting, DNR orders, or following a living will. Talk with your loved ones about your wishes. Fifteen minutes of unpleasant, but honest, discussion can prevent years of hell for your family.
Likewise, if you want to have your remains used for organ donation, don’t assume your family shares your views. Tell them.
I’m not an expert, but most people who oppose specific organ harvesting don’t do it against known wishes, but on the assumption that, “Since Jane never said she wanted that, she must have filled out that part of the Driver’s license form by accident.”
Filling out a DNR, Living Will, or organ donation card is only part of the steps you have to take, while you still can.
:rolleyes: I hope you are an atheist, overwise ya gonna go to hell!! 
I don’t know who else has seen it, but I found this page rather helpful, especially when responding to an article in a school publication that seemed based more in anger than in fact.
No, they couldn’t have, because you did not meet the criteria for organ donation. I have no doubts that a rep from the organ donation program checked you out–although that is usually done via phone. But the criteria for coma and for PVS are different, as has been said by Dr. J.
People in coma are usually breathing above the set rate on the ventilator and they can also show other (sometimes subtle) neurological responses. Terry while she breathes on her own, has no higher brain function than the most primitive reflexes.
Let her go-the only possible good that come out of this is 1. Terry can finally be at peace and 2. perhaps the awareness of the need for what we call advance directives (living will, durable power of attorney for healthcare, organ donations etc) will be heightened.
Actually, I was on a ventilator, they had done CPR the entire trip to the ER. I did not breathe on my own for several days. When I woke up, I had wicked calluses on my feet where they tried to get a neurological response. When I was brought to MUSC in Charleston, the organ procurement people met my wife at the door. I am told that they were…assertive.
You also left out a third outcome: Jeb will keep the retiree vote in Florida.
I am about as conservative as they come, although I am not terribly vocal about it, and yet I am a parent who has signed a DNR (hubby agreed it was the thing to do, but could not bring himself to sign the form) and held her child as he took his last breath, so clearly I am in support of DNR when the illness is ultimately terminal or accident is one from which one cannot recover.
I would like to mention what I find disconcerting about Terri’s case. It’s that it’s a “feeding tube” they want removed. For her it’s not DNR in the sense of ok, lets just let her die at the next medical crisis. It’s that in order for her to die, they want to remove her source of nutrition. This is where (IMHO) the “do no harm” comes in. The tube is already there. Removing it, or not using it to provide nourishment, is doing harm. It will mean she will starve. It’s not don’t “do” anything to revive me as I die, it is let’s undo what has already been done. There’s where I get hung up.
I get the irony that she was anorexic and that was the cause of her brain damage to begin with, however I just find it too much to withhold nutrition.
In our case our boy was getting nutrition via I.V. Even up to his last hour he could make it known he was thirsty and take a sip of water on his own, if he had help holding the cup. We wanted no extraordinary attempts made to revive him if he stopped breathing on his own or had some other of the myriad of crisises that could occur, but I could not and would not have witheld something as basic as nourishment and find it objectionable that this is what is going to happen to Terri.
On the other hand, I do believe him that they had the converstation Michael claims they had when watching T.V.
If there’s anyone in the medical community who can patiently help me understand how removing her feeding tube is not worse than not shocking her heart alive or forcing lungs that don’t want to or can’t breath and will never be able to continue breathing, I would surely read and consider your thoughts.
I’m sorry, but I don’t understand AbbySthrnAccent.
Are you saying that if doctors were talking about removing a ‘breathing tube’ from Terry you would be okay with it, but you object to the removal of a ‘feeding tube’?
I think the problem will only get more complicated as medical science advances, and our ability to artificially keep bodies ‘alive’ gets better.
Abby, they’re not talking about a DNR, but rather about removing life support. She is unable to maintain life without artificial intervention. If she were on a respirator because she couldn’t breathe enough on her own to maintain life, and we were talking about disconnecting her, we’d be withholding oxygen, which is a far more basic necessity than food and water. Except that withholding isn’t really the right word, because it implies that she would be able to have it if it weren’t for our interference. It’s more a case of us no longer going to extraordinary efforts to provide it.
Scientifically speaking, pulling a feeding tube is no different than disconnecting a ventilator–they’re both artificial means of maintaining a vital function the patient can no longer perform on her own. It’s only different emotionally, because one death is a lot faster than the other. With the vent, the patient suffocates and dies pretty quickly. With the feeding tube the patient takes a week or two to die. The tube just sounds horrific and brutal because it’s slow, and because starvation seems like such a horrible way for an aware person to die.
A friend was killed rather tragically by a hit and run driver over the weekend and the past couple of days have been tough so, perhaps this wasn’t the best timing for me to post, because I surely don’t want to argue or offend anyone about my tender feelings on such a controversial subject.
archmichael I suppose that is what I was saying. Although since I am in no way involved or in a position to decide for her, I guess I was saying I object to the idea of her starving to death. My grandmothers “breathing tube” was disconnected 15 years or so ago. I did not object. She was clearly already gone and not going to recover. She had been using a feeding tube which she tended herself for over 10 years prior to that. I realize that is about twice as long as people tend to live with feeding tubes, especially back then and so folks will doubt it. But she is referred to as “Mrs. M” in the medical journal artical of the time that documented the length of time she lived (independently) with the feeding tube. I do not remember the author of the article, only that I was surprised that she mentioned my grandmothers penchant for pretty sweaters and matching lingerie sets that were given her by her granddaughters.
CrazyCatLady I appreciate your explanation and comments. You are quite right, it is the slowness of starving that seems horrific to me.
Yeah, it’s terrible either way. Especially if you dwell on it.
CrazyCatLady hit it on the head. We as people have a tendency to think that if someone can’t breath on their own as already dead or soon on their way, while someone who can breath but just can’t eat we still see as alive. Regardless of brain state. I’m sure that is the image her parents are dealing with. They still see a healthy body that just needs food.
From what I understand, her brain is so deteriorated, she can no longer feel hunger, thirst, or even pain.
Are you sure? Those are all pretty primitive functions. She can breathe on her own but she can’t feel those things?
From what I understand, breathing, and other autonomic reflexes are controlled in the cerebellum, not the brain. Actual perception of pain, vice ‘spinal’ reflexes like the patella kick, require a cerebral cortex.
For a non-human analogy: Mike the Headless Chicken lived for over a year without anthing higher on the spine than the cerebellum. It would still scratch, and other basic behavior, while lacking a head.
The thing that bothers me about the parents is that they base all their arguments on the chance that Terry may recover - that is they do not seem to argue that her life as it is is the reason to keep supporting her. And that’s where I have problems accepting their reasoning.
The possibility of recovery is nearly always the most important consideration in deciding whether to end a life. If you’re saying they’re wrong to hold out hope, I’d agree with you. But if you’re saying they should only consider her current state without regard to future recovery, that’s fallacious. If people thought that way we’d flip the switch on anyone in a coma.
Sorry, didn’t mean to be unclear.
Yes, I only meant that there is so little chance of recovery in this case, based on the stuff I’ve seen, and the opinions of Dopers whom I respect, that it’s not a reasonable basis for making decisions. For Terry, the chance of recovery is so low I can’t see admitting any arguments based on that ‘if.’ I don’t want to start unplugging all the people on life support for comas, really.
Strictly anecdotal, and not a scientific response, but I’ve heard that terminally ill people often don’t suffer from lack of food anyway. The last few days of my father’s life (he had a very explicit directive about end-of-life issues which we followed to the letter), he was not given any food and did not seem to want any.
Ever recall when you’re really, really sick and just didn’t want anything to eat or drink?