Well, at least you’ve got a new argument. A morally bankrupt argument, but a new one.
Let’s say you promise your husband on his deathbed that you will always take care of his beloved aardvark Cecil. The day after he dies, you take Cecil to the pound because your husband will never be aware that you did not carry out his wishes.
How’s your moral position?
No, that’s absurd. The whole point of this is that the courts found “clear and convincing” evidence that Terri wouldn’t want to be artificially sustained if she were NOT conscious of her surroundings or alive in any real sense of the word. The fact that she doesn’t know that what she said she would never want is what her parents or forcing her to endure is utterly irrelevant. And of course Michael is still responsible for carrying out her wishes – he’s her husband!
Michael, her court-appointed guardian and the judges who’ve ruled on this case are ALL DOING EXACTLY WHAT TERRI CLEARLY AND CONVINCINGLY SAID SHE WANTED DONE IF SHE WERE EVER IN THIS CONDITION. The “harm” is in people without standing (her parents) and particularly the damn government, sticking their noses into private medical decisions between a husband and wife. Terri did not want to exist like this. Period. She should not be forced to by anyone, let alone people whose damn business it’s none of.
Isn’t the Florida law pretty obviously ex post facto applied to this case? The court order has already been made, tube has already been removed. How can they then pass a law saying that artififical life support cannot be removed without documentation and then apply it retroactively to this case?
Looks like the Florida legislature is the only route to go now. I wonder if they’ll be less inclined to touch this now after the appeal was struck down 10-2.
Hopefully this will all be over soon, and she can RIP.
Because I don’t think it matters. It’s surreal now. They’re just throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. Remember, if the tube goes back in, they can tie this up in court for years, and their objective will be realized…Terri will remain “alive.”
God, I hope so. Only the rules of this board keep me from expressing my true feelings for Jeb/George/the rest of the politicians involved.
I will say this. I wish for each of the Bush brothers involved for this to have one minute in their life when they know what it is like to have a loved one in this condition (not that I’m wishing for anyone in their families to be in this condition–I just the epiphany part to happen). Then be so smug about preserving life at any cost.
But before the tube is actually re-inserted based on any law they pass, it will have to go before a judge, won’t it?
Ooops, I was replying to World Eater, not Ivylass.
And apparently if they don’t get something done today, that’s it. The White House says it’s exhausted its options and the Supreme Court is not likely to get involved.
I don’t think so. Remember, the Florida legislature did this once before. The tube was pulled, eight days later they passed a law to get it put back in, and Michael had to go to court. The courts ruled it unconstitutional.
Well, I’m not a doctor, but I did find this article that explains the difference: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Schiavo/story?id=600523&page=1 (bolding mine)
It’s also something that requires there actually be some brain activity at all. Reiterating from above: “EEGs or brain wave tests, of Schiavo’s brain have revealed no activity.”
CNN is reporting on TV that the Florida legislature is considering taking custody of Terri via Child and Family Services. Nothing on the web site yet.
How draconian are they willing to go with this?
Here are the Definition and diagnostic criteria:
[quote]
To make the diagnosis of MCS, limited but clearly discernible evidence of self or environmental awareness must be demonstrated on a reproducible or sustained basis by one or more of the following behaviors:[ol][li]Following simple commands.[]Gestural or verbal yes/no responses (regardless of accuracy)[]Intelligible verbalization.[*]Purposeful behavior, including movements or affective behaviors that occur in contingent relation to relevant environmental stimuli and are not due to reflexive activity. Some examples of qualifying purposeful behavior include: - appropriate smiling or crying in response to the linguistic or visual content of emotional but not to neutral topics or stimuli - vocalizations or gestures that occur in direct response to the linguistic content of questions - reaching for objects that demonstrates a clear relationship between object location and direction of reach - touching or holding objects in a manner that accommodates the size and shape of the object - pursuit eye movement or sustained fixation that occurs in direct response to moving or salient stimuli.[/ol][/li][/quote]
I can’t see why they expect the debate to continue along those lines. Even if it turns out she isn’t PVS, and is in a MCS, (and it’s already been established that the Schindlers’ arguments on that point are incorrect) it’s entirely beside the point, isn’t it?
It seems to me that if they want to change the outcome, they’d have to go back and appeal the determination that it was her wish not to be kept on life-support, or argue that the feeding tube doesn’t constitute artificial life support, or something.
Does anyone have the approximate phrasing of Terri’s statements about how she wouldn’t want to live, as related by her husband and friends way back near the beginning of this mess? Were they really so clearly delineated?
Ouch.
I’m trying to work my way through the difference (if there is one) between a person being conscious of a helpless state, and unconscious of it.
I’d like to read more of the evidence about Terri’s wishes. I haven’t read the court transcripts, and all we hear on the news is that Terri told her husband, after watching a movie, that she “wouldn’t want to live like that.” I must assume there’s more evidence than that casual statement, because we all know that when the rubber hits the road, any of us might change our minds.
She also stated it again to her husband and her sister-in-law and brother-in-law when her husband’s grandmother died after a long lingering illness. She said repeatedly she wouldn’t want to end up like that, and when it was her time to go, then she wouldn’t want to be kept alive artificially.
The courts have already determined this.
Either way, your argument that, “Well, she won’t KNOW” is pretty slimy. “Oh, well gramma’s dead, it doesn’t matter that she was a devout Catholic who wanted to be buried next to her husband of 60 years-we’re having the old bitch cremated and having a party!”
Good question. I watched the news conference and found myself screaming in my head. What Gov. Jeb Bush doesn’t understand (he’s responsible for an entire state!) is that it doesn’t FUCKING MATTER who has custody of Terri Schiavo! The case hinges on Terri’s wishes. Not Michaels, not her parents, not the religious right, not pandering politicians but what TERRI wanted for herself. The lower courts have ruled and upheld those ruling for seven years. Seven years!
He’s found a neurologist who HASN’T EXAMINED Terri and baseS his hypothesis that Terri isn’t in a PVS solely on the videos and totally ignoring the diagnosis of a team of doctors who examined Terri for over 20 hours. In 1996…NINE YEARS AGO…her CT Scans showed a liquified brain and EEG no brain activity whatsoever. Do they think that after 9 years she’s suddenly rallied, regenerated brain tissues out of nothing and now has a shot at recovery??? ASSHOLES!!
I’ve tried to be compassionate towards the Schindlers, I’ve been compassionate towards the Schindlers up until this point where they and their attorneys are effectively jerking around every politician and their dog, tying up the courts with appeals that have already been tossed out, and now will make a last ditch appeal to the US Supreme Court which would essentially involve the court overturning it’s own ruling! Between a snow ball suddenly flying out of hell and their success in that…what are the odds?
I personally think the Schindlers and their attorney’s should be held in contempt of court and hope that if DCP attempts to remove Terri Schiavo from her death bed in order to take her into custody that she dies in their arms so they know what a fucking circus they’ve made of this woman’s life and the Schindlers, DCP, Jeb Bush, Daddy Bush, and Congress sued to hell and back again by Michael Schiavo for not allowing this woman to die, as per HER WISHES, with dignity!
regards,
widdley
Wow, widdley.
Tell us how you really think.
Given that this is Jeb’s territory, and the past actions of the Florida Legislature, I wouldn’t be surprised if they called out the National Guard to go and “rescue that poor woman.” Hell, given her brain state, they should make her an honorary Republican politician. Within a few years, she could be the state governor or US president. I think it would be an improvement over the present conditions.
Irrelevant rant warning: I wonder how far the deluded parents would be willing to go if Michael had backed away years ago? Once the heart goes out, she could be hooked up to a heart-lung machine. I bet her body could continue to metabolize for hundreds of years if they put enough time, money and stupidity into the effort.
Damn. When you put it that way, I guess it is slimy. I consider myself chastised, and I’ll rethink that part of it.
I’d like to know what Terri meant by “living like this” – whether she meant “let me die if I’m in a coma and don’t know what’s going on around me”, or “let me die if I can’t take care of myself.” Isn’t there a difference?
Some of us might be okay with life-support if we have the ability to interact with our loved ones, even if it’s only blinking our eyes to signifiy yes or no to a question. Some of us would want to die if we had to depend on others for basic care.
Yet what most of us say is what Terri said. It’s not specific enough, especially when the words come from a young, healthy woman, for whom death is far off in the future.