Let the poor woman die already!

The BBQ Pit
41

Wow, I have to call bullshit. He ‘set about accepting that’? Well, I agree that he’d have to come to terms with his wife in this condition. There is no way in Hell that that could be taken easily. And if she told him she wanted to be taken off life support without any thing even remotely backing it up (notes, letters, a shitload of people), he must be burying his head, crying, into his pillow every night.

And yet, he seems to have his head buried in something (er, someone) else. He’s already engaged to the new woman, and is waiting for Terry to die so he can re-marry.

If he sees her as already dead, he’s emotionally detached from her. Evidence of that being that he’s deleted for civility another woman.

So why not get a divorce and let her parents have the Power of Attorney (I think that’s the power being sought, correct if wrong)? It can’t be the life insurance as he’s been offered millions to give up the fight.

Oh, and the point brought up about his love for her? Busted. He’s trying to get his wife to die so he can marry the new woman. Family be damned.

I can’t fault him for wanting an end to this whole thing. But taking into account how he’s going about it says a lot about him, and therefore makes me discount much of what he says.

But as long as I have your attention Doctor J, could you give a “cold” clinical analysis about possible benefits of stem-cell research in this case? Would it have any benefit? It probably warrants a new thread, but I haven’t seen this discussed anywhere else. Ignore if it would be a serious hijack.

42

Medical care isn’t keeping me alive, you freaking dope. I am. I eat and drink on my own. It’s the feeding tube that’s the artificial part, not the concept of food.

If that’s your idea of entertainment, I’m sorry it’s being denied you. She’d choke; that’d surely be more fun. Again, see the MPSIMS thread where DoctorJ notes that, even if the parents were right and she could be trained to swallow food, they wouldn’t be able to remove the feeding tube because the risk that she’d choke would be too great.

Do you practice being this fucking dense, or does it come naturally? If you have a relative who’s killed or seriously injured, do you just stop thinking about them and ignore them? You toss their wishes out the window? “Uncle Jeff asked me to donate money to the orphanage in his name, but he’s dead and he won’t know the difference, so fuck it.” You moron. Strange as it may sound, we Earthlings generally feel a sense of obligation to our dead loved ones. Your argument is ‘He’s found someone else during the last 15 years while his wife has lain in the hospital as a vegetable, surely that means he should just ignore the wife and forget the whole business. Just because they were married and he was entrusted with her care doesn’t mean he’d feel any kind of obligation or attachment.’ Yiy. It’s distasteful to you that this guy (who actually knew the woman, which you didn’t despite your explanations of he should do) wants to take her off a feeding tube, but you’re okay with him divorcing a vegetable? What the hell sense does that make?

Are you even trying? If he couldn’t wait, he could’ve divorced her and gotten married years ago.

43

But if he just wanted to be rid of her and marry someone else, all he’d have to do is divorce her. It would be easy.

As others have pointed out, there really isn’t any money involved at this point. So if one accepts both of those points, why on Earth would he be going through this? The only thing I can come up with is that he really does want to do what he considers to be the right thing for his wife.

Let’s say I get on a flight tomorrow that mysteriously disappears over the ocean. After a few years with no sign of my return, CrazyCatLady would probably assume I was dead and start trying to accept that, which could very well involve getting close to someone else, and maybe even building a new life with that person. (I hope she would.) That wouldn’t mean that she cared about me any less, or that she was less interested in taking care of any affairs of mine that might be left over. It’s just accepting reality. I don’t think anyone would fault her for it.

In a way, it would be worse, because there’s always the chance that I could show back up, Tom Hanks-style, but he has seen and has accepted the medical reality that Terri is not coming back.

I’m so far from the cutting edge that my opinion is not worth much more than anyone else’s. But keep in mind that this is not just a deficit of one type of cell with one function, which you see in many of the processes being targeted by SCR. This is an entire cerebral cortex you’d have to regrow. Since even the most basic of stem-cell-based treatments is probably a decade or two from practical use at this point, I cannot imagine that such a thing will be possible in my lifetime, or Terri Schiavo’s.

44

Yes, of course that is why he didn’t divorce her and didn’t accept the million dollar bribe, because he wants her to die so he can marry his new, improved wife.
Does that really make sense in that warped little mind of yours?

45

I’ve seen several people use phrases like this- he’s “already” hooked up with another girlfriend.

The word ‘already’ confuses me in the context of this case. I agree that a husband should mourn his wife, and that it’s indecent to get involved with someone else immediately after her death.

But this man’s wife has been dead (brain-dead, at least) for FIFTEEN YEARS. That’s a damned long time, and I’d think it was stranger if he hadn’t met someone else after that long.

Keeping her corpse animated for fifteen years after her death is sick and disturbed. It’s the stuff of mad-scientist movies from the fifties.

46

I’m not an expert in this case, but aren’t the parents the ones bringing every possible outsider that they can into this case. Hell, congress is involved in this mess because the parents simply can’t accept that their daughter isn’t there anymore.

And it’s been fifteen years. This is hardly some new woman that he’s looking to shack up with. If his wife was physically dead instead of brain dead this wouldn’t even be an issue.

47

Uh, it’s not my ‘warped little mind’ that is a main factor in this case. Some facts to consider are his refusal to file for divorce, the fact that there aren’t enough credible witnesses to say she said she’d want to die under this circumstance, the fact that she was so adamant about not wanting to be on life support yet never made it known to her family…huh? We should consider the life of the woman that will die?

I can’t even continue this, I don’t know where the angle is of those wanting her to die.

Listen up, and read carefully. Michael is engaged to another woman. He’s been offered and refused millions of dollars for her life. Either way, he’s banking some cash. So it can’t be about money, right? Nope, there would be nothing to debate there. :rolleyes:

I’m so tired of this shit I’ll just link it to my own life to shorten the typing.

If, God forbid, my wife suffers something similar to Terry Schiavo, I’d probably shoot myself when I found out she was gone. I’m not kidding, I’d likely kill myself if I had to confront the idea of not having her in my life.

I sure as fuck wouldn’t go out to find a replacement and parade her around for the world to see. The love I have for my wife would alone keep me from fucking some other chick.

And I sure as shit wouldn’t start banging another woman while trying to convince the world that I wanted my “veggie” wife to die because she told me, with less-than-stellar-witnesses to back me up, that she wanted to die.

48

It’s been *fifteen bloody years * Duffer. His wife has been dead for fifteen years. Somewhere in those *fifteen years * he fell in love with another woman.

And letting her die is doing no more than letting nature run it’s course. Her brain, the part of Terry that was Terry, isn’t there. The only shred of evidence that she may still be there is an edited video tape that the parents have been shopping around to every quack and media outlet in the hopes of drumming up support because they can’t let their daughter go.

I respect that you have very strong feelings about this Duffer, but you’re letting it cloud your judgement. This is not about money or “shacking up” with some new woman.

49

Shorter duffer: Because Michael refuses to accept money, it’s obviously about the money.

50

Again, she was twenty years old–very few people seriously discuss this sort of thing at her age. It was not an explicit declaration that she made; it was a collection of references in passing.

The court, which heard the weight of the evidence on both sides, found the evidence to be “clear and compelling” that Terri would not want to be kept alive in this circumstance. You have heard bits and pieces of the evidence filtered through emotionally-charged sources, and you disagree.

I should also point out that I discuss and talk and write about this often, since i have a professional interest in hospice and end-of-life issues, but I don’t think I have ever discussed my own wishes directly with my parents. I’m 29 and healthy–why would it ever come up?

I am reading very carefully, and I’m still confused. It might be because I’ve been working all night. But, he has been offered large sums of money to turn over her care to her parents, and he has turned it down. There is not very much money left from the initial settlement that would go to him when she dies, and he has pledged any of that to charity. Even if he didn’t give it away, there isn’t enough there to make all this worth it. How is he set up to “bank some cash”?

Surely you don’t expect everyone to feel like this before you accept their love as genuine, right? Because lots of people lose their spouses and eventually remarry or get involved with someone else. Would you say that their ability to do this means that they never really loved their first spouses in the first place?

51

I think the husband is a caring husband who is doing the best he can. I think the parents are caring parents who are doing the best they can. IMO, there is a big difference between “pulling the plug” and allowing someone who cannot breathe on their own to die and “pulling the feeding tube” and allowing someone who cannot eat to slowly starve to death.

I had a dog who had cancer and was unable to digest food down it was agonizing to see him waste away before my eyes. I can’t imagine how anguishing it would be to watch my daughter die.

It’s a crappy situation and I do hope that there is resolution for all parties soon. Try as we might to make this into a black and white issue, it’s not. I can certainly see where both sides are coming from.

52

Don’t fly on any Fed Ex cargo planes ok?

Is this guy not supposed to touch another person for 15 years?

53

Yes, I know she’s been dead for 15 years. That’s why we’re debating the feeding tube and ramifications of taking her off it. And trying to figure out whom should have the say in taking the tube out. (Though how a 15 year old corpse is somehow still benefitting from a feeding tube is beyond my comprehension.)

Of course, saying she’s dead is still open for debate. There have been more than a few video-taped airings of her responding to family and friends. But we must ignore those as they don’t support the premise of her being the equivalent of a radish, right?

My ire in this case isn’t so much the debate of “right-of-life”. It’s the parties involved. Specifically the husband.

I take things like this and apply it to my own life. Not always the best, or samrtest, thing to do, but it’s where I form my opinions from. I’d even challenge anyone to deny they do the same.

If one of my sister’s husbands tried to do the same under the same circumstances, it wouldn’t get anywhere near the Supreme Court. Here’s why.

My sister, without telling any of us in my family her desire to be left to die if she was in this state, is suddenly in that state. Then, her husband, fighting us based on what he says she said, wants her to die. (There is no way to soften this. She will die.)

None of us have ever heard her say she would want to die in this situation. It may be best she does pass away, but there is only her husband that can testify that that’s what she wants.

Maybe she came to this conclusion, maybe not. The only way to know is to trust what the husband says. Now let’s look at reasons to trust the husband.

A) He has a mistress. Well, that doesn’t help.

B) He proposed and is waiting to marry the other woman. OK, nothing wrong there, you have to carry on in life. But divorce would be so easy.

C) We have to respect the absolute love he has for Terry. He’s only looking out for her best interests. Between court dates and fucking the new chick, he has more love for Terry than her family.
I have pretty much no influence over what happens, and it’s true that I take this case very seriously/personally. All I can do is impotently type letters that make up a post.

I just hope some of the “opposition” posters see where I’m coming from.

54

Don’t be dense. Just let me know that that is a whoosh and I can go on with my day happily safe in the knowledge that you really aren’t that dense.

The point could also be made that if she’s so capable of recovery, why does she still have the feeding tube after 15 years.

This is a sticking point right here. It’s been fifteen years. She’s not the new chick. Unless he was shagging her before or shortly (really shortly) his wife started doing her best impersonation of a carrot, she is not the “new chick.”

Face it duffer, he’s not getting anything out of this prolonged struggle. The money is mostly gone and he’s turned down large amounts of cash. He could divorce her and marry the “new chick” easily. Why is it so hard for you to even consider the possibilty that this actually is what his wife wanted and that’s why he is fighting so hard?

55

Ah, get to answer my own post. Michael Schiavo has been seeing the “new chick” Jodi Centzone since 1995, five years after Terry Schiavo was hospitalized. They have two kids together. Not exactly the picture of a sordid affair. Cite, though it’s a fairly hostile one.

Here’s another good one.

56

OK, so, she’s a vegetable, she’s a shell of a human being. Does that mean that I can go and plug her in the head and give her a merciful death without being charged with murder? If not, then by definition she is still a human being and she shouldn’t be allowed to starve to death. Simple as that for me.

57

Out of hundreds of hours of videos, I shouldn’t think it would be too hard to cherry-pick out a few minutes of what appears to be reponses. duffer, she has no cerebral cortex! She cannot think, she has no higher functions left - nothing! Her brain will not grow back. She’s not a vegetable, but she’s not even at the level of a cat or dog, either. There is nothing human left in her.

And the comments that her parents would amputate all her limbs and put her on a ventilator to keep this husk of a former human being alive are absolutely disgusting. “Pathological” is right.

58

It’s entirely possible. And I’m in a down-swing so some of my posts over the last 2 weeks may not make any sense. I hate being seen as confrontational among friends but my mood is really low and bitter, and I’m taking it out here. For that I apologize.

What I don’t understand is if the guy is so much in love with his wife, why is he already set to marry the woman he’s engaged to when Terry dies? And why not just get the divorce so he can move on?

It seems that most believe she’s brain-dead, and therefore little more than a body housing a set of lungs that convert enough oxygen to keep her heart beating. OK, I’m worn out enough over this that I’ll cede that as well.

I just don’t understand the argument that he’s a caring husband looking out for her interests when he’s already started a new life with another woman. Yes, I know it’s his right and it’s also right to do so.

I take my marriage vows very seriously and see him in the light of being a married man. I pray I’m never in his position, but I can’t dismiss the fact that it’s his wife. And I view his actions in the same way.

I think this is too personal to me and I’m not really adding to the discussion. I’ll bow out of the thread and just respond to anyone’s questions directed to me. I won’t change anyone’s opinion and mine won’t be changed. Really no reason for me to keep posting based on the Catch-22 this has become.

59

From an ethics standpoint, there is a huge difference between doing something that will intentionally kill the patient (active euthanasia) and removing something that is keeping the patient alive (passive euthanasia). The former is why Jack Kevorkian is in jail, and the latter is something I did probably a dozen times last year.

All of this talk about bullets in the head makes me want to post a longer Medical Ethics 101 about euthanasia, nonmalfeasance vs. patient autonomy, and futile care. Don’t have time to do it right at the moment, but I’ll see what I can do later.

60

Goddammit

No current like, but Terri Schiavo has been subpoenad to testify before Congress.

Fine. Let’s wheel this poor woman in and let people see for themselves. Christ.