That is why I qualified my answer.
Swabbing a wound with alcohol is medical treatment.
For many people in a hospital, suspending all medical treatment kills them.
(bolding mine) Well, technically that would be allows them to die, since medical treatment of the kind you’re referring to is more specifically medical intervention.
Five years ago when she was ully aware, she made her wishes known. Those wishes should be respected. Her parents, although sympathetic, have no place here.
It’s not their decision to make, it’s not Mike’s, it certainly isn’t the government or any church.
Humane for whom? I had to make the same decision for my daughter and I let her go to a place she wasn’t suffering anymore.
For the record, Michael Shiavo did turn Terri’s life over to the courts (she was a ward of the court) just in case his decision making process was tainted. In the courts he then took the position that Terri didn’t want to ‘live’ like that. Having the opportunity to be in court, but with no chance to win the parents decided to vilify him and turn the case into a media circus. If Michael hadn’t turned Terri over to the courts he could have made the decision at any time and that would be that.
Ají de Gallina
Have you ever had to make the decision to pull the plug on someone that you love? I have twice! Once for my mother ( Brain dead after 2 massive strokes in 48 hours ) and once for my wife of 30 years ( Hep. C, total liver failure, in a coma on full life support in a ICU for 6+ months ) and both times it was the hardest thing I have ever done and something that I wish didn’t have to do but that needed to be done. The decision to remove Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube and other medical support was a decision for the doctors and Michael Schiavo only to make , the goverment and media had no business getting involved in such a deeply personal and tragic matter.
What makes you say that Terri Schiavo died five years ago? She’s still alive, of course! I mean, if it was possible for her to be alive without a brain, then surely it’s possible for her to be alive without the rest of her body, too, right?
Alternately, you can take the rational view that she’s been dead for over 20 years. There were still biological processes going on, but the person that was Terri Schiavo did not go on with them.
Humane for her parents. If her husband was right and she really was brain dead, she was incapable of suffering. If her parents were right, then a helpless woman was going to be starved to death. If there was a possibility that someone wanted to let my child die and there was nothing I could do about, it would be torture. Her parents were willing to take over her care, so what was the downside? Lots of spouses drift apart, but the bond between a parent and a child is forever.
Like you, I had to make the decision to take a loved one off of life support and it was horrible. I can not imagine how much more horrible it would have been if I had believed there was hope for recovery and someone else was insisting it happen anyway. Let the parents take over for a while and try to help her and then if that doesn’t work you can still remove the feeding tube. Why the rush?
This is not a “what if?” scenario. She was brain dead and her treating physicians had all opined that recovery was physically impossible.
What’s the downside? How about knowing that your wife who you love and care about does not want to have heroic life support if she’s a vegetable? Could you honestly walk away from a spouse and leave their body in a horrible situation that you know they did not want to ever happen to them?
And I don’t know if her parents can be looked at as being totally selfless, as they were mad when her husband spent her malpractice settlement on her care, rather than splitting the cash with the parents. Maybe this left him with the feeling that they might be suboptimal caregivers.
Regardless, once you’re an adult and married, your spouse becomes your default decision-maker. Unless you have a pretty bad marriage, your spouse knows you and your wishes way better than your parents do.
What rush? She collapsed in 1990, the lawsuit wasn’t until after 2000 (not sure exactly), and they didn’t withdraw the feeding tube until 2005. Fifteen years of rehab and attempts at treatment, followed by a prolonged court process, isn’t exactly a rush.
It was one sided, it was for purely political gain, and it was wrong.
Sadly, this is still a fairly common viewpoint on various right-wing websites. Nothing will change their minds. They completely vilified him.
However, he WAS still her husband, and legally had the rights and *responsibilities *inherent to that. By all indications, he still loved her- so much so, in fact, that he was willing to be vilified on the public stage in order to respect her wishes. He didn’t gain anything from doing so. I hope that, if I somehow end up in Terry’s place, that my wife will be half as brave as Michael was.
Was there ever a test for actual brain activity in this case? I don’t mean the tests for reactions to physical stimuli but actual brain scans for activity.
They couldn’t do a brain scan, because there was no brain. And yes, there was 3D imaging of various sorts to confirm that, and after they let her body die, the autopsy confirmed it also.
I know. I was speaking just about what was going on over here.
Other than suffering the indignity of being kept alive for decades as a moaning vegetable. I know she wasn’t aware of what was going on, but I think a lot of us shudder at the thought. And then there’s the small matter of keeping your word to your spouse in the direst circumstances.
My experience is that this is more of a stalling tactic than an argument.
How was he acting as such? What I recall is that his in-laws and others made false accusations against the man.
I was one of the resident experts on Schiavo around here at the time. (I was in residency doing nights, so I had a lot of free time.) I can’t say I feel a bit differently. Her husband clearly had the right to act as her surrogate, and I don’t think he ever had anything but her best interests at heart.
Meanwhile, her parents’ actions were nothing short of ghastly at times. I doubt they’re bad people, but they were blinded by false hope and they were certainly latched onto and encouraged by bad people.
It bothers me that advocates for the disabled hitched their wagon to this case, because they’re making a different argument than the relevant one. Of course Terri Schiavo had a right to go on living in her situation, and to the best medical care and the most dignity possible. But she also had the right to not go on living in that situation, and that was where the argument came in.
An EEG done in 2002 showed no cortical activity. There were probably others done along the way, but that’s the one that is cited in the court papers.
Here are the ‘douchey’ actions of Michael Schiavo:
His most ‘douchey’ act would be saying in the insurance/malpractice trial that there was hope for his wife with radical, untried treatments and receiving a large sum of cash.
He then proceeded to be douchy by actually using that money on said radical treatments as well as excellent hospice treatments.
He was a total douche for being so caring of Terri’s care that she never got a bedsore.
At any time, this douche could have ordered the medical feeding tube removed and that would be it. Instead he kept up her care in hopes one of the treatments would work. Despite having the right to end her life at any time, some of the radical idiots point to a crazy nurse who claims she saw him try to kill her and complained that she ‘wouldn’t die’
At the encouragement of his in-laws, Michael then started dating other women and started a family.
He then decided that there was no hope for Terri and that her wishes to not be kept alive in such a manner should be fulfilled. Terri’s family then went apeshit on the ‘douche’ and started taking legal actions.
So Terri’s family decided to villify him and make end-runs around the courts. They also made it clear that their ‘love’ for Terri was more real than the ‘douche’ because they would happily cut off her limbs (dramatic clotting was in her near future).
At any point the douche could have ordered the feeding tube removed. Instead, he decided that he might be too prejudiced in the matter and turned Terri over as a ward of the courts. This made later offers of money to Michael not only insulting but also futile. He had no power over her.
The rest you all know. Michael took the one side and Terri’s parents took the other. Then a lot of politicians got involved in ways they had no right to, and a lot of them sacrificed political clout for a short term appeasement of the screaming moron brigade. (I wonder how much the Schiavo case figured into the massive losses the Republicans took in the 2006 elections).
Michael Schiavo could have prevented a lot of the circus by keeping his rights as Terri’s husband. But he did not start the circus.
When it was all said and done, he had Terri buried privately and quietly.
Can you look at this and call him a douche? Seriously?
What’s the rush? She suffered for 15 years as a vegetable! If I ever even get remotely like that, pull the plug and take a sword to my brain to make sure. I do not ever want to be in that position and if there was even a sliver of a chance I could be feeling something, then I want someone to end it as soon as possible. Terry made her wishes clear. There is no good coming from preserving life as long as possible. Sometimes people who want to die should just be allowed to