Oh, and as you’re a lapsed Catholic I find it so very interesting you keep using that as a reason to support your perverse belief in ‘life’ at all costs.
What Terri has shown us in the moral bankruptcy of those who would force their way of living death on others.
They don’t want to have abortions so no one should have the ability to have one. They believe that they shouldn’t choose when they die, so no one else should have that option either. These are only two examples of the arrogant moral bankruptcy of those who force their will upon others in the guise of their religion, even though everyone else doesn’t even worship their deity.
Her husband took her to California to try experimental treatment. He became a respiratory nurse to better help her. (Refer to abstractappeal for the cite.) After 7 years he gave up hope.
oh, and don’t link to terrisfight.org. That site is run by her parents and is hardly objective.
What I and others find insulting is that you hold on to lies, spout them as if they were objective facts, slander Micheal viciously, and then act victimized for Terri as well as yourself when called on it.
I did not decide to believe “Michael’s” side. I didn’t “decide to believe” anything-I looked at the different sides, and drew my conclusions. Mostly from the testimony of medical professionals, lawyers, and the guardian ad litem for Terri Schiavo. All of them concluded the same thing.
And no, she couldn’t swallow. There was evidence that the reflex could be retrained-but she’d still BE in danger of choking. So of course he’s not going to try it-it would be too dangerous. And then her body would been subjected to horrible spasms and vomitting, and suffocation, rather than being allowed to shut down on its own.
And the abstract appeal site is NOT Michael’s side, it was made by someone completely unassociated with the case, who looked at ALL of the facts.
Terri WAS dead. All that was left for him to do was carry out her wishes as to the disposition of her body.
This whole thing about Michael starting another family (after being encouraged to start dating again by Terri’s parents, by the way) is really the cheapest of cheap shots. Why should he have been expected to become a monk for an empty body. Terri was gone. She was incapable of even limited companionship. She was brain dead, There was nothing there to be faithful to.
Even so, it’s a lie to say he “abandoned her.” He never stopped taking care of her and never stopped trying to carry out her wishes despite the attempted bribes, the public slander and the death threats against himself and his family. While the parents were running around chasing every television crew they could find and selling donor lists to spammers Michael quietly remained at Terri’s side, never leaving the hospice, until the end. How anyone could call that “abandonment” is absurd. And let’s not forget that others attempted to bribe him to abandon her and he refused,
You are severely misinformed. Where do you get your information, Sean Hannity.
Do you even know the purpose of a hospice? [hint: it’s not to provide therapy]
No physical therapy is possible for a person who has no cerbral cortex. Terri had no consciousness.
The hospice did not allow the parents to try to pour water down her throat because Terri couldn’t swallow and she would have choked to death. The court established with three separate tests that Terri could not swallow food or water and that any attempt to feed or hydrate her orally presented a severe risk of choking. It would have been grossly negligent, unprofessional and unethical to let her idiot family members try to choke her to death with bottled water.
wonderwench, you have consistently and throughly proven you have no grasp of the facts, or the law, in this case. But despite speaking from a point of ignorance, you loudly, continuously, and annoyingly continue to misrepresent the facts and call it an opinion.
You think there wasn’t enough evidence that Ms. Schiavo wished that “after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives.” Over 15 independent judges who reviewed the evidence of two trials (unlike you), were aware of the facts (unlike you), and had a modicum of critical thinking ability (unlike you), disagree. As do a majority of people who have taken the time to acquaint themselves with the actual facts of the case.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. If you believe that Ms. Schiavo, 10 years later, wished to remain in a persistent vegetative state, with no higher brain function or any chance of recovering, you are free to do you. However, you do so despite the evidence and with little to no actual knowledge of the case. As you’ve proven, no amount of facts, arguments, or knowledge is going to change your opinion. It remains your perogative to wallow in ignorance.
However, the vile mudslinging, the hate-filled innuendos, and the mindless repeating of false information is not your opinion. THAT is what I object to the most. You go well beyond advancing an opinion, and instead you spread lies and vile insults, and pretend to do it all from a place of higher moral authority. THAT is what sickens me the most about you.
wonderwench No one’s linking to Michael’s website. The site that’s linked as the actual transcripts from the trials. Not someone’s interpetation or emotions or morally. All the information, the timelines, the rational behind the Judge’s—NOT Michael’s reasons for believing Terri wouldn’t want to live in the state she was in, is there.
This isn’t about Micheal. Once he allowed the Judge to rule on the case, he was no longer able to make the decision, the court did. Micheal could have been banging porn stars or became a monk, it’s all irrevelant, once the court ruled.
I can make the same point about you - but I won’t resort to exchanging insults.
So, according to your POV, we should be allowed to euthanize nursing home patients who are severely disabled.
Terri was not dead. She was not terminally ill. She was severely brain-damaged.
The conclusion that she had no consciousness is in dispute.
Again - when in doubt, do we wish, as a matter of public policy, to err on the side of life or death?
Again - what are our responsibilities as a society to severely disabled people who are unable to speak for themselves and who have left no clear documentation regarding their wishes?
All you are doing is proving the inadequacy of the legal system.
The Judge decided that Terri’s life was not worth living - the court documents include a portion of his ruling which justifies withdrawing treatment for the convenience of the family.
All I am asking for is that we be honest about what was done to Terri. It was euthanasia by the state based upon an assessment that her life was not worth living and that her death would be more convenient for her family (Michael).
Terri’s case became a global soap opera precisely because the facts in evidence may be interpreted to radically different ends. A difference of interpretation does not make either side ignorant or misinformed.
I am not insulting you because you draw different conclusions from the evidence. I disagree with your interpretation but recognize your right to make it.
I strongly recommend the Harvard Crimson piece to which I linked earlier in the thread. It is a good summary of why those of us who were horrified by the withholding of nutrition for Terri feel as we do.
Which is why a guardian ad litem was appointed, to make sure.
The judge didn’t decide whether or not her life was worth living, but what her wishes were, based on the best evidence available. Her parents were not ABLE to provide clear or convincing evidence, and were found to have lied many times.
And a hospice is NOT the same thing as a nursing home. Do you even KNOW what a hospice is? If so, tell us.
The Judge did exactly that - he passed judgement that her life was not worth living.
And thank you for shouting. Putting someone in hospice is generally done when life expectancy is no more than a few months. Terri was not terminally ill - her life expectancy was much longer than that. Nursing home care is what she should have been given.
** wonderwench** What I’m doing, what we’re all doing, is asking that you stop repeating things that are not true.
You don’t agree with the ruling, fine. But don’t say that the cite is biased in towards Micheal. Don’t claim that Terri’s parents somehow by being her parents, knew her wishes. They didn’t even know she was seeing the Doctor because she was trying to get pregnant…the same doctor they helped Micheal sue for malpractice, for missing Terri’s Bulemia…which according to them she didn’t have. They agreed then, that she was a PVS, now they say she’s not. Were her parents lying then or are they lying now?
The guy didn’t even have to go the court, as legal guardian he could have had the tube removed. He didn’t, he allowed the parents the opportunity to convince an independent person; what he already knew. You “guys” scream about swallowing tests, and therapy and MRIs that weren’t done, ignoring the reasons why they weren’t done and to add insult to injury, you ignore that this woman bedridden for 15 years never got a bedsore; because her husband make sure she didn’t.
You don’t like the way this played out, then change that laws and allow people to die via injection as opposed to “pulling” the plug. Saying “err on the side of life”, rings hollow when the person you’re talking about has no cerebral cortex…unless you consider life to no more than breathing and passing waste into a diaper for another 30 years…never to wake up.
You wouldn’t let an animal ‘live’ like that…or maybe you would.
There was no conflict of interest in the way of Michael’s guardianship.
It’s a moot point anyway. The decsion was made by the court, not by Michael.
I think it’s pretty clear that wonderwench is not really interested in a sincere debate. If she hasn’t paid any attention to facts by now, she isn’t likely to start.
On preview:
The purpose of a hospice is to provide end of life care and comfort. It is not to provide physical therapy. Whether you think Terri should have been in a hospice is beside the point. You complained that the hospice staff wasn’t providing physical therapy, something that is a.) not their job and b.) impossible in Terri’s case.