Posted on 03/18/2005 6:06:28 PM PST by mlmr
The Schiavo case is heartbreaking. I admire everyone who is involved in saving this woman from this unnecessary and early death. I do not believe she should die and I think her husband is a monster. My heart goes out to her parents.
On the other hand, I am wondering, what can of worms are we opening here? The 1963 Civil Rights Act opened the door to the judicial activism we suffer from today. Most proponents saw the Civil Rights act as a good beginning in righting years of wrongs. But the unintended consequences have weakened our government.
Roe v Wade was intended by its proponents to help poor women... but its unintended consequence has been the total reconceptualization of rights and the essence of human life.
The American with Disabilities Act had wonderful intentions of helping poor wheelchair bound people join into the mainstream. The unintended consequences of the ADA is the disabilities industies, the lawsuits, and the mainstreaming of adults and children who need constant custodial care.
The Mental Health Privacy Laws were to protect people from the stigma of mental illness in their records but has also prevented families from being involved in their care while the patient is too ill to give consent.
The HIPPA privacy acts, was to prevent medical records from abuse. It may be working, there really isnt any study confirming this, but on the other hand the paperwork is overwhelming and costly.
Thomas Sowell writes about the unintended consequences in economic terms of the good intentions of kind people who only look at the first result, but not the secondary results of their actions.
The better thing would be for Jeb Bush to develop a spine and put a couple of state troopers in there, with a nurse.
If you feel the need to VANITY, use one of the 20 threads already devoted to Terry.
Are their any adverse consequences in this case?
=====
There can be, but people who think ahead, can eliminate this problem if they prepare correctly. My mom, rest her soul, prepared a written statement, witnessed, that she did not want to be kept alive on any form of life support system. We kept her wish, in this document, until her death. If it had been the case, where there was controversy about handling her, the document would have closed the issue. I too have prepared such a document for my family, to prevent the type of absolute tragic mess that this recent affair created, not only for the poor woman, but her family members as well.
I disagree...he is bringing up a specific topic that would be lost among the others.
To answer the point...I agree there is a conflict...the death penalty is left up to the states.
If you feel the need to VANITY, use one of the 20 threads already devoted to Terry.
I dont see this as a Vanity, I see this as a question about the judical and legislative directions in what will be landmark decisions.
To answer the point...I agree there is a conflict...the death penalty is left up to the states
So one unintended consequence could be more issues around states responsibiliy for the death penalty.
What are the unintended consequences of her death? That the value of life is further diminished? That people with Altzheimers, Parkinsons, the quadraplegics, can be starved because their "quality of life" is over?
Where does the slippery slope end? And who decides? A spouse who has chosen to live with another woman and have children with her? Does he have any monetary benefits coming from the malpractise suite?
Many unanswered questions.
I was just thinking the same thing, and posted a similar thought on another thread:
"Why do they want her dead? Why does CNN want the poll to read that her husband can effectively kill her? What is to be gained here by establishing this precedent? What is in the pipeline coming down for a court decision about life and death?
What is to be gained as a society by lauding the sanctioning of death of innocents such as this?
Does anyone have any particulars?"
Do you think starving a human being is humane?
What are the unintended consequences of her death? That the value of life is further diminished? That people with Altzheimers, Parkinsons, the quadraplegics, can be starved because their "quality of life" is over?
I have no quibble with any of your issues and agree with you. But I wanted to discuss what we also may be losing as well as what we are winning.
What is to be gained as a society by lauding the sanctioning of death of innocents such as this?
If we can kill with impunity, we solve a lot of social problems in this country...at great cost...for the evil always costs.
Do you think starving a human being is humane?
No. If you read the thread, I do not. But I want to know what the second degree and third degree consequences are. Perhaps it would be wise to look at the consequences for both sides.
I think it's a marvelous idea! And a great time to set that precedent!!!
Marvelous to look at the consequences or marvelous that Congress has intervened?
"The American with Disabilities Act had wonderful intentions of helping poor wheelchair bound people join into the mainstream. The unintended consequences of the ADA is the disabilities industies, the lawsuits, and the mainstreaming of adults and children who need constant custodial care."
What does:
"mainstreaming of adults and children who need constant custodial care."
I don't get your meaning here.
Yeah, she dies.
What does:
"mainstreaming of adults and children who need constant custodial care."
I don't get your meaning here.
There are adults with mental and sometime physical disabilities who have been mainstreamed into society (think of the mentally ill homeless) who would have been in safe custodial care if not for thoughtless legislation.
Similar issues with mainstreamed mentally and severely handicapped children who are unable to manage in mainstream settings but are there becasue of the fear of lawsuit.
He did save her once. I guess its up to us now.
Whenever I hear the words "Unintended Consequences" I think another liberal is trying to make excuses for the failings of a liberal program or idea.
The fact that we are even faced with this problem is the unintended consequence of appointing activist judges, social movements to legitimize euthanasia, changing definitions of marriage, and so on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.