[stan_sipple]

The Terri Schiavo case is obviously just the tip of the iceberg and the "living wills" that will be our salvation are not as air-tight as everyone thinks.

[atomicpossum]

The Terri Schiavo case is obviously just the tip of the iceberg and the "living wills" that will be our salvation are not as air-tight as everyone thinks.

Of course not. Given the slippery slope, the zeal of the pro-euthanasia lobby, and the entropy of convenience over decency, this is just throwing open the door...

[krazyrep]

Lawyers can argue anything in court, but at least in Pennsylvania, Advance Directives (which both I and my wife have) contain very explicit language regarding a patient's wishes to receive/not receive food and water without regard to "reflexes." Such a statement would carry some weight in court even if a document isn't held to be technically valid from a legal viewpoint. In addition, most documents of this nature enable the person to designate unequivocally who has the authority to make medical decisions if a question arises which is not covered by the document itself.

Thus, having some sort of written, signed and notarized document makes third parties subject to a substantially higher standard of proof of something like forgery or that the patient was not of sound mind at the time the document was signed before the court will totally reject the contents. A half-remembered conversation seven years after the fact would hardly suffice to overturn it.

While being as specific as possible in an advance directive is certainly a good idea, it is not necessary to overdo it. That is the whole purpose of designating a surrogate or proxy.

[Outland]

Making your intentions known in a living will (and documents of the like) are fairly straight forward... if your will is to have the "plug" pulled. If you instead want to continue life support, the battle may be tougher.

In Texas, it doesn't matter what documents you have or who you've assigned power of attorney. If you can't pay, you get 10 days to go elsewhere or they will pull the "plug" anyway. Thank GW for that.

[eccentric]

I sent this letter to Florida lawmakers last week:

"Sir/ Ma'am; I went to the site recommended by the state of Florida for Living Wills. But I noticed that the Living Will sited there states only that no extra efforts be made to preserve or prolong life. What if a person wants life prolonging efforts?

"I have heard many people say that this issue about Terri Schiavo could have been avoided if she had filled out a Living Will. Be if she didn't want medical care discontinued, why would she have filled out a Living Will form?

"There seems to be a catch 22. Terri didn't fill out a Living Will because she didn't want her medical treatment discontinued. Yet, because she didn't fill out a Living Will, the state assumes she doesn't want life support.

"Is there a recommended form for residents of Florida to fill out to state that they DO want medical treatment continued?"

Arnold Cooperman was nice enough to respond:

I agree with you that the primary thrust of the Living Will is to discontinue medical treatment in certain situations. However, the Living Will form in Florida Statutes section 765.303 does provide options. You can choose not to have life-prolonging procedures if you have a terminal condition, or are in an end-stage condition, or are in a persistent vegetative state. By not choosing any of these you are choosing to continue life-prolonging procedures in those situations. In addition, the form allows you to provide additional instructions. I assume you could make it clear there that you do want life-prolonging procedures to continue.

To which I responded: "unless a guardian tells a judge otherwise.............."

Then I highlighted, repeated and enlarged the line from Cooperman's letter: By not choosing any of these you are choosing to continue life-prolonging procedures in those situations.

and I signed off with a copy of the last line of his letter "I assume you could make it clear there that you do want life-prolonging procedures to continue. " and When you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME.

[PistolPaknMama]

Anybody who considers themselves alive today should at least read these links and decide what's best for their own desires.

Are you a target for euthanasia? (must read!)

National Right to Life – What is a Will to Live and Why You Need to Sign One

[Mark in the Old South]

Am I the only one who has noticed they have reversed the purpose of a living will. When this trend first appeared you needed a living will to get them to pull the plug because the courts would naturally assume you would wish to live. Now it is suddenly reversed 180 degrees. Those who cite the need for a living will are nuts. You need a piece of paper to keep them from killing you? What a world. Welcome to the Fatherland

[SophiaP]

What I think is so important is the slant of the news on this. So many of my relatives get their information from the news (as I wrote in my own blog www.riskywest.blogspot.com) but here we have just one case getting all of these resources. It's so unbalanced that the average voter really isn't getting the information that they need to make decisions in the next election.

Terry Schaivo is just one case out of hundreds, but an excellent example of using the media to create a unified impression of perspective and politics.