Click on my freeper name. I'm not a "he," and have a background in ethics, as well as Family Medicine and hospice work.
This is not hypothetical. It is the basis for all euthanasia vs. "letting nature take its course."
I am uncomfortable with the concept of substituted judgment(especially in this case), but have not argued that point in this thread.
The morphine drip and the gratuitous trip to the hospital to remove the tube were unethical, if the actual disease were the cause of Terri Schiavo's death. If she had been dying because of her disease, *or* if she were truly without consciousness or any reaction to her circumstances neither was needed. Both were artificial. Greer had ruled that no other medical interventions would be allowed. He could have just as well ordered that the tube be clamped and never used again.
These were the symbolic actions. And, they were meant to ensure her death.
But, the immediate and most sure cause of death was the March 8th order forbidding natural means of hydration and nutrition.
There was a chance - no matter how slim - that Terri could take enough hydration to keep her alive, had she been offered it. The certain, the unavoidable end of that order was her death within a given time period.
No one ever said that Terri said she would never want anyone to feed her, or give her a bit of ice chips or a sip of cool water.
The offering of hydration and nutrition by natural means is outside the power of legitimate law, which is meant to preserve the right to life, liberty and happiness - and in that order.
The doctrine of non-maleficence and the corollary Double Effect or of Unintended Effect is an old, respected scale on which to weigh end of life treatment. Greer chose to kill rather than treat Terri's life as an end in herself. He had the legal right to order that the artificial and medical treatments not be used. There was no legal right to forbid natural means of hydration, any more than he had the right to forbid natural means of respiration.
Think of it this way: if she had been on a ventilator, greer could have legally ordered the machine turned off and the tubing removed. He could not place Terri in a room with no oxygen or place a plastic bag over her head.
thank you for your calm and respectful tone and reasoned opinion on this matter. i find your personal experience, as a physician who has worked in hospice, especially compelling. you are being attacked simply for the view you hold, neither your tone nor your words have been offensive here. be assured that reasonable people see it that way.
For the third time, what makes you believe this?
There's a chance this ..., there's a chance that ... We can go on and on with that kind of logic. There's a chance that I can win the lottery, too, but I'm not spending the money yet.
And you would convict a man and send him to prison because of this "slim chance" that you cannot, and will not, support? That's the part that really frosts my shorts.