A TERRY SCHIAVO case QUESTION????

[ElPatriota]

I am a conservative. My brother in Law is a liberal. I am visiting them here in Florida and as usual we are having the samE old arguments. The SCHIAVO case poses a new disagreement.

I uas under the impression that Terry's parents **ASKED** for the custody of her daughter, as well as all finanacial responsabilities. (In other words, the government would NOT PAY FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO HER CARE)

My brother in law contends that he never heard the parents in any of the interviews he saw on the news - and they were many - ASK for FULL CUSTODY OF HER, AS WELL AS ALL FINANCIAL RESPONSABILITIES.

So help us, who is right? Me? Him? if neither, what are the facts? (please provide links or references to articles that support the correct position>

[8mmMauser]

I have been reading your posts here and elsewhere and would suppose we have much in common. But, here you slip off track and dig up very worn axioms almost as if you come into the topic predisposed. You also call on your formidable knowledge about people who are in brain damaged condition and default to the side of the one who wanted Terri murdered and his band of evil henchmen.

Because of this, I can only suppose the anomaly in your otherwise conservative thought is attributed to some bad experience. Your techniques of insults and calling bad good and good bad is something we have seen over and over and with intentional distruptors. I am hoping in your case, it is not because you are reading talking points from your handlers like the ones you resemble.

Be careful when you point to your resume as proof you are right. Some of us, me included, have considerable more experience in working with people like Terri and whom we loved all along, and we understand and come down on the opposite fence as do you. Because we know better, we tend to find your attempts at clinical dehumanization to be laughable were it not so tragic.

You present nothing new only a scary side of your otherwise conservative makeup we all can see. Can you see it?

[EternalVigilance]

Say, do any of you know the FACTS of this case?

Certainly more than you do. You don't even know the difference between living and dead, between human beings and vegetable matter.

So, when do you think the hospitals should start dehydrating all of the useless eaters?

[Goodgirlinred]

A decision to let someone go should be made in a timely manner. The time to have made a decision like this would have been after the doctors determined that her brain function was irreversibly devastated by the lack of oxygen. At that point, if she had been on a ventilator, which I believe she was, she should have been taken off the vent. If she survived that, fluids and nourishment should not have been withheld. To starve someone and dehydrate them, even if they are not aware, is inhumane and I believe it is against God's will. In my few years practicing in a hospital as an R.N. in the early 1980's, I never saw a patient denied fluids or nourishment. There were plenty of Do Not Resuscitate orders for those who were terminal and resuscitating would serve no purpose other than to prolong their suffering. Teri should have also had a DNR order. I don't know if she ever had to be resuscitated after hospitalization, but that should have been done once it was determined that to bring her back would not enrich her life.

[k2blader]

Thank you.. :-)

[Spiff]

Further, nobody was MURDERED.

Except for Terri Schiavo, of course, who was dehydrated and starved to death.

[EternalVigilance]

I am hoping in your case, it is not because you are reading talking points from your handlers like the ones you resemble.

You're a very hopeful person, my friend.

And much kinder than I...

[Nathan Zachary]

Really? "inalienable God-given rights" ? what does that mean exactly?
Does that mean, if you can feed yourself, you have the right to live?
I would agree.
Does it mean if you can think, therefore I am? I would agree.
But if your being has departed, that being your BRAIN, which is YOU, all that your are, then I see NO reason to keep the vessel alive, and in FACT, if you read a little Ambrose, he touches on that very subject, as does St. Augustine.
Perhaps you would be wise to refresh your memory of the teachings of the fathers on the subject. Obviously you consider yourself an "old timer" around here, Although I don't know if you are really older than I, but if you are, maybe your clutch is slipping a little, and you need to refresh your memory of what makes you- you, according to the church, and the teachings of the fathers. You see, i'm all for "inalienable God-given rights", but I also know what being "alive" is, and the difference of keeping a corpse alive after the mind, you, your being, has departed. THAT can actually be considered a sin. Even more so if you are Jewish.

[exDemMom]

In your delusional world, like George Felos', those who died in Auschwitz died a beautiful, peaceful, lovely death...

No, they didn't. They did not have their rooms filled with flowers and teddy bears stuffed into their arms while they starved to death. If only the Nazis would have done that, there would have been nothing wrong with what happened at Auschwitz. < /sarc >

[k2blader]

You're actually saying Terri was a "corpse" ???

[Spiff]

[Nathan Zachary]

She was quite plimp actually, far from being 'starved to death, and much fatter than she was in 1990, when she starved herself to death, literaly.

I don't know what it is with you, spiff, but when your brain is gone, your dead. how can you starve some one who isn't even there to death?

Her body was allowed to die as it should have long ago.
Until you can prove she was alive, concious, aware, you have no case. All the evidence points the other way.

Tell you what. I have to kill a few chickes today, so instead of the usual way, I'll scoop their brains out. If any live, I'll let them go, and starve myself. Hows that? deal?

[EternalVigilance]

Really? "inalienable God-given rights" ? what does that mean

The day you figure that out is the day you'll be worth talking to.

[EternalVigilance]

Yep.

[coconutt2000]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/6/19/204324.shtml

Biased, but presents viewpoints not expressed in the link you gave me, which I had read a while back.

[Nathan Zachary]

No, I'm saying her body is a corpse. Terri, what was her, her mind, her being, departed in 1990 when she caused herslf to die by losing 150 lbs, slimming down to a "healthy' 102 lbs.

I'm 225, I can't imagine slimming down to 102 lbs and living.
and that's cutting down a mere 123 lbs. Heck, I don't think I'd live at 150. last time i remember wieghing 150 lbs I was listening to abba on an 8 track sometime in the late 60's.

[Spiff]

She was quite plimp actually, far from being 'starved to death, and much fatter than she was in 1990, when she starved herself to death, literaly.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The cause of death was clearly explained in the autopsy report. Also, I didn't know a corpse could gain weight.

Her body was allowed to die as it should have long ago. Until you can prove she was alive, concious, aware, you have no case. All the evidence points the other way.

She was not dying before the judge ordered all nutrition and hydration to be withheld. She only started dying when that was the case. The cause of her death, according to the autopsy, was dehydration/starvation. Who caused that to happen?

One does not need to prove they're alive in order to keep someone from taking action to kill them. If I'm sleeping deeply and you happen to walk into the room, you are not permitted to shoot me.

Tell you what. I have to kill a few chickes today, so instead of the usual way, I'll scoop their brains out. If any live, I'll let them go, and starve myself. Hows that? deal?

Number one, you are one sick individual. This post proves it. Second, you should not be allowed to starve yourself to death. Suicidal acts should be stopped and the person who atlempted them should receive proper mental care as you very well might require.

[k2blader]

If I could backtrack a little..

That last sentence of #47--were you saying you're Jewish?

If so I was just wondering because I'm pretty sure I saw some very strong articles by Jewish folks who hold quite different beliefs from you..

[8mmMauser]

You are very very welcome!!

8mm

[8mmMauser]

I always try to give the benefit of the doubt, am really a chump the first time around....

After that, things become clearer. lol

I will say this, EV, am real glad you are my friend and not my adversary. They do not know what they are up against.

8mm

[Nathan Zachary]

I'm not saying mistakes were not made. in fact I agree with allot of what you say.
My wife is also an RN who has worked in a convalescent home her entire career. I have worked in the field for 23 years army reserve medic, x ray tech ans field surgeons assistant myself, and have seen probably much more gore than you can imagine. Terri was dead, but she was revived, enough to keep the medulla oblongata alive, which in turn maintained her body function. looking at the case, We see Micheal didn't give up on her for 8 years, the records and court docs show he sent her for any hopefull treament he could, what was available, including that stimulator implant which was experimental, and not cheap as you know. It was only after he was told that there was no hope, that he put it in the courts hands for them to decide. I've seen quite a few vegetive people myself, most don't live as long as Terri did. Looking at her files, reading the Me report, there is no doubt in my mind she was long gone. Being a RN, you have enough training to know that white matter is the first to die from 02 deprivation. The other damage we see in her ME report is prolonged 02 deprivation,very complete, and the hydrocephalus ex vasuo, well that tells the tale. He brain wasn't "shrunken" it was empty, with 8 times the cerebrospinal fluid, and only 1/3 the weight. massive tissue death, I don't need to explain it all I'm sure. Suffice it to say the damage was complete. She died feb 25 1990, no doubt in my mind. I also agree that it wasn't really nessesary to pull the tube out, After all, she had outlived every other case, so she didn't have a whole lot of time left anyways, and degradation was starting to takes it's toll according to the ME report. But, you can't "murder" a dead person. That's what I disagree with, people making that accusation. You- everything that is you, is your mind. Once that's dead, your dead, even if the body is kept alive. In fact, bodies are kept alive all the time, sometimes for days. Longer for organ donor co-ordination. I'm also a little religious, and don't like seeing people becomming heratics over the issue. God forgives ALL sin, and HE is the judge of it. We are supposed to follow in his footsteps, and forgive as well. right EternalVigilance? take it easy, I need to go make breaky