Posted on 05/24/2006 9:08:58 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Of course, if she accepted it I guess that would be pretty strong evidence that she wanted to live.
It's all Newspeak.
Please elaborate. Why would we lose seats or the White house because of this?
"If we are going to allow courts to give decade-old half-remembered conversations the same force as a written living will, we are all in very, very big trouble."
Absolutely, and I think we're allready are in very big trouble.
"What upset me most was that her parents were prohibited from giving her water by hand.
Of course, if she accepted it I guess that would be pretty strong evidence that she wanted to live."
Terri was able to maintain her own saliva through swallowing.
At least 3 former staff members signed sworn affidavits stating they had either given her spoonfuls of jello, or placed wet cloths in her mouth for her to suck on.
One guardian ad litum requested a swallowing test which was ignored by Judge Greer.
"Without A Trace" has portrayed pro-lifers as the kind of people who would see a clinic bomber as heroic. These people just don't get it.
I would point out that Chuck cannot address the following because of Michael's panting attorney entourage There exist video of Terri prior to the lawsuit settlement which show her responding to directions of where to look and to people speaking to her; at some point after the courts awarded Michael monies, Terri 'became brain dead' and not in the natural progression of her malady. I'm of the school who believe someone with intimate access to Terri 'hurried along her decline via artificial means such as injected insulin, etc.
Definitely a sociopath.
"I'm of the school who believe someone with intimate access to Terri 'hurried along her decline via artificial means such as injected insulin, etc."
It doesn't require such drastic measures.
Treatment for brain damage requires therapy and stimulation.
All one has to do is deny regular therapy, draw the curtains, turn down the lights, turn off the radio and TV, restrict visitors, forbid trips outside, forbid movement to a chair, deny dental care and other basic hygeine.
That oughta do it.
Michael was enjoying the comfort of other women even before he began his euthenasia campaign. One woman was even with the blessing of Terri's parents.
My point is that one doesn't need to actively injure someone to contribute to their deterioration.
One can simply deny basic treatment and stimulation so that neglect and isolation can do the work.
And can't you see how regarding decades-old half-remembered conversations as a living will could be used to override spousal decisions? If this case had been Terri's brother v. her parents, would she still be dead? You betcha.
No offense, but in seeing the pro-Terri faction as anti-spousal control, you are buying into a straw man argument that the pro-euthanasia forces have been happy to provide. The pro-lifers who sided with the Schindlers in this case did not object to spouses controlling medical decisions. They objected to the following:
1. Any guardian being given the right to starve a person to death.
2. Any court regarding food and water as a heroic medical measure.
3. A clearly unfit guardian (Michael Schiavo) being left in charge of a patient.
I want my wife in charge of my medical care, but you can bet I don't want her or anybody else saying, "We should starve him to death, he told me in 1986 that he didn't want a bunch of tubes in him."
"want my wife in charge of my medical care, but you can bet I don't want her or anybody else saying, "We should starve him to death, he told me in 1986 that he didn't want a bunch of tubes in him.""
Excellent point.
The vague "statement" he strangely remembered after he won the malpractice suit did not even address the situation she wound up in.
Supposedly she and Michael had been visiting a dying relative. This person was terminal, Terri was not terminal. He didn't make any claim she wanted to be dehydrated to death.
You are correct that neglect can cause the brain to deteriorate ... it's been proven in newborns, sadly. My point is that such neglect wouldn't 'eliminate the albatross quickly enough'.
Certainly a big part of the problem!
well...it cannot be proven there were attempts to actively injure Terri through such things as injections of insulin.
I'm not saying it isn't possible...it just cannot be proven.
The issues of neglect and isolation can easily be proven.
On top of that, several times Terri's body was forced to fight off infections without the aid of antibiotics (at Michael's orders) So this also greatly contributed to her deterioration.
Law and Order is another manifestation of the corrosion of godliness. The Scientologists who engineered Terry's death are another manifestation of truly insane psychopaths worming their insidious malice into the culture. The only way to overcome the evil that seeks to engulf us is to completely destroy liberalism in all of its manifestations.
Anytime you give politicians power in a medical issue of who lives and who dies, eventually you get doctors into the decision making process, other than just opinions. Then you get legislation.
Bad as MS is alleged to be, and I can agree with the presumptions, not the moral judgments, if he is used to move a personal decision on the matter of life and death to the political area, thereby destroying the custom, you open the door for euthanasia.
I don't agree with the starving remedy, either; she should have received a quick death.
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.