Woman's Sustaining Care Resumed- But Experts Say No Hope Exists For Her Recovery

The Washington Post ^ | October 23, 2003 | Rob Stein

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Life support for Terri Schiavo was resumed yesterday in a Florida hospital room, but many experts said there is virtually no hope that she will ever recover, despite her parents' desperate hopes.

"If it's over a year, she's not ever going to get up," said Fred Plum, a professor emeritus at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York. "You just don't see it. It just doesn't happen."

Schiavo, 39, has been in a persistent vegetative state since her heart stopped for unknown reasons in 1990. A feeding tube in her stomach was removed Oct. 15 after her husband, Michael, who said his wife had told him she would not want to be kept alive under such circumstances, won a long series of court battles to have life-sustaining nourishment withdrawn so she could die.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I would imagine that the doctor, as quoted, who testified for Schiavo, did examine her.

[Bluebird Singing]

Are we, as a country, ready to adopt the service of starving and dehydrating the disabled so that they die? She may be brain damaged, but she was not terminally ill and did not belong in hospice.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I agree that there's little hope for significant improvement, though probably a little improvement is possible witht therapy. Howver, given that she appears in the photos and videos not to be in any discomfort or misery, and that she has two parents and two siblings willing and eager to continue caring for her in this condition, I see no reason to end her life, in the absence of a clear written instruction executed by her prior to her brain injury. If she appeared to be really suffering, it would be a more complicated issue, but there's just no evidence of that.

[agrace]

Good thing they stuck to the unbiased, like Cranford. This is the guy who frequently testifies in these cases (including Terri's, for Schiavo of course), ALWAYS for the side wanting to pull the plug, ALWAYS says that the patient is 1) in PVS and 2) will never ever recover, and guess what, some of them actually do.

MarMema, I can't locate a link to the story, but who was the patient about whom he testified as having no chance of recovery, the guy who "woke up" soon after Cranford advised starving him to death?

And not only that, we have two recent cases discussed here on FR in just the past few days - one about a man in so-called PVS for 17 years who suddenly asked for a coke, and another woman who was in a coma for 16 years after complications from childbirth who said "stop that" to a nurse fixing her bed and was soon up and around.

Amazing that Terri hasn't been given any chance at all.

From this link - Meet Some Advocates of Imposed Death -

Ronald Cranford, MD, perhaps more than any other individual, has engineered the shift in medical practice and public opinion regarding denial of food and fluids to severely disabled, non-dying people. He helped create one of the country's first "bioethics" committees in 1972 and quickly established himself as an "expert" in this new field.

Often quoted, this Minneapolis neurologist is not an impartial professional but a propagandist for the "right" to kill. He was the principal voice calling for the starvation/dehydration deaths of Paul Brophy, Nancy Ellen Jobes, Nancy Cruzan and Christine Busalacchi, all of whom were brain-damaged but not dying. He testified that he would consider even spoon-feeding for Nancy Cruzan to be "medical treatment" because that "would be totally inconsistent with what was wanted" (her death). (Cruzan v. Harmon, [Missouri], Trial Testimony, 3/3/88, Transcript Vol. 1, pp. 228Ð229) He wrote in the CFD newsletter (Summer, 1988), "I also believe that there may be extreme situations, and in the future increasingly common situations, where physician-assisted suicide may not only be permissible, but encouraged."

[LaraCroft]

Hello?!?!?

This has been going on for over 10 years.

All of this is on the web page, and has been posted about 50 kajillion times just on FR.

This is why everyones opinion isn't equal. (no disrespect to you, just a thought in general)

[Tax-chick]

Since you've made a written record of your intentions, then it's entirely your business. That's entirely different from a situation where someone else, with obvious self-interest, insists that you be killed.

And legislatures pass laws that benefit individuals, or individual companies, all the time. It's just part of the way our government runs these days.

[coloradan]

Woman's Sustaining Care Resumed- But Experts Say No Hope Exists For Her Recovery

Liberal's Sustaining Welfare Continued - But Experts Say No Hope Exists For Their Mental Recovery

They're a lost cause, sucking federal dollars and voting Democrat. They appear to be alive, but are actually in a coma. It would be better to put them out of their misery, even though they appear to be responsive and appear to take interest in political matters, such as voting.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I would wonder about her ability to get up. I think her muscles have atrophied so very much, from lack of rehabilitation, that she will be unable to do so. I assume your nephew received rehabilitative care.

[IncPen]

"If it's over a year, she's not ever going to get up," said Fred Plum, a professor emeritus at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York. "You just don't see it. It just doesn't happen."

So, let's stop feeding Christopher Reeve?

[najida]

There is a difference between allowing a terminal, dying person to die, and pushing an otherwise healthy person into the next life.

Terri, with care, can live a long time. And not even really heroic care either. Just basic nursing care and a tube feeding. No biggie.

[LaraCroft]

One of the founding fathers said that obedience to a bad law was evil.

I agree heartily.

Just because something is a law, or a court rules on it doesn't make it RIGHT. No man is God, and you only have to look at the boneheaded rulings from the courts recently to see they are completely off kilter.

I applaud the people who are forcing the court into accountability for their actions. They need to be reminded, often and hard that their ONLY duty is to see if things are constitutional and/or lawful, not make up stuff.

It is the court that has been out of line in this case all along, no big suprise for a Florida court.

[GovernmentShrinker]

One thing we may accomplish is to get her thoroughly examined by independent doctors, to establish whether there is serious evidence of physical abuse by her husband (there are reports that some now missing records from shortly after her heart attack/brain injury showed numerous broken bones which a doctor believed were consistent with battering). Mr. Schiavo's eagerness to have Terri cremated immediately upon her death, without any autopsy, is suspicious under the circumstances. If this guy is complicit in his wife's brain damage and/or death, he belongs behind bars.

[HELLRAISER II]

Christopher Reeves is a completely different deal altogether, he's coherrent and can communicate his wishes. There is no doubt that he wants to live. Have you ever wondered did we keep Terri alive, when she actually wanted to die? I hope she really wants to live, because like it or not that's the choice that has been made for her.

[HELLRAISER II]

No biggie, unless of course you did want to die and nobody would let you. That would be Titanic, would it not?

[ClancyJ]

but if there is truly no hope of her recovery, then what service are we doing to her soul by preventing her from entering the next phase of her journey?

Several reasons.

We don't know the condition of her soul - maybe she had not accepted Jesus and would not be on the way to a better place.

We are not God - God determines when it is time for one to leave earth.

There are medical advances all the time - no hope today does not mean no hope next year.

It is her life and we are not the ones to take it away from her - nor is a husband who wants her insurance or medical funds and possibly to keep her condition from being investigated.

She is at the mercy of one who desperately wants her dead. Are we to assist him when his actions have shown that he has never given her therapy to improve her condition.

[agrace]

You can't have a society where the rules that you live by can change any day, and can change retroactively.

It's interesting you say that. Did you know that before Terri's collapse, FL law did NOT consider a feeding tube to be life support? They could not be legally removed as such. So even if Terri DID say what her husband now claims she said, she couldn't have possibly meant a feeding tube.

The law was passed six months after she collapsed, but Judge Greer saw fit to apply it retroactively to her case, somehow divining that her wishes against being kept on life support were meant to include the law which did not exist when she allegedly verbalized those wishes.

[coloradan]

There is no evidence that Terri wishes to die except the assertions of her husband and his relatives, who apparently wish her to die and have an interest if she were to die. For some reason, the husband didn't recall her statement of intention to not be kept alive until about 2 years or so after her mysterious collapse. Then, all of a sudden, he "remembered" that she had said that to him, "several times."

[exmarine]

More lies. The woman is not in a "persistent vegetative state"! She says words ("help me") and is responsive - that is not vegetative, and it is not comatose. I'm sick and tires of these media Nazis and their lying propaganda.

[Tax-chick]

God willing, she'll recover. But i'm not that optimistic about her chances.

That's reasonable enough. But I don't think the only options are "recover" or "die." If she's free from Michael Schiavo's malice, she can be provided rehabilitation, to whatever extent is beneficial. She can be kept clean; taken outside; receive visits from people who care for her; have television, music, or other stimulation that causes her pleasure.

Maybe she won't "recover" anything beyond the faculties of a baby (or a profoundly retarded person, or an Alzheimer's patient), but there's a great difference between a person in those situations who's receiving the best care possible in their condition, and above all LOVE, and a person who's being deprived of the care they deserve.

An infant may not walk, talk, or feed himself, but if he is loved and cared for appropriately, he is happy. Surely the same is true of a mentally disabled adult - she may remain at a diminished mental capacity for many years, but if she is given the love and care a human being deserves, she can be happy, and can be a blessing to others.

[PleaseNoMore]

He was denied therapy by his father for 10 years. It is only in the past 8 years that he has had any rehabilitation. His father fought tooth and nail and even gained custody of him for those ten years. He said that the therapy was too painful for Chuck. His mom regained custody and he began receiving some therapy, as much as she could aford. To be honest, most of the improvements he has made are the result of a tireless and dedicated mother. Chuck now feeds himself and just last month he said "mama" for the first time in 18 years last month.