Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FreepinforTerri
Say newbie! Welcome to FR. Now please quit abusing the system. Figure out how to post before making a fool out of yourself.
9 posted on 10/24/2003 8:34:55 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Don'tMessWithTexas
Well then help me. I've never posted before. I was in Florida doing the lobbying this past week, and you guys were instrumental in getting news out. Now we want to bombard the ACLU with the all the facts (i.e. the civil liberties she's been denied. I'm awaiting the list of laws.) Help us, or don't help us, but personal attacks on me are petty.
48 posted on 10/24/2003 9:05:59 PM PDT by FreepinforTerri (Well, then help me rather than be so rude.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
I despise the ACLU. However, I have no idea, from your post, what the ACLU is doing. These posts are generally a rehash of the same accusations without any explanation. As a result, I am uninformed and frustrated.

I have said in the past, and I repeat, that this is appears to be an easy case. A feeding tube should not be removed from a woman who is severely disabled. That is clearly immoral

However, I don't think that is the issue that some are concerned about. Hence, people are speaking past each other on this case.

The other issue is this: in the absence of a living will or directive to a physician, does a parent of a minor child or a spouse have authority to direct the medical care of their children or their spouse.

One may not like it, but MS is Terri's husband. Marriage conveys to a spouse certain rights and authority. As a husband, I can give a physician consent to operate on my wife. You may not approve of everything a parent does, but that parent can give consent for his minor children.

Terri Schiavo's parents cannot give informed consent for their daughter. They lost that right and authority when she married her adulterous husband.

The question is when do we lay aside the rights and authority given to spouses and children? Can I give a directive, in the absence of a living will, indicating that my wife does not desire a ventilator or a feeding tube without being labeled a murderer? Can I refuse some extraordinary treatment for my children without being labeled a wacko?

I may be wrong, but it seems to me we have two competing interests here. A person's right to live and that rights of that person's spouse, parent or guardian to make medical condition for the person under their care. If we suggest that the person's right to life always rules, then nothing could ever be done to remove any life sustaining treatment be that a feeding tube, a ventilator or a heart/lung machine. If we suggest that a person with authority always calls the shots, then a parent or spouse could withhold the most simple treatment that could save life.

Where do conservatives want to draw the line? If we are naturally suspicious of government intervention, how much power do we give to the state to intervene in these matters? Do we want the state substituting its judgment for the judgment of a parent or guardian.

I understand the situation with Terri Schiavo. I am looking down the road at other cases and think we should understand the precedents we set and stake out a consistent ethical framework, understanding what could be a conflict between a person's right to life and a parent or spouse's authority to direct another's care.

77 posted on 10/25/2003 5:18:10 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson