Many Neurologists Side With Courts In Florida Coma Case

Contra Costa Times ^ | 10/26/03 | Donald G. McNeil Jr.

[torchthemummy]

Quick Analogy: When the book "The Bell Curve" came out, there was all kinds of expected howling from the left, despite the book's truthful conclusion that there is the non-existent chance that every racial/ethnic group somehow has the exact same aggregate results in relation to intelligence levels. Their argument against the study/book was that it was racist. I never read the book, just excerpts, because I didn't feel I needed to accept or not accept the results. My thought was that it is irrelevant what a person or their groups intelligence may or may not be. If you believe in hard work, equal opportunity then one doesn't have to be concerned with whether a person or group has lower I.Q.s. Good nature, honesty and self-application always result in an honest open society.

So what does this have to do with Terry Schiavo? The same premise applies, in my humble opinion, in as far as although Terry may never recover, she has the right to equal opportunity of a conciense life irregardless of her lack of communicative ability and now-possible limited I.Q.

The Bill of Rights was a constitutional listing of individual rights that government could not infringe upon. In this circumstance, the right to dehydrate someone to the point of death due to the lack of a will puts the government in the business of deciding what it can do to a human being without the body of evidence/appeals that would be mandated in a death-penalty case.

[Domestic Church]

And another neurologist and radiologist have scans of Terri's that refute this.

Of course we don't know when any of these scans were taken but it is obvious there is an agenda to kill this woman and set a national precedent.

An impartial doctor would have been curious about a conflicting scan instead of being angry that his determination/agenda was foiled.

The anger in the doctor's response should exempt him from further involvement as it implies partiality.

[pickyourpoison]

I might not want to live like her either. However I wouldn't want a husband who has another girfriend, has children by this other woman, has not used lawsuit money for rehab, has put me in a hospice, controls when my family can visit me, and has court orders saying no cameras allowed in my hospice room etc. I would not want this person calling the shots on my life or death. How could he possiby make a decision in my best interests.
All he has to do is divorce Terri and let her parents have her.
Since he received over a million dollars for her rehab and has not spent it for that I say follow the $$$$$$$

[T'wit]

Aw, you had the right idea all along.

Besides, medical opinions are not altogether irrelevant. In the public relations war, popular opinion can certainly be swayed by unscrupulous doctors bloviating about patients they have not worked with. "Expert" testimony in lawsuits is for sale, and imo, doctors who testify for an immoral verdict are the lowest order of whores.

[nickcarraway]

Good point

[cyborg]

You're not the first person who has that view when caring for children with mental challenges. It takes a very special person to do that, someone with very christlike qualities in my opinion. Was listening to Focus on the Family once, and heard that same story.

I'm very sorry but I think what is being done is DISGUSTING. I'm 29 and don't have a living will... I told my mother to do what she feels is best. Same thing with my sister. The only thing I've done is sign an organ donor card. Why can't people er on the side of LIFE?

[Shethink13]

Not hardly. Try again. Stephen Hawking would quickly be able to fashion a means of communicating with the outside world because there is something still going on in his brain. Something I fear is not the case with Terri. Their bodies maybe crumpled but one has a functioning brain. You figure out which.

How do you know there's nothing going on in Terri's brain? Are you in her head?

[T'wit]

>> If I fired a gun at the ceiling and yelled at the couch potato to raise his hands, I have little doubt but what he'd follow that command. While there is virtually no liklihood that someone in a PVS state would do so.

You're right. There is "virtually no liklihood (sic)" that people in a PVS state would burst into the room, fire a bullet in the ceiling and threaten a guy watching TV. Anyone who did such a thing should get help -- today, not tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the bold-faced description of PVS that we were discussing did not happen to mention loonies firing guns into the ceiling. What it DID say, as I pointed out, is so vague that it could define a couch potato, or slot machine players, or people getting a massage.

[Zevonismymuse]

Because she has apparently expressed in the past (according to the court tesimony of at least three people) that she wouldn't want to be artifically sustained in such circumstances; and her wishes, not yours, should be the governing factor.

I remained shocked at the number of people who believe this woman would want to live indefinitely in her condition. I certainly would not want to live like that.

There have been many reports that this woman suffered from an eating disorder. It is hard to believe that someone pathologically obsessed with their appearance would want to lay around in a diaper all day drooling.

[cinFLA]

Can anyone refute this nonsense?

How can you call it nonsense if you can't refute it?

[Normally a Lurker]

What it DID say, as I pointed out, is so vague that it could define a couch potato, or slot machine players, or people getting a massage.

I think we are in basic agreement, but I see such a vagues definition as also extending to the couch, the slot machine, and the massage table. That is, it is a completely wothless definition.

I think I must have misunderstood your intent in the first post. Sorry again.

[Normally a Lurker]

LOL - excellent post.

[Republic]

I don't think the point is whether she will "get better."

It's that she's not dying. She's young, strong, and healthy, and could live a very long time, in a state without conscious thought.

Makes one wonder WHY IN THE HELL she is isolated in a HOSPICE!!! And for THREE YEARS!

The Hospice Organizations own website, HospiceFoundations.org, states that ONLY terminally ill, end stage patients are accepted, and MOST are tended to til death in their own homes! Also---the HOSPICE organzation is BY ITS OWN LAWS not allowed to accept patients whose every means of rehabilitation and cure HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED.

What kind of nefarious, dirty, cruel tactics have led to Terri being imprisoned there?

[T'wit]

>> That is, it is a completely wothless definition.

Good. That was exactly the point.

[gooleyman]

I had previously looked at them. I think the above article is an accurate assessment of what they show.

Possibly you and I should just agree to disagree - I'm not likely to come around to your way of thinking nor you to mine.

However, if you want to cut to the chase regarding my opinion, you might want to look at the following article/thread

I read your "living will" thread and the comments after it. Obviously we'll never see eye to eye. If you don't care any more about yourself and your loved ones than that, you certainly can't be expected to care about someone you don't even know (Terri).

I wish you well and will not discuss this with you any longer. Take care.

[Snidely Whiplash]

Relax there, Sparky. Everyone goofs, you know? The link should've been thus: http;//www.neuroskills.com/index.html?main=tbi/coma.shtml Now, try that and see whatcha get. It's a reprint of a info sheet or whatever from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, part of the NIH.

Now, as far as your other posting:

Post 43 did state how I know she is not PVS.

No, it didn't. You insinuated that someone (you? or somebody else?) is a physician, and that said person walked in and checked her out (some way of verifying that would be nice though I don't expect it).

But you certainly didn't provide anything other than bald assertion that she isn't a persistent vegetative state. Just 'cause you say something is so doesn't mean it is. Care to explain what of her condition led you to your, uh, diagnosis? You know, something besides just waving your hands and saying "No, she's not in a PVS! Really! I mean it!"

Snidely

[Calpernia]

That link worked: http://www.neuroskills.com/index.html?main=tbi/coma.shtml

One thing it didn't make clear for you is that PVS is the second principle stage of a coma. Someone reading that that wasn't familiar with head injuries may be kept under the impression that PVS and coma were two different conditions.

You may reference that here or find another reference of your choice by doing a search with the keywords, "principle stages of coma"

>>>Just 'cause you say something is so doesn't mean it is.

I am not the only one saying that though.