Pope Declares Feeding Tube Removal Immoral

Associated Press ^ | 03/20/04 | The Pope

[phenn]

March 20, 2004, 11:34 AM EST

VATICAN CITY -- Pope John Paul II said Saturday the removal of feeding tubes from people in vegetative states was immoral, and that no judgment on their quality of life could justify such "euthanasia by omission."

John Paul made the comments to participants of a Vatican conference on the ethical dilemmas of dealing with incapacitated patients, entering into a debate that has sparked court battles in the United States and elsewhere.

The pope said even the medical terminology used to describe people in so-called "persistent vegetative states" was degrading to them. He said no matter how sick a person was, "he is and will always be a man, never becoming a 'vegetable' or 'animal.'"

In a vegetative state, patients are awake but not aware of themselves or their environment. The condition is different from a coma, in which the patient is neither awake nor aware. Both, however, are states in which the patient is devoid of consciousness.

If the vegetative state continues for a month, the patient is said to be in a persistent vegetative state; after a year without improvement, the patient is said to be in a permanent vegetative state.

Providing food and water to such patients should be considered natural, ordinary and proportional care -- not artificial medical intervention, the pope told members of the conference, which was organized by the World Federation of Catholic Medical Associations and the Pontifical Academy for Life, a Vatican advisory body.

"As such, it is morally obligatory," to continue such care, he said.

Since no one knows when a patient in a vegetative state might awaken, "the evaluation of the probability, founded on scarce hope of recovery after the vegetative state has lasted for more than a year, cannot ethically justify the abandonment or the interruption of minimal care for the patient, including food and water," he said.

Similarly, he said that someone else's evaluation of the patient's quality of life in such a state couldn't justify letting them die of hunger or thirst.

"If this is knowingly and deliberately carried out, this would result in a true euthanasia by omission," he said.

John Paul has consistently voiced opposition to euthanasia, which the Vatican defines as "an action or omission that by its nature and intention" causes death to end pain. It says euthanasia always is a violation of God's law.

The issue over removing feeding tubes has prompted several court cases and legislation in the United States, Australia and elsewhere.

In a highly publicized case in Tampa, Fla., the husband of a severely brain-damaged woman, Terri Schiavo, has battled her parents for years to have his wife's feeding tube removed so she can die. He says she wouldn't have wanted to be kept alive with it.

The issue has involved the state legislature as well as the governor, who was given the authority to have the feeding tube reinserted after the woman's husband had it removed.

In his comments, John Paul said families of such ill people needed more emotional and economic support, so that they can better care for their loved ones. In addition, he said, society should commit more money to find cures for them.

Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press

[phenn]

If and when the Church rules on the issue of life's official end, I am rather doubtful it will include 'upon disability'.

In the case of Terri Schiavo and thousands like her, there is nothing even close to brain death. There is cognitive disability. But, these people are starved to death, neglected to death and waltzed to death every day of the week.

I can tell you of quite a few families who have contacted me in the past several months, begging for help because a hospital refused to treat their loved one. Of those, two had advanced directive in FAVOR of life-prolonging assistance. Yet, they are all dead now.

I think we need to wake up and start screaming about the horrid and brutal injustices being laid on profoundly disabled people.

In answer to your question, I don't know if the Catholic church will ever take a hardline on the issue of when life ends. They, like a lot of us, are way too busy keeping the death-happy lawyers at heel.

[phenn]

Vegetative state is misdianosed nearly half the time. Half.

I don't put too much weight into the term, myself.

[Destro]

To be fair the internet chat forum has a way of turning words and making them sound "mean and arrogant" that is because conversational language for humans also goes hand in hand with voice inflections and physical postures as we speak. I can not read emotions behind posted words - few can - that is why many add on >>sarcasm<< and other hint words when they want to make their harsh words read in their proper context. I was just having a discussion as if we were in the local coffee house or tavern where people gather to talk over issues. No deep empotion involved.

Readind this article and others after my posts I must say the Pope's words were not full enough to set a standard. In what cases? What circumstances? What are Catholic hospitals to do in such cases?

I welcome the Pope's initiative in this and I hope he empowers a panel of his Church's fathers to come up with guidelines on what to do in such cases and when to do it.

A few sentences on the matter does little to help but it is a step in the right direction.

[Conservative til I die]

Do you mean that if we can keep peopel alive past the natural life cycle via turning them into cyborgs would be correct? We all die. When is intervention in preventing death for the terminally ill wrong?

*ANYTHING* that keeps us alive past a natural life cycle is by definition, artificial.

The chemotherapy and radiation therapy that I received to help me beat cancer is an artifical means of keeping someone alive. One that didn't exist 100 years ago. What you're doing is making an argument from certain biases you and many others have, that there are certain ways of keeping one alive that are OK and others that are somehow distasteful, because they seem odd or too out there. You're also looking at it from this moment in history.

Like I said, 100 years ago there was no chemotherapy, no radiation therapy. If we were discussing this in 1904, we'd be saying that people with cancer die, and that's just the natural order of things, and we should just accept it.

Your fear of turning people into "cyborgs" is silly, because you're against it because it seems so odd to us today. But when they implant machines that can help bridge the brain with the severed nerves of a quadripilegic, and allow that person's muscles to move, that's a cyborg my friend. It's also still a human, with a soul, and dignity, and it's still one of God's children.

I mean, really, what is the difference between an amputee with an artificial leg, or a "cyborg" like I just described? One has artificial help, but apparently one is worse than the other because his help is automated. It's an argument from silly personal biases.

[Destro]

Why do you assume I mean people who have cognitive disability?? Why is the case of Terri Schiavo being brought uo to me when I never mentioned her? To insert a specific example to take down my short and generalized thoughts on the subject is not fair to me. Makes me look like I am some euthanasia - abortion loving monster and I am not.

Of course my statement looks harsh in specific cases but my statement was a brief thought and generalized.

[Deo volente]

"Young Terri is a lass, a girl, a disabled woman, a brain-injured person, a daughter, a sister, a friend, a kid, a lady, a human being, an animal lover, a music freak, a comic, a delight to her loved ones, a person, a soul. Just like you and I. "


Beautifully said.

She is also, sadly, a wife at the mercy of a cruel husband supported by the diabolical purveyors of death.

May God continue to protect her.

[tutstar]

Hey Destro, be sure to write this school and let them know that the parents of these kids ought to let them pass on....

Local Students Reach Out to Terri Schiavo

By Chris Mitchell (cmitchell@wmbb.com) News 13 On Your Side Joshua Farver and his teacher Susan Perry display the card they made to be sent to Terri Schiavo...

Panama City, FL - Students from Margaret K. Lewis School in Panama City are reaching out to Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged woman in Pinellas Park whose feeding tube was recently removed for six days so she would die. While court battles continue between Terri's parents (who want her to live) and Terri's husband (who wants her to die), Panama City students want Terri to know they care.

Dozens of special needs students learned they could send birthday wishes to Terri who will turn 40 on December 3. Several students needed help from teachers and assistants to draw their cards and sign their names. Many are being fed the same way as Terri.

"So many of these children are children with feeding tubes," says Susan Perry who works at the school. "They are human beings just like Terri. They want her to understand they know what she's going through, and if their feeding tubes were taken away from them they would go hungry. They just want to wish her a very happy birthday," says Perry.

Students at Margaret K. Lewis School are not the only ones getting involved in Terri's fight. Clients at St. Andrew Bay Center in Lynn Haven are also making birthday cards. The Center serves adults with disabilities. Over 100 cards from both schools are being collected and hand-delivered to Terri's parents Saturday.

Birthday cards are some of the few things Terri is allowed to see in her hospice room where she's been for several years. According to Terrisfight.org, the official website of Terri's family fighting to keep her alive, Terri's husband does not permit her to have flowers in her room. However, her parents are allowed to take her cards and other gifts while court battles continue.

Birthday greetings can be sent to The Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation, 4615 Gulf Boulevard, #104-103, St. Petersburg Beach, Florida 33706. For more information, go to Terrisfight.org.

http://www.wmbb.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WMBB%2FMGArticle%2FMBB_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031772198741&path=%21news%21archives

[FR_addict]

If the Pope is for keeping human vegitables alive then I am in disagreement with him (i.e. no mind activity). This is a complex subject and it would be hard to make a point across regardless.

The Pope is not for keeping someone alive when they are already dead. If brain-dead people had to be kept alive, then a Catholic could not donate their vital organs, but would have to be kept alive artificially.

I don't believe your issue is really pertinent to what the pope said today. The Church has a reasonable and moral approach to artificial means of life support. That just isn't the issue addressed by today's ruling.

[Destro]

Vegetative state is misdianosed nearly half the time?? Never read that but what does that have to do with the existance of such a state? At least I think you are saying that there is such a thing as a "vegetative state"? If so I was talking about such a state. Are you saying that because vegetative states are misdianosed nearly half the time that no one should be diagnosed in this state ever?

[phenn]

Well, whether it be Terri or Scott or Margorie or Hugh or Robert, all the cases are specific, yes? They are all lives lost because of a pretty pernicious little agenda. They all matter. I bring up Terri because she is the GLARING example of how this *&$%# gets out of hand in a hurry.

I certainly don't think you a course euthanasia-abortion enthusiast. I simply ask you to rethink your position on keeping a healthy body nourished.

As a personal opinion, these 'death with dignity' maggots are already affecting the way hospitals administer care to certain patients. I've had a gutful of it. It starts with people like Terri and Robert and so on.... it ends with people like you and I.

[Hildy]

Uh oh, you're in for it now! (I agree with you, but we're in the minority here). Good luck.

[phenn]

I'm saying that it's probably a keyword and doesn't have much in the way of medical merit. Does that make sense? It's a 'convenience' term that enables some people to abandon some other people. Don't make it right.

Again, I have to go back to the fact that we know so little of the brain. We just don't have the ability to judge what goes on in someone's world.

[Destro]

Why do you assume I mean people who have cognitive disability?? Why is the case of Terri Schiavo being brought uo to me when I never mentioned her? To insert a specific example to take down my short and generalized thoughts on the subject is not fair to me. Makes me look like I am some euthanasia - abortion loving monster and I am not.

Of course my statement looks harsh in specific cases but my statement was a brief thought and generalized.

To be fair the internet chat forum has a way of turning words and making them sound "mean and arrogant" that is because conversational language for humans also goes hand in hand with voice inflections and physical postures as we speak. I can not read emotions behind posted words - few can - that is why many add on >>sarcasm<< and other hint words when they want to make their harsh words read in their proper context. I was just having a discussion as if we were in the local coffee house or tavern where people gather to talk over issues. No deep empotion involved. Readind this article and others after my posts I must say the Pope's words were not full enough to set a standard. In what cases? What circumstances? What are Catholic hospitals to do in such cases?

I welcome the Pope's initiative in this and I hope he empowers a panel of his Church's fathers to come up with guidelines on what to do in such cases and when to do it.

A few sentences on the matter does little to help but it is a step in the right direction.

[Destro]

I think the majority agree with us. It is just an emotional issue and I don't have the word smithing skills to get a complex position out with few words. Then someone brings up specific cases and makes me seem like I want to murder that poor person. That is poor debating - argument skills. My thoughts are macro-general in nature and brief. Sadly, they can be easily twisted. It would be impossible to post on any forum if I had to insert a thousand footnotes to fully describe a general thought so I can cover all circumstances.

[tutstar]

We should have the right in advance to make our own choice in this matter.

An adulterous spouse who has parented 2 children out of wedlock and denied the treatment that money was awarded in a big lawsuit, who melted down the spouse's wedding rings into jewelry for themself, who has not filed the proper documents required by the state from guardians, who denies the incapicated spouse the comfort of having a cloth in their hand to absorb perspiration, and would not allow the Catholic Last Rites, should not be allowed to make that decision for the other spouse.

[tutstar]

To keep a person alive unnaturally with no hope of recovery via the use of machines to keep them alive for the sake of only keeping the body functions working - with no brain activity apparent is a sin because it is torture.

Wow! I didn't realize there was someone on FR who had direct insight into God's plans for each person and knows for a fact who will recover and who won't!

Lots of people can be thankful that you weren't in charge of their fate!

http://www.notdeadyet.org/

[phenn]

You've done just fine. Keep talking. Get this worked out. The specific cases being brought up are because you - and everyone - should understand that there are names, lives and people attached to this horror.

Don't feel as if you're being slammed. Talk. Get it out. This is the only way we sort these things out.

What I'm telling you is that I personally don't think food and water should be considered medical treatment and why. Just think on that. That's all.

The cases I mentioned before are:
Scott Holcomb, 24
Hugh Finn, 42
Robert Wendland, 41
Marjorie Neibert, 80
Terri Schindler-Schiavo, 40

Just do a quick internet search on them when you get a chance. You might come away rather horrified.

[Destro]

This is not a fantasy world. We usually don't die cleanly like in the movies. At some point someone dies. I don't see God sending his Angels to select those that are really dead so we humans can know for sure. At some point we humans have to classify and define. It is what humans do. Whatever acceptable classification arises someone will fall out of that classification. Nothing exists that would satisfy all people in all cases.

Secondly, for you to bring up specific cases to take down what I said in general is the sign of an immature debating skills. A bomb throwing tactic.

[Destro]

discussion is what this website is all about, no?

[tutstar]

Secondly, for you to bring up specific cases to take down what I said in general is the sign of an immature debating skills. A bomb throwing tactic.

HA!

Now you're becoming laughable. Because I can provide specific info I'm immature at debating! ROFL