Posted on 03/19/2005 4:30:22 PM PST by ambrose
SCHIAVO Q&A
By Palm Beach Post Staff and Wire Reports
Saturday, March 19, 2005
Terri Schiavo's case has mixed emotion and medical science into a sometimes incomprehensible blend. Here, according to medical experts, are answers to common questions:
Q: What happened to Schiavo?
A: On Feb. 25, 1990, at age 27, she suffered cardiac arrest as a result of a potassium imbalance. Court-appointed doctors have found her to be severely brain-damaged because oxygen was cut off from her brain. The doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state that offers no hope of recovery.
Q: What is a persistent vegetative state, and how does it differ from a coma?
A: A coma is a profound or deep state of unconsciousness. The patient is alive but unable to react or respond to things going on around around her. People have awakened from comas and gone on with their lives. In a coma, the patient looks asleep and is unresponsive.
A persistent vegetative state, which sometimes follows a coma, is a condition in which someone has lost awareness of the world around her but remains in a sleep-wake cycle. The individual loses the higher cerebral powers of the brain, but the functions of the brain stem, such as respiration (breathing) and blood circulation, remain relatively intact. In this state, the patient may look as if he or she is awake.
Q: But why does Schiavo look like she's smiling?
A: Her parents say she is aware of what's going on around her and reacts to her surroundings and to people who talk to her. But experts say it is extremely common for someone in a persistent vegetative state to look alert, as if she knows what's going on. Medical experts say Schiavo exhibits extremely primitive reflexes, nothing more. For example, she might turn or jerk in response to a loud noise. These are primitive functions directed by the small part of the brain that is still intact.
Spontaneous movements may happen and the eyes may open in a response to external stimuli, but the patient does not speak or obey commands. Patients in a vegetative state may appear somewhat normal. They may occasionally grimace, cry or laugh. The court has found that Schiavo does not consistently respond to stimuli. Doctors say her actions are reflexes, not a consciously directed effort by the brain's cortex.
Q:What will happen to her now that the tube has been removed?
A: There's no way to tell for sure what will happen, but the kidneys might be the first to react. In such cases, urine output decreases and patients begin to stop secreting fluids. The mouth begins to look dry and the eyes appear sunken. Patients will look thinner because the body tissues have lost fluid. The heart rate gradually goes up and blood pressure goes down. That leads to breathing changes that culminate in the rest of the body shutting down. Depending on how strong she is, she might take two to three weeks to die.
Q: Will she feel any pain?
A: In a vegetative state, medical experts believe the higher cortical functions — those brain functions that allow us to experience the world around us — have been suspended. The patient is, in effect, unconscious. It would be difficult to know if she experienced any discomfort, doctors say, because no one can talk with her. Because the more primitive functions remain, the body would try to maintain life, so there may be some grimacing or other apparent reaction to what's happening. If she seems uncomfortable, doctors can give medicines to relieve pain and relax her. Doctors say she should not experience pain as we experience it. Usually, there are no signs of a change except a gentle and quiet transition from breathing to non-breathing. Doctors who have witnessed the procedure in other patients call it a dignified death.
Q: What if the feeding tube is reinserted?
A: If it's replaced within the first few days — as it has been done before with Schiavo — a patient can recover from dehydration. If the tube is replaced after two or three weeks, she likely would still die. Replacing the tube doesn't always lead to recovery.
"Florida law recognizes food and water to be a part of medical treatment that can be accepted by a patient or refused just as any other treatment, including respirators, oxygen masks, antibiotics, blood, etc. In the event that a patient is unable to state their wishes regarding medical, the nearest relative, as defined by Florida* (see list below), will be authorized to make all medical decisions for you, including but not limited to: food, water, vitamins, medicine, surgery, therapy, visitation, religious practice, etc.
"Therefore, it is imperative that if you have any concern about your closest relative making these decisions on your behalf, that you make your intentions known NOW, before you go to sleep (possibly not to wake up again), IN WRITING in a LIVING WILL, sample below. BE SPECIFIC, including EVERY thing that could possibly occur (remember Murphy's Law). Sign your living will in the presence of two witnesses and distribute copies to lots of people, so that, in the event it is needed, it doesn't become lost."
How does that sound?
" Physicians like Kevorkian maybe!"
Actually Kevorkian is allowing people to actually have a peaceful death, unlike the agonizing suffering Terri is being put through by dying of dehydration and starvation.
Full court press by the MSM to make people believe there is nothing to see here....move along....
The only reason Terri's parents thought he was biased was that he said in an interview that Terri's law was unconstitutional.
Gee. I guess he shoulda lied.
Her parents liked him well enough to ask for him to be re-assigned as her guardian after his report came out.
How about having it tattooed on your body to ensure people don't try to pretend it doesn't exist?
Michael had her sedated for sure last time, but her parents complained about it.
You've seen people here warning that he might to sedate her again, and that would be bad because it would speed her death, and he just wants it to look peaceful.
Can't have it both ways.
I'm sorry for your loss. Many of us may face something like this. I hope I can deal with it as well as you did. Thank you for sharing.
"However, she clearly dehydrated over the last week, and it was NOT painless. I was there, and I know."
I am sorry you had to relive that memory, but thank you for relating it.
Would burning at the stake be a "peaceful" death if the person was jacked up on enough morphine?
What reason is there to regard dehydration as any moreso, aside from the fact that it takes longer?
1991
Apr - Terri's condition is assessed as improving.
1992
Aug - Terri awarded $250,000 in malpractice settlement.
Nov - Terri awarded $1.4 million in malpractice trial.
Nov - Michael Schiavo awarded $600,000 in malpractice trial.
1993
Feb - Michael Schiavo denies recommended rehabilitation treatment.
Feb - Schiavo and Terri's parents have falling out regarding lack of therapy for Terri.
Feb - Schiavo withholds medical information from Terri's parents.
Feb - Schiavo posts Do not Resuscitate order in Terri's medical chart.
Can't help but see something suspicious about the husband in this early part of the timeline of events. It appears Terri was begining to improve, then during 92 there is a windfall of money due to suits, then Schiavo starts going the other way.. Was he concerned about the windfall being drained by long term costly medical bills and figures to cut it short with the DNR order? Pure speculation, but it makes me wonder..
I am only answering the "how can anyone do something so cruel" part, supercat.
You can't use the pain of dehydration as a reason not to do it if you're the ones not letting the person be sedated.
In my view, it's hypocritical for the state to pretend purposefully starving someone to death is any more moral than giving them an OD of morphine.
That comment is especially ironic, given that the reason Terri had the problem in the first place is that she was severely anorexic (not eating).
She did starve herself, and now everyone is arguing about feeding her.
BTW, I do not think courts should involve themselves with the medical treatment for anorexics, either. Any court interference in our medical care is just too much.
Indeed it is. The use of dehydration is so they can pretend the death is "natural", and the use of morphine is so they can pretend it's "painless", when in actuality dehydration of someone whose organs can process water is neither natural nor painless.
TT has asserted on other threads that Terri is brain dead and won't recognize pain ... but you can continue to exchange with itr, we're all enjoying your clear thinking, my friend.
How old are Michael Schiavo's children with some other woman and where in this timeline did he first meet her?
"Can't help but see something suspicious about the husband in this early part of the timeline of events. It appears Terri was begining to improve, then during 92 there is a windfall of money due to suits, then Schiavo starts going the other way.. Was he concerned about the windfall being drained by long term costly medical bills and figures to cut it short with the DNR order? Pure speculation, but it makes me wonder.."
That isn't just speculation my friend, it is a solid logical deduction. Except for monies actually spent in Terri's care, Schiavo should have to return any money he spent on things other than Terri's rehab. The lawyer (Felos=Felon) should has his assets frozen and be required to relinquish all money his has made on this perverse crusade. Judge Greer should be placed in a hospice and denied food and water - he is legally blind and has a "poor quality of life." We should show compassion to the judge and let him expire by withholding food and water - it is for his own good.
If Terri had done that, this would have been over years ago ...
I don't think many young couples would be suspecting that their spouse will incapacitate them, and most would probably not want to explain " Why didn't you pick me? "
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.