I have a simple question for my fellow FReepers that I hope some of you will answer without getting too upset at me for asking. If, hypathetically speaking, it was Terri's wish not to be kept alive in this persistant state (meaning she at some point in her marriage told this to her husband), would that change the minds of many of you?
This is for no other reason that to discuss the issue. It is not to say that I agree with what is being done, because I do not.
I have a question for you
What does this mean?:
DollarCoins
Since Mar 20, 2005
There is no evidence that this is the case...except testimony from her sick husband who has massive conflicts of interest.
In other words, the answer is no. His testimony is too tainted. If someone wants to be put to death just because they are using a feeding tube (a pretty unlikely scenario) then the burden of the law should be that THEY make that statement along with signed witnesses, ie, sort of like a will. But the hearsay testimony of someone with an interest in the case being given the weight it has is insane.
Pro-life fanatics, like me, are saddened when people actually put in writing in a Living Will that they don't want food and water, but we accept that decision. But what happens, when a person who has a Living Will, changes their mind after they are injured. Will anyone listen to them?
It would change things, certainly. Right now it is a right to kill case. If her considered wish to be killed were established (that would require a recent written or otherwise certified statement specific on the level of disability that would trigger the assisted suicide, and specific on the manner of execution), then that would be a right to die case.
I would not assist anyone in a suicide but I would understand that law might recognize such a right. I would leave that on the conscience of the people involved.
Pro-life fanatics, like me, are saddened when people actually put in writing in a Living Will that they don't want food and water, but we accept that decision. But what happens, when a person who has a Living Will, changes their mind after they are injured. Will anyone listen to them?
"kept alive"?
We are all "kept alive" by eating and drinking. Let me rephrase the question for you. "If you knew you would not be able to eat and drink under your own power, and there was some degree of disagreement over how conscious you were, would you want to be starved to death?".
That is actually the accurate question to be asked.
It wouldn't change my mind. If hypothetically, Terri said that she didn't want to live "like that" (while watching a movie) she probably meant "I don't want to be kept artificially alive if I am in a coma and don't feel pain". She surely didn't mean "I don't want to have a painful death by being starved if I am mentally disabled".
One thing is to be connected to a machine to breath and something very different to be fed, as you feed babies.
One thing is to be in a coma and something very different is to be very severely mentally disabled.
I agree w/many who replied to you already.
I would not like it, some1 wanting essentially to kill themselves, but if there was no law against it, I'd have to stand aside.
But then again, normally, I don't think it would legally stand up because there is no WRITTEN documentation, and apparently only the husband's say-so. Your (simple) scenario is exactly what the Terri case is.
In any case, the big problem here is HOW she's dying - slowly by being disallowed nutrition. I wonder if she thought that would be OK, or was thinking maybe she'd be in such a bad medical state that w/o true *supporting apparati* she'd die very fast, not slowly as in this starvation. Or perhaps that she'd get an OD of anesthetic like her pets which would put her out in 30 sec.
EVEN IF TERRI DIDN'T WANT TO LIVE AS SHE IS, WOULD SHE WANT TO BE GRADUALLY LET TO DIE OVER A WEEK OR MORE?
Your hypothetical is a different case. But, in this real case, the husband gave absolutely no initial indication that was her wish. Quite the contrary -- he spoke of using the award money and studying nursing to be able to continue caring for her. He is not to be trusted, as you've noted.
So, if the case can't be made, do you err on the side of life, or death?