Posted on 03/22/2005 4:03:02 PM PST by Crackingham
A Michigan lawmaker is working on legislation that would prohibit a spouse having an affair from denying food, fluids or medical treatment to a wife or husband who cannot make such decisions.
Rep. Joel Sheltrown on Tuesday said he wants to avoid a situation similar to Terri Schiavo's.
snip
Sheltrown, a Democrat from West Branch, said Michigan should strengthen its protections before a similar situation happens here.
"While people, in happier times, may trust their spouses to make future medical decisions for them, situations change," Sheltrown said in a statement. "In a situation where an incapacitated patient lives at the mercy of an adulterous spouse, it is in the patient's interest to make a presumption in favor of life."
Michigan law already prohibits the denial of life-sustaining treatment, such as food and water, unless the patient has expressed that such action be taken, said Sheltrown, who expects to introduce the bill in about three weeks.
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/2dcaorder01-01.txt
Thanks for that. I am reproducing the last paragraph here. I have some problems with the question as posed by the appellate court. It presumes too much about the factors that Terri might consider (e.g., expecting a miracle to recreate her brain); and I think makes a leap by counting forced starvation as "a natural death process." We don't know if that is the calculus that would have weighed on the patient's mind, even after ten years of PVS.
In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did.
Yet another Huh?
I didn't point fingers at not being able to afford counsel. I have no clue about the Schindlers financial situation.
What I said was, if they hired a bad attorney, that's not anybody's fault but their own.
Well, then Hillary certainly wouldn't have to worry about Bill offing her.
"What I said was, if they hired a bad attorney, that's not anybody's fault but their own."
How would one know they hired a bad attorney until the case was over?
In this case it was a death sentence.
How stupid.
You either have a living will or you don't.
Oh, so you don't know it's a bad attorney until you lose a case? Do you understand that even good attorneys lose cases and that sometimes it's the case that's bad and never should have been brought?
well, then there now - Terri was not, is not "on machines" - she was not on life support, not comatose, not in a PVS - etc - only a feeding tube - and only that because her husband-in-name-only refused to let them feed her by mouth - and there are nurses who have signed affidavits that she could be -
But how can you create the illusion that someone is on life support if they are not, at least, on 'something -
the feeding tube is only hooked up for a few minutes a day to deliver the nutrients...
that is not "life support"
(and, oh, Peach-y, don't bother to answer me. It's obvious you are for euthanasia - so no sense conversing with you - I only commented on you remarks for others to read)
Right - after all, his wife and a coming child were inconvenient - in the way.
"Oh, so you don't know it's a bad attorney until you lose a case? Do you understand that even good attorneys lose cases and that sometimes it's the case that's bad and never should have been brought?"
No I had no idea good attorneys lose cases. (sarcasm)
In some cases there are BAD judges.
Oh, lots of bad judges.
And now with Congress getting involved with what used to be settled by families and doctors, we are going to see more of these cases.
And we will need a LOT more judges. That is NOT a good thing.
Shouldn't Florida have a simialr law regarding spouses who attempt to murder the spouse in question?
great solution - well, maybe we could make an exception in your case...
I believe the tube and/or the device that enters her stomach are permanently attached. The tube from the nutrient back is affixed temporarily to the device permanently installed in her stomach.
Oh, no. Let me answer.
You seem unaware that Florida law considers feeding tubes to be part of what they call life saving equipment.
And not just Florida either, btw.
If you don't like the law, may I suggest you work to change it.
Have you read the facts of the case? Terri cannot medically take food and water if she had tried she might choke to death.
"Oh, lots of bad judges.
And now with Congress getting involved with what used to be settled by families and doctors, we are going to see more of these cases.
And we will need a LOT more judges. That is NOT a good thing."
This is another area of disagreement. Congress is the one who set up all these courts and Congress is the one who allowed things to get out of control.
Allowing this judge to make a life and death decision was never what the Constitution intended or allowed.
Outstanding. Clearly there is a "conflict of interest" at hand.
Som,eone should assist Terri to get divorced before she starves to death.
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.