Replies

My aunt was dying of ovarian cancer. She had tried everything and there was no hope. In the end she was vomiting feces, which I had not know was even humanly possible. It was the worst death I've ever witnessed.

Doctors ultimately inserted a feeding tube. She insisted that it be removed and stopped eating or drinking by mouth, which she was still capable of doing, although with disasterous results. Within a short period of time, she never struggled again or seemed to have any pain and died quickly after that. It was a blessing.

Were there other ways to help her over those final few weeks? Unquestionably. But those other ways are considered unethical.

My aunt was dying of ovarian cancer.

Sounds as though she was clinically terminal. Most patients in that condition voluntarily stop taking nutrients, but do crave hydration.

A sad story, and sorry for your loss. But it is totally irrelevant to the point of causing death, initiating death, with a starvation process.

My aunt was dying of ovarian cancer. She had tried everything and there was no hope. In the end she was vomiting feces, which I had not know was even humanly possible. It was the worst death I've ever witnessed. Doctors ultimately inserted a feeding tube. She insisted that it be removed and stopped eating or drinking by mouth, which she was still capable of doing, although with disasterous results. Within a short period of time, she never struggled again or seemed to have any pain and died quickly after that. It was a blessing.

NOW I see why you want Terri dead. NEWSFLASH...Terri is not your aunt.

My aunt was dying of ovarian cancer. She had tried everything and there was no hope. In the end she was vomiting feces, which I had not know was even humanly possible. It was the worst death I've ever witnessed. Doctors ultimately inserted a feeding tube. She insisted that it be removed and stopped eating or drinking by mouth, which she was still capable of doing, although with disasterous results. Within a short period of time, she never struggled again or seemed to have any pain and died quickly after that. It was a blessing. """

INTERESTING, BUT NOT RELEVANT. Terri Schiavo is not in the last stages of terminal illness. She's not even ill - let alone have a terminal disease. But she IS one of thousands of people around the country who have severe brain damage. ARE WE GOING TO KILL THEM ALL? I don't see any logic that allows us to kill Terri but to spare the thousands of others who are in similar physical state - whether it's PVS or minimal consciousness, or whatever it's diagnosed.

THAT'S WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT -- whether we start down the path of killing severely disabled people because we've made a determination that they would be better off dead.

You point out that feed tubes are pulled with some regularity from terminally ill elderly people. Whether that's right or wrong - and it depends on the particular circumstances of each case - it simply is not relevant to the question of whether we should start withholding nourishment from brain damaged people who otherwise ARE NOT DYING. That would be a HUGE change in policy in the US. And yes, it would start us down the German road - because this is what Germany did in the 30s - it made a decision that the severely disabled were better off dead. That decision had consequences that didn't stop with the severely disabled.