Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
I abhor the "ethics" of causing death by starvation too, but that is a separate subject.

For me , this is the subject. I can understand a DNR status and also taking people off life support. Usually, these measures are taken by the family soon after the trauma if these are the patients wishes. If I understand correctly, the first time the removal of life-support was mentioned was 7 years after the trauma. For me, this is totally unethical to remove feeding from a person after 15 years of living this way.

253 posted on 03/25/2005 7:22:12 AM PST by texastoo (a "has-been" Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]


To: texastoo
If I understand correctly, the first time the removal of life-support was mentioned was 7 years after the trauma.

That is correct.

For me, this is totally unethical to remove feeding from a person after 15 years of living this way.

For me it is totally unethical to stop feeding a human in order to cause the body to die, period. Would have been wrong the first day, first week, first month, and it is unethical now, to me.

It is perfectly ethical to the medical and legal professions.

256 posted on 03/25/2005 7:27:14 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies ]

To: texastoo

What was God thinking to allow her to live this way for 15 years. The gall of him. Thank heaven we have people that know better than God. It will not be long before God will not be needed at all.


337 posted on 03/25/2005 9:07:35 AM PST by Two-Bits (May You Never be looked on with Pity from your love ones but only with love and compassion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson