Posted on 04/01/2005 8:05:46 PM PST by FairOpinion
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Polls leading up to the death of Terri Schiavo made it appear Americans had formed a consensus in favor of ending her life. However, a new Zogby poll with fairer questions shows the nation clearly supporting Terri and her parents and wanting to protect the lives of other disabled patients.
The Zogby poll found that, if a person becomes incapacitated and has not expressed their preference for medical treatment, as in Terri's case, 43 percent say "the law presume that the person wants to live, even if the person is receiving food and water through a tube" while just 30 percent disagree.
Another Zogby question his directly on Terri's circumstances.
"If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.
A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes.
"From the very start of this debate, Americans have sat on one of two sides," Concerned Women for America's Lanier Swann said in response to the poll. One side "believes Terri's life has worth and purpose, and the side who saw Michael Schiavo's actions as merciful, and appropriate."
More than three-fourths of Americans agreed, Swann said, "because a person is disabled, that patient should never be denied food and water."
The poll also lent support to members of Congress to who passed legislation seeking to prevent Terri's starvation death and help her parents take their lawsuit to federal courts.
"When there is conflicting evidence on whether or not a patient would want to be on a feeding tube, should elected officials order that a feeding tube be removed or should they order that it remain in place," respondents were asked.
Some 18 percent said the feeding tube should be removed and 42 percent said it should remain in place.
Swann said her group would encourage Congress to adopt legislation that would federal courts to review cases when the medical treatment desire of individuals is not known and the patient's family has a dispute over the care.
"According to these poll results, many Americans do in fact agree with what we're trying to accomplish," she said.
The poll found that 49 percent of Americans believe there should be exceptions to the right of a spouse to act as a guardian for an incapacitated spouse. Only 39 percent disagreed.
When asked directly about Terri's case and told the her estranged husband Michael "has had a girlfriend for 10 years and has two children with her" 56 percent of Americans believed guardianship should have been turned over to Terri's parents while 37 percent disagreed.
Do you want a judge to be able to deny you sips of water or ice chips, even as you die? Do you want a judge to forbid you from offering comfort in the form of a spoon full of cool water to your child as he or she dies?
That was enough for the Court.
Of course, you want to dismiss their testimony based on how you "feel" about them.
Why of COURSE... because... because... they might CHOKE TO DEATH [/sarc]
Has anybody noticed that the Pope stopped eating around the time that Terri was sentenced to death by having her feeding tube pulled? He denounced what the american left was doing to kill this woman. He didn't eat either, however he was granted water, more than Terri was allowed, they even gave him a feeding tube, but it was not tolerated, now he is dying as well.
Because something is "good enough for the Court" it's automatically good enough for the people for whom the government is supposed to be of, by, and for?
Terri...don't ask me bull$hit rhetorical questions.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, then take the time to find out on your own, or go on to a different topic where you are more familiar with the details.
I am not obligated to either educate you, or amuse you.
It is NOT the question of how I "feel", it is the question of a lot of conflicting statements and "information".
I also heard the statement of Terri's best friend, who said that MS was very controlling, that he wouldn't let Terri go anywhere, checked the mileage on her car, to make sure she came right home after work, and that Terri told this friend that she wanted to leave MS. And this was not just a statement she made, when in a bad mood, but they were actually planning on getting an apartment, talked about how they will furnish it, etc., which shows Terri was seriously considering it.
Then suddenly she suffers this unexplained "collapse"...
You just contradicted yourself in the space of one paragraph.
And, here's the $64,000 question: is it good enough for God?
Thank you for pointing out the real act of intentional murder in this case: the denial of both artificial and natural means of hydration and nutrition.
That is your assumption and it is wrong.
MY feelings have nothing, aboslutely nothing, to do with this. Michael Schiavo's own very flawed and contradictory testimonies and actions are clearly indicative of a man who was unfit to make any decision regarding this woman's care, much less her life.
You don't know the answer so don't bother to respond.
Zogby's questions were even more slanted than the MSM.
Is it good enough for God?
Mmmm...
Thirty years ago, Terri Schiavo would have died.
We are playing God in extending life beyond a point where traditionally life would have ceased.
With all due respect, I do not believe the Pope is somehow supernaturally partaking of this woman's suffering and death. The Pope has been ill for quite sometime. His decline and Terri's death have nothing in common.
Yes, and there are statutes in the State of Florida which require caregivers to provide nutrition and hydration to disabled persons. The statutes do not make an exception for 'next of kin' to kill their inconveninent disabled relatives by starvation and dehydration.
But for Judge Greer's order, one would expect the Pinellas County Sherriff's office to haul off in manacles anyone starving and dehydrating their next of kin.
If I am a vegetable and and water is all that is keeping me trapped in a such a miserable state of limbo, then by all means deny it.
It's preferable to suffering years on end.
Generally, I agree with you. Yet when a state law or judicial decision compromises Constitutional rights, I would expect Federal intervention.
Greer's interpretation of clear and convincing doesn't seem to pass the common sense test and did show that the Florida law needs fixing or risk further cynical application.
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.