Posted on 04/01/2005 11:52:28 PM PST by FairOpinion
Your suggestion that the inability to chew/swallow is a defined part of the "shutting down" process in every case (and the implication that there is a defined and short timeline) is a logical fallacy.
I STILL CANNOT BELIEVE they murdered Terri. Just can't believe it! But then I STILL CANNOT BELIEVE that there are those who condone the practice of partial-birth abortion.
What has happened to my America?!
Did it ever occur to you that sticking a sharp object into a body and injecting, say, penicillin, is an un-natural act?
You ask the same question that I did as this story unfolded. While we now look with incredulity at Terri's legally-sanctioned murder and partial-birth abortions as horrific...
Roe v Wade began this stuff, or perhaps Truman's decision to nuke Japan was the trigger-event. Certainly, the "end justifies the means" test was operative in the HST decision--a test which has NEVER been morally sanctioned.
Stephen Hawking can indicate he wants food and water, so he himself can overrule his body's inability to chew and swallow and request a feeding tube.
His brain is still functioning. He so indicates.
I am not advocating *putting down* someone. You are reading far too much into my posts.
A baby is fed by its mother's body. The body is forming, so it is a different matter. I do not advocate abortion, if that is what you are getting at.
We feed infants as their abilities to suckle, chew and swallow develop. When the ability to develop these functions is LOST (as in PVS, etc.), then a feeding tube is unnatural, and is circumventing God.
It is fine with me if you so choose to place me on *ignore*. And if many of my fellow Freepers choose to do so, that is their choice as well. I am not posting to gain friends or influence people. Instead, I am discussing my views on the matter. I am not posting to offend, just to express.
Regards,
"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today." Tom Delay.
Someone pinch me, I'm having a bad dream and can't wake up! In my dream, an innocent handicapped woman was sentenced to death by starvation, as each day passed the men with the power to save her all said they would do something tomorrow, but tomorrow never came. For 13 days this woman suffered publicly, while her family pleaded for her life, for the government to spare her from this cruel death sentence. Their cries went on deaf ears and others just simply turned their back and said there is nothing more I can do, it's the law and we can't go against the law.
The whole world watched day by day, as this innocent woman who had been locked in a room, without so much as having her teeth cleaned for 5 years, was cruelly being starved to death, per order of The United States of America. This order came not from her husband or his lawyer, but from the government itself. In one fell swoop, the government now decides who lives or dies, innocent or guilty no longer matters. The government now decides who is worthy of life and who is not.
"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today." or tomorrow or the next. It will never come, at least on this earth, because just in recent history those responsible for the most heinous crimes against the public have not been held accountable, but lauded as heroes and promoted to higher positions within our own government. We all know it and yet as a public, we still vote into office these same self serving men and woman. Have we not learned to judge a man by his actions or lack of actions, rather than what he says. Just as President Bush said after the death of this innocent woman, "the strong have a duty to protect the weak" almost made me vomit! He, the most powerful man on the face of the earth, did nothing to stop this public execution. I am no longer blinded by his words and see him for the first time, for what he is. May God have mercy on us all, because we all bear a responsibity to this woman’s death.
Well *maniac,* apparently this discussion has spiraled you into maniacal accusations.
Yes, Terri had brain function, the brain function that controls the following physical abilities: open and shut eyes. React to noises, appear to react to some stimuli (actually not a cognitive reaction), swallow some of her saliva, etc. The doctors did NOT agree that she had brain function above these basic functions. The Schindlers found doctors who alleged that Terri could, with physical therapy, learn to swallow. That was their hope, and there is always going to be a *doctor* (and their doctors were not all neurologists) who will feed a *hope,* ever how extreme or unrealistic it might be.
The court did not forbade the wet washcloth, nor did Michael Schiavo, none of those hysterical statements are anywhere in the court's decisions.
I think anyone, including you, can make decisions for yourself. I don't think anyone else has the right to make such decisions for anyone else. Terri was murdered, pure and simple.
I read the data on the CT scans, and the videos (minutes obtained after HOURS of videoing and careful editing to ensure that it appears that Terri is *tracking* and *following* and *responding*. The Guardian Ad Litem appointed by Gov Bush sat with Terri for extended hours, reviewed the unedited tapes and came to the same conclusion as the courts. Or are you not familiar with that report?
It appears to me that you have chosen to believe the information presented by one side. I have read materials from both sides, and even the third side (some trial transcripts, and court documents). Have you read data from sources OTHER than the Schindler *side*?
Your details do present some valid points.
However, I maintain that Terri Schiavo's body began shutting down fifteen years ago, and the feeding tube supplanted that natural shutdown. The dying process was therefore extended, and the organs had a chance to regenerate.
However, her brain did not, nor did the ability to chew and/or swallow.
Her parents took her home with her for three weeks (can't remember the year, it seems it was two years after her heart stopping, and before the malpractice suit award). They brought her back because they could NOT care for her. That was at least ten years ago. At that point, without ANY equivocation, Michael Schiavo was appointed guardian.
Did I bring into the discussion *wasting* money and *starve to death*?
Terri Schiavo could not chew or swallow FOOD. That is why the feeding tube was intubated fifteen years ago.
"Forbade anything by mouth at threat of arrest" could in fact be an extreme statement. Perhaps the hospice followed *protocol*. Are you aware of the protocol that follows removal of a feeding tube?
Why should a religious belief (the Schindler's personal interpretation of their Catholic religion) produce a hysterial knee jerk reaction and potentially create new laws to which I am opposed, morally, ethically and spiritually?
I heard those claims as well. But I know there is a hospice protocol that would indicate otherwise. The judge's order was not as specific as you believe. Have you read the order? Have you read the hospice's protocol?
I understand. It's hard to qualify exactly what is on display in some of these museums, but "art" is not the description that comes to my mind. My criteria is, if it's not better than what I can do, it's not art.
I believe that God gives us *choice.*
We can choose medical intervention, or not choose the intervention.
We can choose medical intervention for a time, and then refuse, as choice.
The data I have read regarding the brain and its function supports what I have stated. Terri Schiavo was capable of living because she was fed artificially by a feeding tube.
Why is it wrong to let someone go to their Creator when their body function to receive nutrition no longer functions as God intended?
I have not bookmarked every page I've read via internet, but I did find a lot of data that linked me to other data when I searched on miami.edu
Much of the data was actual court documents. Both the Schindler pleadings and the responses, findings by the courts, etc.
Yes, Terri Schiavo could live for decades if the unnatural feeding tube was in place.
I do not accept Deryk Humphrey or Jaack Kervorkian's thesis on governance of life.
I do look forward to life after death.
The checks and balances present in our governments were violated when Congress and the President intervened as they did.
I will read the Bible rather than works by Leonard Kass.
My father-in-law was an attorney as well. A Christian man, and I would that he were alive to discuss these matters with him.
There are idiots in every career, every field and in every church. However, we can and will be responsible for our actions, responses and beliefs to the One Judge. He is infallible. He also knows we are human.
Did I say in *every* case?
I apologize if I did.
Even if you haven't, there are many others who supported killing Terri who indicated that the cost of caring for her was an unnecessary waste of money. The money aspect of this issue is not irrelevant.
My question specifically addresses another issue. That is, once you have defined a person in Terri's condition (prior to her murder) as not worthy of life, on what logical basis do you justify allowing others who are in comparable conditions, but who were born that way, to continue living? Maybe you don't realize that there are tens of thousands of them (one estimate I heard: 100 to 200 thousand).
Penicillin helps the body heal itself.
It is my opinion what when the body cannot regain the function (as in a PVS patient who cannot re-learn chewing or swallowing), the feeding tube unnaturally extends *life* beyond God's purposes.
If that is my religious belief, should I be forced to accept a feeding tube? Should I be forced to allow doctors intubate my wife with a feeding tube?
Your premise is a completely different aspect. Why are these tens of thousands still alive? How are they fed, maintained?
It is indeed a great expense. The words *unnecessary waste of money* are loaded and I would dispute the use of those words.
The money issue is indeed relevant, but not relevant to the discussion of whether or not a person who cannot chew or swallow should be fed via feeding tube.
Obviously, that would be a whole separate thread, wouldn't it?
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.