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

To: robertpaulsen
I'm reading your posts with interest. However, I still cannot fathom why starving an otherwise healthy woman except for her brain damage is necessary and ethical.

I heard on a radio talk show this afternoon the Schindler attorney who represented Terri for a few years, Pam Anderson, state that around the 9th day after Terri's feeding tube was removed a hospice nurse told her that she was so surprised at how strong Terri's heart is, not at all like the other cancer patients. What did the nurse think, that Terri was dying from cancer?

Perhaps, in your view that is not a significant event, but I recoil when I think of a human being who would not die otherwise for a long time being deliberately starved to death by the state.

Moreover the fact that clearly many Americans think starving the innocent infirm, handicapped, disabled and defenseless is an appropriate way to dispatch them is disgusting.

185 posted on 04/02/2005 7:26:09 PM PST by harpo11 (Sandy Document Stuffed Underwear Berger gets a slap on his wrist.Terri Schiavo got starved to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: harpo11
Many people are misrepresenting Terri Schiavo as a euthanasia case, either through ignorance or because of some agenda of theirs. This is not a euthanasia case.

I repeat, this is not a euthanasia case.

This is not a situation where well-intentioned people are trying to figure out what to do with Terri -- should she live or should she die. Would I want to live or would I want to die.

Scrap all of that. It's a lie. Save it for a real euthanasia case.

Terri Schiavo is about an individual who, lacking a Living Will or Durable Power of Attorney, nonetheless expressed a verbal desire that if it came to be, she would not want to live in a brain damaged state by artificial means. That's it. Pure and simple.

Many arguments followed. Some said Terri is not in a PVS (Persistent Vegetative State). Some argued that a feeding tube is not "artificial means". Some said that she can swallow on her own and doesn't need the feeding tube. Others said that a verbal wish doesn't count. Some said the people who heard that wish are lying. On and on.

Michael, her husband, took the whole thing to Judge Greer in 1998 and said (in effect), "Here. You sort it out".

In January, 2000, Judge Greer held a hearing to determine what Terri wanted. According to Florida law, an oral wish is acceptable, but the judge is charged with finding "clear and convincing" evidence as to the patient's wishes.

In February, 2000, Judge Greer found that Terri would not have wanted to live the way she was living, and ordered the feeding tube removed.

Terri's cerebral cortex is gone. She feels no pain. She is not conscious, even when she's "awake".

This was Terri's wish. Not Michael's. Not Judge Greer's. If she had placed this wish in writing, we never would have heard of Terri Schiavo because she would have died years ago.

186 posted on 04/02/2005 9:03:08 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | 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