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

Skip to comments.

Reborn (Schiavo supporters may have been right.)
Guardian Unlimited ^ | September 12 2006 | Helen Pidd

Posted on 09/16/2006 8:44:44 AM PDT by Jawn33

Perhaps the last word should go to Pat Flores, the mother of George Melendez, the 31-year-old coma patient who reassured his parents that he wasn't in pain after taking Ambien, as zolpidem is known in the US. He was starved of oxygen when his car overturned and he landed face down in a garden pond near his home in Houston, Texas, in 1998. "The doctors said he was clinically dead - one said he was a vegetable," says Pat. "After three weeks he suffered multi-organ failure and they said his body would ultimately succumb. They said he would never regain consciousness."

He survived and four years later, while visiting a clinic, Pat gave him a sleeping pill because his constant moaning was keeping her and her husband, Del, awake in their shared hotel room. "After 10 to 15 minutes I noticed there was no sound and I looked over," she recalls. "Instead of finding him asleep, there he was, wide awake, looking at his surroundings. I said, 'George', and he said, 'What?' We sat up for two hours asking him questions and he answered all of them. His improvements have continued and we talk every day. He has a terrific sense of humour and he carries on running jokes from the day before.

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: activism; ambien; doctors; medicine; schiavo; stilnox; zolpidem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-233 next last
To: Traveler59

She wasn't hooked up to a machine, and she was only reported to say that in any case.


181 posted on 09/17/2006 2:33:26 PM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: bvw
The case was covered very closely here on FR, and among those most closely following was T'wit. To wit, it is youself in the out-lands, not t'wit.

I'm sure it was, and I've seen other threads similar. However I feel this one-sided "Michael Schiavo bashing" and the just plan ignorant statements need to be challenged, especially when made by individuals who have no idea what it is like to watch someone you love dearly pass away before your eyes.

To say it was just for the money, or anything even remotely like that is just plain wrong and and takes on the appearance of a lynch mod with a herd mentality. I apologize if I take it where some people don't want to go, but I will NOT sit down and color.

So, each time statements/threads like this come up I will jump right into the middle and confront the statements that are being made.

-Traveler

182 posted on 09/17/2006 2:43:44 PM PDT by Traveler59 (Truth is a journey, not a destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
Well, you certainly jumped in the middle. But "confronting" is not what you did.

Say, that reminds me, did you ever hear the story of Mike, the Headless Chicken?

1945 ... In the 18 MONTHS that Mike lived as "The Headless Wonder Chicken" he grew from a mere 2 1/2 lbs. to nearly 8 lbs. In a Gayle Meyer interview Olsen said Mike was a "robust chicken - a fine specimen of a chicken except for not having a head."
Yes, sir, FRiend Traveler59, for some reason that particular case pops into, well, my "head". I still have mine.

Note for the record that the headless wonderchicken was treatly far more kindly than did Mr. Schiavo treat his most beloved wife. He was a promise keeper, for sure, that Mike!

183 posted on 09/17/2006 2:58:07 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Anitius Severinus Boethius
She wasn't hooked up to a machine, and she was only reported to say that in any case.

Under Florida law, it's the same thing:

"Life-prolonging procedure" means any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention, including artificially provided sustenance and hydration, which sustains, restores, or supplants a spontaneous vital function. The term does not include the administration of medication or performance of medical procedure, when such medication or procedure is deemed necessary to provide comfort care or to alleviate pain. § 765.101(10), Florida Statutes.

-Traveler

184 posted on 09/17/2006 3:17:14 PM PDT by Traveler59 (Truth is a journey, not a destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59

Legal or moral.

I know clearly which one you support in this case. You know which one I support in this case.


185 posted on 09/17/2006 3:40:34 PM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
So, at the age of 27, you want your loved ones to suffer along with you...give up their lives to take care of you?

If my loved ones did not judge my care to be 'burdensome', I would not want the state to second-guess their judgement.

186 posted on 09/17/2006 4:07:42 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: ContraryMary

Accect?


187 posted on 09/17/2006 4:21:24 PM PDT by Lesforlife ("For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb . . ." Psalm 139:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: supercat

I'm asking YOU....would YOU want to burden your loved ones with the task of taking care of your body indefinitely?


188 posted on 09/17/2006 4:24:46 PM PDT by Hildy (I have two horses..their names? Snoopy and Prickly Pete.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
I'm asking YOU....would YOU want to burden your loved ones with the task of taking care of your body indefinitely?

Were there nobody who wanted to care for me, I would not want my loved ones to be always out of my side out of a sense of begrudging obligation. On the other hand, if one of my relatives wanted to care for me, even if others did not, I would not want the latter people to prevent the former from doing so.

189 posted on 09/17/2006 4:46:00 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Anitius Severinus Boethius
I know clearly which one you support in this case. You know which one I support in this case.

I'm a bit more complex than that. It may be legal, but I don't have to like it. Some people would like to say it's semantics whether a person is brain damaged or brain dead. I say they're two distinctly different things. And to keep a person alive, who has already stated their wishes, does nothing but put more years in their life but it does not put life in their years.

-Traveler

190 posted on 09/17/2006 5:16:36 PM PDT by Traveler59 (Truth is a journey, not a destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
And to keep a person alive, who has already stated their wishes, does nothing but put more years in their life but it does not put life in their years.

Who, besides the Schiavos, says that Terri "stated her wishes" in the manner Michael claims?

Also, what basis was there for declaring Terri a hopeless case without making use of modern diagnostic technology in her evaluation? To be sure, the best known technology (functional MRI) could not be used without removing the metal probes from Terri's brain, but given that the doctor who installed such probes instructed Michael to remove them, I don't see why that should have been a problem--simply remove the probes (as the doctor ordered anyway) and then do the test.

The only explanation I can figure is that Michael didn't want Terri to get better. And I'd regard an evaluation by someone who does want his patient to get better as being much more trustworthy than that of someone who does not.

191 posted on 09/17/2006 8:09:36 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
How much do you really know about this whole situation, Traveler? Terri Schiavo was not "hooked up to a machine". I read a long time back what Terri's reaction was to Karen Ann Quinlan. But why do you follow your above quote with reference to Karen Ann Quinlan?

I've lived long enough to know that every comment someone makes at a young age, and every immediate reaction they may have to what they hear about, most often changes as they get older. We simply do not, cannot, mentally and physically remain in that period of our lives, and progress into adulthood.

Who among us would choose to be held to everything we said and did during this time of growth?

I tend to think one must choose to be blind if he/she will not admit to the plain truth of what went on here. IMO, a legally sanctioned murder took place.

192 posted on 09/18/2006 1:24:31 AM PDT by IIntense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Starving someone falls into the category of cruel and unusual punishment ...

It would not be legal to kill a dog by that method, and neither should it be.

Even if they do not recover, people with severe brain damage often have awareness of things, and can probably feel some sensations, such as thirst.

193 posted on 09/18/2006 1:28:21 AM PDT by BlackVeil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
...but it does not put more life in their years.

Your clever little "comparison" might be appreciated if it focused on a different topic. When it applies to life and death, it is hardly appropriate.

Who, in your belief, is the author of life and death? You? Michael Schiavo? Judge Greer?

Imagine yourself in a situation similar to that of Terri Schiavo. You collapse and are hospitalized. You are not responding normally...serious problem. Nurses testify they have fed you some things orally and you handled that just fine. You also spoke words to them.

A few years later your husband sets up a home with another woman and together they have two children. Wouldn't you agree he has made a whole new life for himself?

BUT, he is allowed to remain your guardian and the controller of all the money which came from the medical malpractice suits.

He then finds an attorney, George Felos. (You can read all about him.)

Despite the pleas of your family to let them care for you, your husband insists that you want to be starved to death. Keep in mind, he now has a live-in lover and they are the parents of two children.

Despite the fact that I have presented a small sampling of the whole crooked mess, I ask you, "Would you honestly want a person like this to decide whether you should live or die?" Continue to be given sustenance or die of starvation? Would you starve a pet under any circumstances?

194 posted on 09/18/2006 2:02:17 AM PDT by IIntense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Jawn33
Schiavo Supporters May Have Been Right

This DOES refer to Terri Schiavo and not Michael, right? Though some may judge us as arrogant, we who were appalled that Michael Schiavo, with the backing of George Greer and George Felos, succeeded in their death wish, we firmly believed we held the right position. In other words, "...May Have Been Right" was never our view of this travesty.

195 posted on 09/18/2006 2:12:25 AM PDT by IIntense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ContraryMary
The Lord didn't "call Terri home". The courts did at the request of her husband.
196 posted on 09/18/2006 5:38:24 AM PDT by PleaseNoMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: BlackVeil

My sentiments exactly!


197 posted on 09/18/2006 7:05:34 AM PDT by PhiKapMom (Oust Brad Henry from the OK Governor's Mansion. Go Sooners!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Let's face it, Mike was far from alone. New woman, new children

That should say, "new woMEN"! Michael Schiavo had more than one "fiance" while still married to Terri.I will never understand why he just did not divorce her and turn her care over to her parents. His story does not add up, except that he wanted to spend the money that he derived for his lawsuit against the hospital. And he sure didn't spend it on her.

198 posted on 09/18/2006 7:32:37 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
I'm asking YOU....would YOU want to burden your loved ones with the task of taking care of your body indefinitely?

A casual conversation over 15 years old is now not only equivalent to living will, but is equivalent to begging to be starved to death?

199 posted on 09/18/2006 11:29:34 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Terri Schiavo would have been treated better if she was a captured member of Al Qaida.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Traveler59
Crap, screwed up that post: An excellent position, except that she orally stated she did not want to live "hooked up to a machine" (reference to Karen Ann Quinlan).

A casual conversation over 15 years old is now not only equivalent to living will, but is equivalent to begging to be starved to death?

200 posted on 09/18/2006 11:31:42 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Terri Schiavo would have been treated better if she was a captured member of Al Qaida.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-233 next last

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.

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