Posted on 03/10/2011 12:13:39 PM PST by wagglebee
“In our culture, we would never sentence a person to die from hunger.”
A good reason to go back to the morally superior culture of Rwanda.
I would have taken her home. With training, I managed my mother’s feeding tube for 3 1/2 months.
Let's see, Rwanda had a civil war and genocide where approximately 1 million people were killed. This woman and her family left, moved to the United States and became citizens.
Here in the United States a baby is killed EVERY 24 SECONDS, we dehydrate and starve the disabled to death and we will soon have death panels.
53 MILLION INNOCENT AMERICANS have been murdered as the result of judicial decree in the past 38 years -- if you think you can make a case based on that for "moral superiority," be my guest.
*****************************************
What hypocrisy.
It’s such a lie. These helpless, defenceless souls are being tortured to death. At least have the human decency to admit that what you are doing is killing them.
No - The point of this article is to pull-on our heart strings and blame others.
I notice Mrs. Nyirahabiyambere has a son, has a daughter, has grand-children. Its good to have family. Are they supporting their mother? Is life really so much better in Rwanda as they claim? Why blame Georgetown Univ. Hospital? They seem to have been extremely charitable and respectful in the many months they cared for this poor woman. So who then must protect life? Shall we only look for those with the deepest pockets to do so? I feel this article does not offer solutions, only emotion.
By that I mean you support the idea that a hospital can just decide to starve and dehydrate someone to death?
Good. You go pay for her healthcare or let the Baptist minister.
Hello??? Did you read the article? The hospital petitioned the court to appoint a legal guardian for this woman. That removed any control the family had over this woman’s care. Just like Terri Schiavo, whose family wanted to care for her at home at their own expense. The article’s point is that the gov has no right to decide who lives & who dies. Don’t you get that?
Wow! The cold-hearted, anti-life responses by some FReepers are unbelievable & are what give conservatives a bad name.
I will pray for you.....some of you seem to be under the influence of the Evil One.
Cut off her feeding tube and water? Gee, that’s what we do with people here in the US. It’s the ObamaCareWay. She should have been warned after watching Terri Schiavo MURDERED.
First — it appears we don’t have ALL the pieces of this puzzle to put together. All we DO know is a woman is DYING and SOMEWHERE, SOMEONE has dropped to ball.
Second, if this is a failure of Georgetown Hospital, a “Jesuit” Hospital, are they “washing their hands” of her care because she is an immigrant — or because she is a Baptist? Yeah — the Jesuits have a history....
Third, it appears that the Government HAS intervened, so it may not matter WHAT the Hospital does or does not want to do. If the Government SAYS who can or cannot make decisions, or what can or cannot be done insofar as treatment, then the Hospitals hands are tied. The patient DOESN’T matter.
It's threads like these that show me how many FReepers actually support death panels.
Of course not.. In Rwanda their culture would be to HACK them to death!!!
Murder is murder. No matter the country or the method. It's true the world is immersed in a culture of death. It's just hard to believe America has to be part of that culture. We should be better than that. If more people actually believed in God (instead of just saying they do), we could possibly turn America around.
bump!
Usually people read the article, and THEN post.
The article, though, doesn't do a good job of making the issues clear. The central issue is not
The real, central point is that a helpless woman's feeding tube was removed, for the purpose of causing her death by starvation/dehydration. This is murder.
Since she was severely disabled, the proper thing to do would have been to secure "ordinary care" for her -- at a long-term convalescent care center or hospice --- which her adult sons, all apparently employed and enjoying some level of income, should have paid for.
"Ordinary care" is nothing more or less than nutrition/hydration, hygienic maintenance and comfort care; it is not expensive; and it should have been provided by her next of kin. This is their familial obligation. If they can't afford a convaescent home, it could have been provided in a private home, or even an apartment, with home hospice workers and/or family members attending to the (simple) process of tube feeding.
The fact that all the choices were taken away by a court-appointed "guardian" who exercised "guardianship" by arranging for her death by starvation, is gravely wrong. Whatever the legalities, from a moral point of view it is premeditated murder.
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.