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.
Thanks. For some reason, I didn't scroll down enough at terrisfight.org, but finally found the documents, after others posted the links.
This is worse, than anyone's worst nightmare.
You seem to have your Courts mixed up.
And Glen Beck is banned from my radio.
In his time was when she was struck by the heart attack which destroyed her cerebral cortex.
Giving someone food and water by mouth is an "experimental procedure"?
What's the harm, that it may kill her? (/sarcasm)
Krauthammer argued that where there was a disagreement between the spouse and the parents, and no living will, the party who was willing to care for the person in PVS state should prevail. I agree with Krauthammer. He has it exactly right in the sense that I agree with him. Within certain constrainst as outlined, choose life, choose the nurturing party, where there is a lack of certainty of the preferences of the PSV person, chosen with thought and gravitas, by virtue of having to pen and sign a written document.
Not murder according to the law.
I believe someone else testified to being her best friend. But even if that weren't the case, I'm curious what evidence, if any, was introduced to back up the sister-in-law's claim of friendship. Things like photographs of her with her sister-in-law, letters, autographed or personalized gifts, testimony of others about their friendships, etc. If you know of any, I'd like to hear of them.
No - the request the judge denied was placing her in experimental therapy that would allow her to swallow and chew food on her own. You can play at sophistry with others but not with me.
This happens all the time when it comes to these sort of cases.
Agreed.
However, in Terri's case, Florida Law, not a Charles Krauthammer Op Ed took precedent.
You are beyond help. I'm through talking with you.
Then read the text of the case. Obviously, it was sufficient for the Judge.
You are clearly correct. New laws are needed. Clearly.
Can't argue with facts? Oh well.
"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."
Most of the MSM was careful to make sure people do NOT understand the situation and the facts of the case.
I just looked at Greer's ruling again...he explicitly said he didn't need to rule on Michael Schiavo's testimony because he had Scott and Joan Schiavo's testimony. The only testimony of a friend of Terri's was that she wouldn't want the feeding tube removed. Interestingly Greer dismissed her testimony because he didn't know when Karen Quinlin died(the event that sparked the discussion between the witness and Terri) and questioned the actual date of the conversation.
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.