Judge rejects right-to-die delay

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Che, that's a shallow argument that I'd say was normally beneath you. This is a sad case all around. Nobody wins from this suffering.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. All of the "leaders" who are sticking their noses in the Schivo's business are Republicans. Here in Florida, the GOP government deliberately passed a law ("Terry's Law") that they knew was unconstitutional and would be overturned. In many ways, I give Jeb Bush a lot of credit for being a good governor, but this is one of his shameful performances. This is a cynical move to whip up the partisan base, just like *****ing about abortion (and never doing anything about it).

Let me ask this, if it was an injured dog or cat that was going to be starved to death would some of the answers here be different?

If she wasn't human, she could be euthanized. Unfortunately, that's illegal in all fifty states (IIRC, Oregon's law was just overturned, I could be wrong).

[Odin]

Originally posted by SpencerH

Let me ask this, if it was an injured dog or cat that was going to be starved to death would some of the answers here be different?

She is a vegetable, she won't suffer.

[Gatekeeper]

Damn right-wing zealots. Yeah, they care about life — until it's born! At which point all bets are off. Just like some of the left-wing zealots — they care about life *after* it's born, but if you're not to term yet, all bets are off.

The lessons I've learned from Terri Schiavo's plight? One, put into writing how you wish to be treated, should you ever become physically and mentally incapable of controlling your fate. And, two, if you're going to let Schiavo die, do so quickly, via injection of some sort, rather than letting her *starve* to death over a two-week period. That part is cruelty, IMO.

Gatekeeper

[alva]

I wouldn't want an animal to suffer any more than I would want a human to suffer. I don't see how this is relevant. Plus, we euthenize animals. We should offer the same choice for humans.

I wil go you one further, if someone would keep a pet alive in the same ccondition she is in, we would call that person inhumane.

EDIT: quote added

[Sava]

gatekeeper

re: an injection... unfortunately, we don't have a "right to die"...

[Pyrodrew]

He waited 15years before fighting for his wife's wishes?

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Unfortunately, you are wrong. All of the "leaders" who are sticking their noses in the Schivo's business are Republicans. Here in Florida, the GOP government deliberately passed a law ("Terry's Law") that they knew was unconstitutional and would be overturned. In many ways, I give Jeb Bush a lot of credit for being a good governor, but this is one of his shameful performances. This is a cynical move to whip up the partisan base, just like *****ing about abortion (and never doing anything about it).

The fact that GOP members are fighting against starving her to death does not mean that this is about "whipping up the partisan base".

If she wasn't human, she could be euthanized. Unfortunately, that's illegal in all fifty states (IIRC, Oregon's law was just overturned, I could be wrong).

Euthanasia would be a reasonable solution if it existed here. My question though is whether you really want to travel down that road? Once you allow it, you incur govt regulation. Personally, I dont trust any govt to decide who has a right to die and who doesnt.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
He waited 15years before fighting for his wife's wishes?

no, she stopped being responsive in 2001... that's when he first tried to have the feeding tube removed.

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by Sava
no, she stopped being responsive in 2001... that's when he first tried to have the feeding tube removed.

Ok. Thanks.

[Sava]

[St Leo]

Can't we compromise and administer cyanide instead of starving?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

You know the tapes I saw were as recent as 2003 were she started making nosies. If in fact you want to say let her just die dont starve the woman to death. Kill her suddenly.

[ixnay]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
You know the tapes I saw were as recent as 2003 were she started making nosies. If in fact you want to say let her just die dont starve the woman to death. Kill her suddenly.

About those tapes:

Hours of video tape was taken (illegally mind you..the judge ordered the Schindler to stop taking video/pictures of Terri and distributing them to protect Terri's privacy) and of the hours of tape, selective clips were edited to "prove" Terri reacting. In actuality, they took the random and reflexive movements & sounds she makes, and used those selective scenes to show how alert and responsive Terri is.

The fact that they refuse to release the entire tape shows that they don't want people to see what the courts have seen. The 4 hours worth of tape taken during the trial to determine Terri's condition showed that she didn't respond as the Schindlers have claimed, rather they cherry picked the movements & sounds that corresponded with their requests to show she was not PVS, when in fact the trial court and the 2nd DCA viewed the entire tape and stated on the record that those "movements and sounds" were nothing more than reflexive actions.

From another forum.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

the woman is still alive if you take her feeding tube inject her with something to just end the suffering. YOu want to know why you cant its called murder.

[Sava]

its called murder.

from Merriam Webster: 1 : the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

letting someone die instead of keeping them hooked up to machines is not murder... and you seriously misunderstand the meaning of the word if you cannot understand that.

also from Merriam Webster:

: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy

euthanasia...