Terry Schiavo

[Guest oldschooler]

I personally don`t see this as being political...and I don`t see why it should be.
I`m not trying to make it political...I think this is more a moral issue.
Michael Shiavo has a child with his common law wife. He should just
let her family take care of her. I totally agree with you there...
Straving her to death...a process that could take weeks ...shouldn`t even be
an option ...and I don`t see how some1 that claims to love some1 could even consider it no matter what condition they are in ...that`s what I have been saying...

[Jason]

The Supreme Court has refused to hear the case today.

Bad news for Terri and her family.

[kitkat]

This is a "quality of life" issue.

Udub-[i]YOU[/i] may not think this is a life worth living, but others do (i.e. parents, family members). And what's up with the comments about her suffering? How do you know she is suffering? Are you standing by her bed and looking into her eyes? oh thats right you don't know her, therefore you cannot tell if she is in pain...because you can tell with someone you know, I've worked with enough patients on ACTUAL life support to know what I am talking about. Starvation is painful. So if you want to end her "suffering", which is it? That you [u]think[/u] she is suffering because she cant "enjoy" life how you see it or actually causing her to suffer, such as starvation.

As for BJ, I don't know if you were kidding about the monetary comments, but if you weren't, that's just asinine. There are many people who disagree with how our dollars are spent, such as war.

[jza10304]

[quote name='kitkat' date='Mar 24 2005, 01:12 PM']This is a "quality of life" issue.

Udub-[i]YOU[/i] may not think this is a life worth living, but others do (i.e. parents, family members). And what's up with the comments about her suffering? How do you know she is suffering? Are you standing by her bed and looking into her eyes? oh thats right you don't know her, therefore you cannot tell if she is in  pain...because you can tell with someone you know, I've worked with enough patients on ACTUAL life support to know what I am talking about. Starvation is painful. So if you want to end her "suffering", which is it? That you [u]think[/u] she is suffering because she cant "enjoy" life how you see it or actually causing her to suffer, such as starvation.

As for BJ, I don't know if you were kidding about the monetary comments, but if you weren't, that's just asinine. There are many people who disagree with how our dollars are spent, such as war.
[right][post="66960"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
very well written!! [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img]

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='kitkat' date='Mar 24 2005, 12:12 PM']This is a "quality of life" issue.

Udub-[i]YOU[/i] may not think this is a life worth living, but others do (i.e. parents, family members). And what's up with the comments about her suffering? How do you know she is suffering? Are you standing by her bed and looking into her eyes? oh thats right you don't know her, therefore you cannot tell if she is in  pain...because you can tell with someone you know, I've worked with enough patients on ACTUAL life support to know what I am talking about. Starvation is painful. So if you want to end her "suffering", which is it? That you [u]think[/u] she is suffering because she cant "enjoy" life how you see it or actually causing her to suffer, such as starvation.

As for BJ, I don't know if you were kidding about the monetary comments, but if you weren't, that's just asinine. There are many people who disagree with how our dollars are spent, such as war.
[right][post="66960"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

i agree w/ jza... great post...

i normally don't agree w/ you kat, but this should prove this is anything but a political issue...

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

I think this is a common sense issue. Common sense should tell you that if there are people who love this woman and they are willing to take responsibility for her then let them. Why is that so hard for people to understand? Her "husband" shouldn't have the right to decide if she lives or dies, especially given the FACTS that he 1. Hasn't tried to rehabilitate her at all(despite having the financial means to) and there is precedent were rehabilitation can help. 2. He has moved on with his love life and he has a common law wife and a child. 3. There is NO LIVING WILL that proves his claims that she wanted to starved to death, since when is hersay permissable in a court of law?

It just seems that logic and common sense has been lost on everyone who is making the key decisions, this only puts the problems with our justice system under the magnifying glass. Her husband is motivated by something, but it ain't love. This is crazy how our government; who is supposed to be working for the people, not killing them, has sentenced this woman to starve to death. That's the part that shows that the key decision-makers aren't using logic and common sense.

[whodey319]

totally inappropriate but funny:

[img]http://www.tshirthell.com/images/shirtofmonth_143.jpg[/img]

[creechnasty]

[quote][b][u]Mocking the Mostly Dead[/u][/b]


First of all, how you get Shy-vo out of Schiavo is way beyond ,but that's not the point. About half the actual point is you know what? I don't care. Do I know Terry Schiavo or any of her family? No. Do you? I seriously doubt it. Was she the only person whose life hung in the balance in the last few days? Absolutely not. Then why for fuck's sake was I and the rest of the lot of you submitted to nothing but Terri Schiavo for every minute of the last few days. I couldn't even get away from it listening to the Beeb for the love multiple sexual positions. I defy anyone to assert that this is a life more important than all the other lives out there. I could list any number of more important issues but I won't bother because unless you've been in a persistent vegetative state for the last fifteen years you're probably aware of them.

Now then, what I suggest is that everyone including myself just shut up about it. The country has laws and medical standards and it seems as if their being followed or at least were till congress got involved in this entire mess. I'm not a doctor and I doubt you dear reader are either and even if you are the chances that you've examined the person in question here are slim. So seriously drop the subject America. We don't know what we're talking about. Especially that part of America and the world of the opinion that "big g" god decides when it's someone's time to die. Er, with all lack of proper respect it seems to me in this case that god already tried, leaving us with a score of god 0 : doctors 1, Terry Schiavo fucked.

But, before I take my own advice I'll throw down a little Solomonic wisdom. What it boils down to is that yes it is pretty horrible to yank the woman's feeding tube if she is aware that she is starving to death. Maybe she would be, maybe she wouldn't be, we really can't say for absolutely, positively sure either way. Thus I offer up the following compromise: someone at the hospice wherein the Schiavo woman is stored boils up about five gallons of porridge; the five gallons of porridge will then be put into a five gallon bowl; Mrs. Schiavo shall be seated before the bowl with a large wooden spoon in one hand; then once she is in proper eating position she shall be released and then it will all be in the hands of the fates. If she plummets face forward into the bowl, makes no attempt despite her lack of nutrition to eat it, and drowns in five gallons of porridge, well then I'd say god had rendered his verdict: too stupid to live.[/quote]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050324/cagle00.gif[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050323/danziger.gif[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050323/koterba.gif[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050324/corky.jpg[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://www.cagle.com/news/TerriSchiavo/images/gorrell.gif[/img]

[Jason]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='Mar 24 2005, 04:06 PM']I think this is a common sense issue.  Common sense should tell you that if there are people who love this woman and they are willing to take responsibility for her then let them.  Why is that so hard for people to understand?  Her "husband" shouldn't have the right to decide if she lives or dies, especially given the FACTS that he 1. Hasn't tried to rehabilitate her at all(despite having the financial means to) and there is precedent were rehabilitation can help. 2. He has moved on with his love life and he has a common law wife and a child. 3. There is NO LIVING WILL that proves his claims that she wanted to starved to death, since when is hersay permissable in a court of law?

It just seems that logic and common sense has been lost on everyone who is making the key decisions, this only puts the problems with our justice system under the magnifying glass.  Her husband is motivated by something, but it ain't love.  This is crazy how our government; who is supposed to be working for the people, not killing them, has sentenced this woman to starve to death.  That's the part that shows that the key decision-makers aren't using logic and common sense.
[right][post="67000"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Smoov,

We don't agree very often in this thread, but I am with you 100% on this one. Very well put!

[-Dan_Bengals_FL-]

First of all I see a lot of people who don't know much about this type of condition so I will try to enlighten.

I had the pleasure on Thursday to talk to a professor who majored in Neurology and works in a lab at my school.

He pointed out that Terry will never come out of this condition. The Senator who is a doctor who watched a tape and claims she is responsive is a complete fool. The only doctors who claim she is responsive are doctors who were brought in by the parents or others that have a hidden agenda. The part of the brain that allows her to touch and make eye movements is completely seperate from the part that allows her to have any conscience idea of what is going on. That part of the brain is dead and will never recover.

On another note, people die of starvation all the time. It is actually pretty common. With people on their last leg of parkison's disease the feeding tube is often pulled. My teacher's brother in law just died of that recently. He actually woke up out of his comma from parkison's ate a full meal and died three days later. That is also a common event.

The one thing I don't like about this case, is the government needs to stay out of the matter. There is no judical presidence for them to get involved and they shouldn't. Laws should not apply there. However I do think the husband is a cold man. He just comes across that way to me. However when people like the doctor senator come along and say that she is responsive, it is a complete joke. Would he like to change her diapers everyday, and pay for the treatment? I think not. I do sympathize with her parents, but I think it is time to let her go.

I know I would not want to be in that condition for that long.

[Guest BadassBengal]

[quote name='jza10304' date='Mar 23 2005, 05:02 PM']It isn't against the will of her legal guardian which is her husband.  I personally think she is brain-dead, but I find it cruel that she has to be starved, however I believe that there is no law to essentially kill a patient in a less painful way.  If she is in a persistent vegetative state she cannot think, speak or respond to commands, not aware of her surroundings, though she might move spontaneously and make noises, cry or laugh.

In my opinion the government is stepping over boundaries to prolong this issue anymore than it needs to.
[right][post="66579"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


If you believe she is breandead, then you should know that she wouldn't be able to feel ANY pain at all. Her pain receptors have been completely fucked since day one. Even if she COULD feel pain, they've been constantly pumping her ass with morphine, so it wouldn't be no thang. I say get this shit overwith, and just give her a lethal injection or something. Her parents are complete fuck-tards. Why the hell would someone want to even be alive if they can't see/think/feel/anything? I sure as hell wouldn't. If you ask me, she isn't even technically alive anymore. Just a meat bag with a thumping heart. Let her die, people...

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050325/lester.gif[/img]

[Guest BlackJesus]

[img]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050324/simanca.gif[/img]

[Ben]

Am i going to hell for laughing when i saw this?

[url="http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/"]http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/[/url]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Ben' date='Mar 30 2005, 08:25 AM']Am i going to hell for laughing when i saw this?

[url="http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/"]http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/[/url]
[right][post="69416"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



Yes.


But so am I. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img]

[Guest bengalrick]

i don't know anything about a persistant vegitative state, and i have never claimed to, but i can't understand if there is conflicting evidence, why the hurry to dehydrate her (you die from dehydration well before starvation)???

[url="http://www.crisismagazine.com/january2004/johansen.htm"]crisis magazine[/url]
[quote]Questionable Medical Evidence
Doctors testifying on behalf of Michael Schiavo say that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), with no hope of recovery. [b]A patient in a PVS is unaware of himself or his environment and does not respond to the world around him[/b]. He continues breathing on his own, maintains a stable heart rate, and may even have eye movements that mimic normal sleep. [b]However, he has, for all intents and purposes, no higher brain functions that we would associate with “consciousness.” [/b] Judge Greer’s order to remove Terri’s feeding tube was based largely on his finding that no course of treatment could improve her “quality of life” and that she had no function in her cerebral cortex.

The ruling and judgment are sweeping, including such statements that there was “no such testimony” to establish any hope of recovery and that “the credible evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that Terry Schiavo remains in a persistent vegetative state.” Given such confident pronouncements, one might expect to find the evidence behind them all but impervious to refutation.

But that isn’t the case. What you find when you examine the medical data and listen to the experiences of those who have spent the most time with Terri over the last decade is that a great deal of evidence belies the contention that Terri is in a PVS. Terri’s parents, brother, sister, and numerous other family members and friends who visit her regularly do not believe for a moment that Terri is unaware of her environment or unresponsive. At a press conference organized by the Schindlers on October 24, Terri’s mother, father, and eight others all gave accounts of how they see Terri consistently respond to people: She smiles, frowns, or acts sullenly depending on who the person is and what he or she does or says. She reacts quite markedly to music, particularly piano music, which she always especially enjoyed. A certified speech therapist asserted that Terri does attempt to verbalize and has been heard saying “yes,” “no,” “Mommy,” and possibly even “Help me.”

[b]Even more powerful is the testimony of the numerous doctors who emphatically deny that Terri is in a PVS. The most convincing medical testimony comes from Dr. William Hammesfahr, a neurologist specializing in the treatment of brain injuries, who has spent approximately twelve hours examining Terri. At the October 24 press conference, Hammesfahr explained that Terri is able to respond to commands: She can raise and lower her limbs, although her range of motion is limited by severe muscular contractures from a lack of physical therapy for more than a decade. Doctors testifying for Michael Schiavo have dismissed such responses as reflexes. But what is most telling is Hammesfahr’s description of Terri’s response to a standard strength test: In this test he asked Terri to lift up her leg while he pressed down on it with his hand. He instructed her to keep lifting it in spite of his pressure. Hammesfahr explained how he could feel Terri pressing up against his hand with the same degree of force with which he was pressing down, so as to keep her leg in the same relative position. Such a response, Hammesfahr explained, is simply not reducible to a “reflex.” [/b]

Hammesfahr has even observed her move her head and limbs into positions that clearly cause her discomfort and maintain them in order to carry out instructions he gave her. Such behavior, Hammesfahr said, cannot be reflexive: [/B] One has to overcome reflexes in order to perform a task in spite of discomfort or pain.

Many have seen the now-famous videotape that the Schindlers distributed to the press in their effort to show the world that Terri is not a vegetable. In this video, Terri gives every appearance of looking directly at those speaking to her, reacting to her mother’s embrace, and following (with her eyes) a balloon around the room. While many who saw the video found it compelling evidence that Terri is in fact conscious, Judge Greer did not.

Although he had to be asked twice to look at his monitor and to put his glasses back on so he could see it clearly, he did not find the video evidence sufficiently “consistent and reproducible.” He opined that “cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli.” Pat Anderson, the Schindlers’ attorney, explained in a World Net Daily article that Judge Greer, in evaluating the video, used a “scorecard” approach that “stacked the deck no matter how Terri responded. If she always responded—it was just primitive brain-stem activity. If she randomly responded—it was not repetitive enough.” Interestingly, Judge Greer and Felos have sought to suppress the video, and Judge Greer ordered the Schindlers not to photograph or videotape Terri in the future, under threat of legal sanction.

Where Judge Greer derived the medical theory that “cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli” is hard to discern. [b]It was not a matter of evidence introduced in the medical testimony in either the 1998 or 2000 legal proceedings[/b]. Furthermore, it’s a matter of common sense that people don’t respond to the same stimulus in exactly the same way every time with 100 percent predictability or repeatability. Indeed, if Terri did respond in such a rote manner, it’s likely that such a response would have been dismissed as “reflexive.” But the evidence of the videos and the testimony of the numerous family members and doctors overwhelmingly show that Terri does respond “consistently” to numerous stimuli. According to Hammesfahr, any of these responses, let alone all of them, should rule out a finding of PVS. “By definition,” he said, “if there is any response to the outside world, the patient isn’t in a PVS.”[/quote]

i just don't know if she is in a PVS state of mind... since we are not sure, and she hasn't been examined for a long time... if there is doubt, why not side w/ life over killing her... there was a guy in colorado that raped and killed someone, and recieved the death penality... but a juror brought a bible to the jury room as they were deciding his fate, and read the passage about "eye for eye" etc... just b/c of that, he isn't the getting the death penality... their lawyers got to appeal it as much as they want... why can't an innocent woman?

[url="http://www.terrisfight.org"]terrisfight.org[/url]
[quote]Not only that, Terri’s situation is akin to that of the condemned prisoner imagined above—who could be saved if only the court would consider newly discovered facts. Here is just a sampling of facts and allegations that emerged since the original trial:

-Mr. Schiavo informed a medical malpractice jury, from which he was seeking millions of dollars in 1992, that he would care for his wife for the rest of his life, that she would live a normal life span, and that she would be provided rehabilitation and therapy. As soon as the money was in the bank, however, he refused all therapy and started to refuse medical treatment such as antibiotics. In other words, Schiavo’s story changed when he went to court in 1998 seeking her early death, casting serious doubt on his testimony that Terri would “want to die.”

-Three nurses have signed affidavits under penalty of perjury that Mr. Schiavo used to go to Terri’s nursing home and angrily demand to know why his wife was not yet dead.

-Friends of Terri have come forward stating that she believed in the old maxim, where there is life, there is hope. Indeed, all of her close friends and family deny that she would want to die under these circumstances.

-Several doctors and therapists have testified in written affidavits that she is not in a persistent vegetative state, and indeed, that she could be improved with proper therapy—treatment she has been denied since 1993.

-Dehydration may not be a painless way to die as some have asserted. Indeed, if the patient is conscious and not otherwise dying, it can be agonizing. [Weekly Standard Link][/quote]

[jza10304]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='Mar 30 2005, 11:01 AM']i don't know anything about a persistant vegitative state, and i have never claimed to, but i can't understand if there is conflicting evidence, why the hurry to dehydrate her (you die from dehydration well before starvation)???

[url="http://www.crisismagazine.com/january2004/johansen.htm"]crisis magazine[/url]
i just don't know if she is in a PVS state of mind... since we are not sure, and she hasn't been examined for a long time... if there is doubt, why not side w/ life over killing her... there was a guy in colorado that raped and killed someone, and recieved the death penality... but a juror brought a bible to the jury room as they were deciding his fate, and read the passage about "eye for eye" etc... just b/c of that, he isn't the getting the death penality... their lawyers got to appeal it as much as they want... why can't an innocent woman?

[url="http://www.terrisfight.org"]terrisfight.org[/url]
[right][post="69435"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
because he is alive and was facing the law of the United States, not the law of God. I wouldn't want someone referring to the Bible, Koran, Torah (or any other religious book) during my sentencing (except for maybe the Buddhist scritures of non-violence [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img] ).

[Ben]

[quote name='jza10304' date='Mar 30 2005, 10:11 AM']because he is alive and was facing the law of the United States, not the law of God.  I wouldn't want someone referring to the Bible, Koran, Torah (or any other religious book) during my sentencing (except for maybe the Buddhist scritures of non-violence  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img] ).
[right][post="69441"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Or maybe the passage about turning the other cheek;)

[Guest bengalrick]

the jurors were asked if it changed their opinion and they all said no... but the judge said it MIGHT have changed their opinions anyway...

i'm not saying that he should have died (really i am, but the law is the law) but my point is every avenue was ALLOWED to be pursued... why isn't it allowed w/ terri?

[Guest oldschooler]

Our Justice system has dropped the ball on this 1.

I just don`t understand how a man can go in front of a jury
and say he needs money to take care of his sick wife for the rest
of her life...then is awarded $ 2 million dollars ...but then a few years
later he "remembers" that she "once" said while watching TV that she
wouldn`t want to live that way.
This same man has a common law wife who he has parented a child with...
and hasn`t spent a dime on his wife`s rehab in years...
But he has her best interest at heart ...he is respecting HER wish ?

Anyway what really gets to me is that her family wants to keep her alive.
[b]There are no papers or video of her saying that she wouldn`t want to live that way.[/b]
If she was a dog people would serve jail time for starving her and not giving her
water...if a loving family wanted to take care of that "dog" then they would be
awarded the "dog"...funny (not really) how a dog has more rights than a human
that is sick and can`t speak for theirself either.


As far as the state getting involved...Jeb Bush has the power to give a
death row inmate his/her life back...but not a woman that [b]doesn`t[/b] have in writing that she would want to die like that ?
I thought hear say wasn`t admissable in court ...