Its not bad being a minority

[Raider179]

Originally posted by Airhead
Ah...You believe in the right to assisted suicide too I bet.

I don't know Raider, I feel funny about deliberately starving someone to death who only needs to be fed, regardless of what her long term prognosis is.

I had a cousin born blind and severely mentally retarded and there was never a question that he'd be taken care of- it was never an issue. He ended up institunionalized and, ultimately, kept alive by a feeding tube, until he died in his mid 40s of natural causes. We all knew he'd never get "better," but we all knew he deserved our love and campassion and, most of all, our help to eat.

I don't feel comfortable having state sanctioned euthenasia, especially when that euthenasia involves starving someone to death. I'm not sure I want my Government rubberstamping that, regardless of the wishes of anyone- I'd prefer my Government err on the sanctity of life rather than the finality of death.

Yep I have no problem with someone taking the easy way out.

Your cousin never had a chance to say he wouldn't want to live that way. Therefore your right life is the right choice. With Terri on the other hand she voiced her opinion to not be kept alive in those circumstances. Honoring her wishes its the least we can do. I understand what you are saying but disagree fundamentally about an individual's right to decide to when they have lived long enough and the government coming in and saying nope your gonna suffer longer.

[Vulcan]

In her later years my grandmother, (married for over 65 years), was plagued by strokes and a weak heart. Her quality of life was horrible, she couldn't walk, barely talked. Finally she told my grandfather that the next time she had an "attack" that he should wait 10 minutes before calling an ambulance.

She died in his arms, at home, not connected to tubes or machines, the way she wanted. She ended a 65 year old marriage and an awesome life with dignity and grace.

Sometimes you have to let go. Thankfully, no religious zealots got in the way of her dignity nor made her suffer.

This whole case reinforced my beliefs about Christians, their zealotry, and hypocracy.

[Airhead]

Vulcan, the only "tube and machine" we're talking about here is a feeding tube. She's not being kept alive by extraordinary means; she is simply being fed.

I don't know, man. I read Seagoon's take on this and the part that comes through to me is that we have an obligation to honor the sancity of life regardless of the quality of that life.

Somehow it doesn't seem right we are basically ordering her execution by starvation, especially in light of this being a tug of war between those who feel she should, at the least, continue to be fed and those who are insisting she die.

I just feel funny about this. It just doesn't seem like we should starve people to death, no matter how much of a burden they are. Just sayin....and I agree she'll never get better and all, but,,,sheeesh.... this is over the top. At least as far as an edict goes.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Airhead
"...the part that comes through to me is that we have an obligation to honor the sancity of life regardless of the quality of that life.

Hows about honoring her wishes wrt her life?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Nash
Hows about honoring her wishes wrt her life?

Unless she has written those wishes down while properly witnessed by a notary public, we can't know what they were, nor can we reasonably expect that she would have made such wishes known to her husband, because he afterall, just wants her to die. He never loved her. He's just a horn dog looking for another piece of tail and an insurance settlement. Her parents would know what she wants as an adult, because they sat with her during bed-time story and had long lengthy discussions with her about heroic lifesaving measures, and eggplants.

[Nash]

Heh...

[Holden McGroin]

I don't know if this means anything, but I've tried to connect with her telepathically and all I get is white noise.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I don't know if this means anything, but I've tried to connect with her telepathically and all I get is white noise.

Hmmm... me too, but all I seem to get is black or white noise.

[Nash]

It just occurred to me...

Lets for a second ponder the "she's there" side of the story.

You are there.

In fact, you are her.

You breath, and you sleep, and you awake, and your eyes open, and you see your family in the room.

But you cannot move. Your facial muscles stretch themselves into a hideous grin. Your hands are seized.

These people speak to you, but you cannot speak back.

Like clockwork, strangers will come in, pry your legs open and take care of your gynecological needs...

You're lying there. Unable to move. Unable to speak.

"I'm HERE" you scream. In your mind.

Because you are seized up. And they are not telepathic.

One year passes like this. Then another. Then another and another.

In that bed... watching. Unable to do anything. Just lying there.

Frozen.

Another year passes.

Then another.

It does not dawn on you that you will have to spend yet another ten years like this.

Aware, but unable to speak. Unable to move. You just lie there. Every day... Three hundred and sixty-five days.... with another 9 more of these years to go.

But that's what happens.

You have been lying there, for 6 years, watching. These days of insane boredom are intermittently broken up by every one of your teeth getting pulled out due to decay. But, at least that's something different.

By this point, it is far worse than any Vietnamese torture. You go insane. You have been lying here for 9 years, watching...

Little do you know that you have another 6 years left of this.

Until your husband finally breaks through all the legal restraints and everyone says "enough is enough."


So........................... ...

To those (Tweety?) who are getting all worked up about the outcome... it's because you see a glimmer of consciousness inside of her.

If she does indeed possess that consciousness... Then this truly has been a living hell.

You really wanna prolong it? For her?

[NUKE]

and after your husband pulls the tube, then the real terror begins. Starving to death.

Nash, I was thinking of "One" reading some parts of your description.

[NUKE]

Lieberman put into words almost exactly my feelings about this:

http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/27/213955.shtml

"And I think as a matter of law, if you go - particularly to the 14th Amendment, [you] can't be denied due process, have your life or liberty taken without due process of law, that though the Congress' involvement here was awkward, unconventional, it was justified to give this woman, more than her parents or husband, the opportunity for one more chance before her life was terminated by an act which was sanctioned by a court, by the state."


Lieberman added, "These are very difficult decisions, but - of course, if you ask me what I would do if I was the Florida Legislature or any state legislature, I'd say that if somebody doesn't have a living will and the next of kin disagree on whether the person should be kept alive or that is whether food and water should be taken away and her life ended - that really the benefit of the doubt ought to be given to life."

In conclusion, Lieberman said, "The family member who wants to sustain her life ought to have that right because the judge really doesn't know, though he heard the facts, one judge, what Terri Schiavo wanted. He made a best guess based on the evidence before him. That's not enough when you're talking about aggressively removing food and water to end someone's life."


"You would have kept the tube in?" asked NBC's "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert.


Lieberman replied, "I would have kept the tube in.

[Airhead]

Hey, we all agree this woman has zero chance of recovery, so that's not the issue. What IS the issue is if we have the right to stop feeding people who, by accident, birth or whatever, are a burden to us.

We're talking simple substinance here, not someone on a ventilator or a heart machine. What we are sanctioning as a society is the starvation of a person who, given food, would otherwise survive. It's not pulling a plug, it is starving a human being to death. And I'm not sure I want my judicial system saying it's OK to do that... in fact I'd want my judicial system saying that's NOT OK.

[Nash]

BS, and Lieberman needs to go.

"One more...."

Hell, it was ran through the courts 25 times before those idiots got their smarmy hands on it and, based on no fact finding whatsoever, said "re-do".

Because... what?

It was an egregious intrusion by the highest political body into the smallest, saddest of personal affairs.

The entire thing is wrong on so many levels.

[Nash]

Airhead, I'm not sure why you and others see a distinction between removing air and removing food.

But it doesn't matter.

Because this chick didn't want ANY of it.

All this turmoil about the pain of starvation means squat. She wanted starvation.

[NUKE]

Oh yeah Nash, well you're view is BS. See how easy that is to say?

And personal affair for who? I'd think that her own life is her own personal affair and nobody can prove she would have wanted to be starved to death.

I'm saying you protect life unless there is proof that she would have wanted to be left to die. What harm is it to feed her?