if you were terri schiavo?

[bazooka]

No

She is a vegetable.

[Supreme2k]

In the Sydney Morning Herald, it was reported that a poll done in the US showed about 60% of people supported the position of letting her die, 20% supported the position of keeping her alive with the remained undecided.

I think the technical term is "I don't give a ****"

[vitualis]

@ AlecWest:

Yes, people recover from a persistent vegatative state but look at the numbers you provided (which seem quite reasonable).

Terri has been in one for around 15 years. Her chances of recovery is nil.

Regards.

[Zisguy1]

In the Sydney Morning Herald, it was reported that a poll done in the US showed about 60% of people supported the position of letting her die, 20% supported the position of keeping her alive with the remained undecided.

I think the technical term is "I don't give a ****"

I think not. Why not at least try to give people credit for having some *potential* intelligence? It really is impossible to know what living in that state would be like. Maybe there's some part of you still vaguely aware of what's going on, but unable to communicate. Maybe even just your brain stem functioning would perceive a sort of pain/discomfort as your life drained away -- no higher thought is required to feel pain, after all.

And of course, maybe not to all of the above.

[beavereater]

Nope...wouldn't want to be kept in that state. And I would be pissed if someone, other than my wife, made a decision to keep me alive. She knows, I don't need a will for her to know. The only reason she's "alive" is because of the feeding tube...how could ANYBODY want to be kept alive that way...I think the parents are holding onto false hope, and have been for 15 years.

[AlecWest]

@ AlecWest:

Yes, people recover from a persistent vegatative state but look at the numbers you provided (which seem quite reasonable).

Terri has been in one for around 15 years. Her chances of recovery is nil.

Regards.

Well, I wouldn't say "nil" ... just remote (even very remote). But so was the Scantlin case I gave a link to on the last page ... a woman who had a spontaneous recovery following a 20-year vegetative state.

My biggest problem with this case goes back to the original trial in state court. And it seems to me to be a reasonable argument. If any medical professional were asked the question, "Would keeping Terri alive put her in pain or discomfort?" I think the answer would be "No." Since a human life is at stake, the original state court should have found in favor of the husband, ordered the feeding tubes removed, but stayed the order to give the other side a chance to appeal.

Even in death penalty cases involving heinous murderers, appeals in most states are mandatory. And the question that burns in my gourd is, "What makes Terri less qualified for the appeals process than a heinous murderer?" Terri's case is a bitter civil dispute between two families, not a capital criminal case.

[ZAPPER]

I heard the other night that the lawsuit money went into a trust and has be used up on her. I also heard that the money that he had received has been spent on her. I have seen and heard bits and peices of this story for several years now, and nothing even remotely looks like greed. The whole thing is a terrible event and should have been kept private. It is a bad enough situation to be in without the whole world seeing it as well. Let the poor woman die in peace and let the poor man try to get on with his life. Be thankfull that it is not you in either of their places and be strong if you end up in a simular situation.
Yes you are allowed to have an opinion and even express it here or all over the world, but please don't try to force it on anyone especially those close to the case.

[AlecWest]

The whole thing is a terrible event and should have been kept private.

Agreed.

Let the poor woman die in peace and let the poor man try to get on with his life. Be thankfull that it is not you in either of their places and be strong if you end up in a simular situation.

And therein lies the rub. Whether this case was public or private, it sets precedent ... that could affect me or my loved ones years down the road. This whole case is a "he said, she said" case with nothing solid to go on. I realize my opinion is a minority opinion ... but I'm sticking to it.

[vitualis]

I agree with the sentiments above that this is a private affair.

I see that the Court of Appeals has upheld the decision to not re-insert the feeding tube.

Regards.

[AlecWest]

I agree with the sentiments above that this is a private affair.

I see that the Court of Appeals has upheld the decision to not re-insert the feeding tube.

Regards.

Yup ... only one more court to go now ... the Supreme Court ... if Terri's parents want to take things that far.

[vitualis]

The Supreme Court has previously decided NOT to intervene on a lower court's decision. Given that multitude of times various courts have knocked back their position, I doubt very much that the Supreme Court will decide to intervene now.

Regards.

[AlecWest]

The Supreme Court has previously decided NOT to intervene on a lower court's decision. Given that multitude of times various courts have knocked back their position, I doubt very much that the Supreme Court will decide to intervene now.

Regards.

Possibly. But even in Judge Wittemore's decision to deny appeal, he said there may be substantial constitutional issues related to the new law (referring to the law passed by Congress and signed by the President). That, the Supreme Court has NOT decided on. I guess we'll all see.

[ViRaL1]

Her parents say should be kept alive because they're willing to take care of her. What happens when they die, or they just can't take care of here anymore? Then we'll have to go through this whole thing all over again, and she'll be none the better for it.

[AlecWest]

Her parents say should be kept alive because they're willing to take care of her. What happens when they die, or they just can't take care of here anymore? Then we'll have to go through this whole thing all over again, and she'll be none the better for it.

Neither the parents nor the husband are "taking care" of her ... it's the money. I'm assuming, given the costly appeals, that the parents do have money set aside. Whether they live or die is not the issue.

In any case, the parents just decided to take things to the Supreme Court. One way or the other, this is the last stop ... unless Jeb Bush intervenes making this a "states rights" issue. And, he might.

[lumis]

i was watching nightline the other night and they had a person who was her "guardian at law" appointed by the court some years ago, he monitored her for either 30 or 90 days and was asked to report back to the court. he said her cerebral quartex (sp?) was liquified and that only her frontal lobe & brain stem remained, and they were reflexive (?), not cognitive.. he said her chances of recovery were non-existant.

[MOVIEGEEK]

I and every family member I've asked do not want to live in that condition.
If anything good can be learned from this is every adult should have a Living Will(Power Of Attorney),if you live in the states you can go here and print a free copy:
www.legaldocs.com (click on FREE DOCS)

[AlecWest]

I and every family member I've asked do not want to live in that condition.

If anything good can be learned from this is every adult should have a Living Will(Power Of Attorney),if you live in the states you can go here and print a free copy:

Good advice, MOVIEGEEK. And, while most people would prefer to be taken off life support if in a vegetative state, such documents are equally important to the minority of people (like me) who would prefer to remain on life support. The site you mention has links to all 50 states ... so I guess that living wills are universally recognized in the USA (but may not be elsewhere). Here's the URL to the page with those 50 state links:

https://www.legaldocs.com/htmdocs/livin_st.htm

i was watching nightline the other night and they had a person who was her "guardian at law" appointed by the court some years ago, he monitored her for either 30 or 90 days and was asked to report back to the court. he said her cerebral quartex (sp?) was liquified and that only her frontal lobe & brain stem remained, and they were reflexive (?), not cognitive.. he said her chances of recovery were non-existant.

Did they mention whether this guardian was a practicing physician? Here's another opinion from a recent article (today) on CNN.com:

Dr. William Cheshire, a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, concluded Schiavo is "most likely in a state of minimal consciousness," rather than the persistent vegetative state previous doctors have diagnosed.

Of course, he could be wrong, too. What a mess this whole situation is.

[ZAPPER]

The whole thing is a terrible event and should have been kept private.

Agreed.

Let the poor woman die in peace and let the poor man try to get on with his life. Be thankfull that it is not you in either of their places and be strong if you end up in a simular situation.

And therein lies the rub. Whether this case was public or private, it sets precedent ... that could affect me or my loved ones years down the road. This whole case is a "he said, she said" case with nothing solid to go on. I realize my opinion is a minority opinion ... but I'm sticking to it.

AlecWest: Get all of your ducks in a row. Make sure that those that may be making the call should you wind up in such a situation know what your wishes are. From what I am hearing, a peice of paper may not be enough or at least can be contested. But I think that some sort of document could only help. Hell keep one in you wallet and two or three other copies with other people that you trust.
I admire your desire to cling to every last speck of hope, and going out scratching and clawing is tuffer than most will be able to do.
If I will not recover and my existance will not benifit others there is no need to make me a science project. I would however like it to be fairly quick. Starvation or suffication does not sit well with me.

Depressing topic if you dwell on it too long. Maybe inspiring for some. The one thing that is certian is that we will all be equal in the end.

[lumis]

i was watching nightline the other night and they had a person who was her "guardian at law" appointed by the court some years ago, he monitored her for either 30 or 90 days and was asked to report back to the court. he said her cerebral quartex (sp?) was liquified and that only her frontal lobe & brain stem remained, and they were reflexive (?), not cognitive.. he said her chances of recovery were non-existant.

Did they mention whether this guardian was a practicing physician? Here's another opinion from a recent article (today) on CNN.com:

Dr. William Cheshire, a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, concluded Schiavo is "most likely in a state of minimal consciousness," rather than the persistent vegetative state previous doctors have diagnosed.

Of course, he could be wrong, too. What a mess this whole situation is.

yes he is.

Jay Wolfson, DrPH, JD, Guardian Ad Litem for Theresa Marie Schiavo

"guardian ad litem" = latin term for "guardian at law".

[vitualis]

Ultimately, her actually diagnosis is beside the point. She probably doesn't quite fulfil the strict criteria for PVS but she still has extensive irreversible brain damage and is not conscious in any meaningful way (and nor will her level of consiousness improve).

Functionally and prognostically, it is basically the same as PVS.

Regards.

[vitualis]

The Sydney Morning Herald has conducted its own poll: http://smh.com.au/polls/world/results.html

Of over 10,000 votes at this time
Keeping her alive: 21%
Removing her feeding tube - 43%
Not keeping her alive but not starving her either - 37%
Undecided - 6%

Regards.

[smearbrick1]

Correct me if I'm wrong here but... because of the severity of her brain damage she won't "starve to death" the way that most people think of "starving to death" correct? She won't experience the psychological hunger pains along with the knowledge that she is dying from malnurishment. In essence, she is comatose without being completely unconscious. Am I correct in this assumption?

[AlecWest]

AlecWest: Get all of your ducks in a row. Make sure that those that may be making the call should you wind up in such a situation know what your wishes are.

Some of the recommendations I've seen include having a living-will notarized with certified copies given to an attorney and a primary medical provider for inclusion in their permanent records on clients/patients. Carrying a copy in a wallet or purse is a good idea as well as wearing a medical ID bracelet or necklace engraved with "Living will ... contact (attorney name/number, physician name/number, loved one's name/number, etc.)."

From what I am hearing, a peice of paper may not be enough or at least can be contested.

Everything can be contested. But, unless they can prove you were in a diminished mental capacity at the time you signed the document, it would be a tough thing to contest. In a way, this is exactly the problem faced by Terri's parents. Legally, the marriage license held by Terri's husband makes him her "official" next of kin ... and even if he only says he knows what Terri's wishes were, that opinion would take precedence (and has). Documentation rules (usually).

I admire your desire to cling to every last speck of hope, and going out scratching and clawing is tuffer than most will be able to do.

From a Dylan Thomas poem -- "Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

The one thing that is certian is that we will all be equal in the end.

Sounds like lyrics from a Faine Jade song (grin). But true.

P.S. BTW, the Supreme Court is expected to render a decision of some kind prior to Noon today (EST) ... 3.5 hours from right now.

[offline]

The are multiple problems with this. I don't know about the US, but in Australia, there is no enforceable legality to a "living will".

But you can enforce a MPA or Medical Power of Attorney -like an Enduring Power of Attorney, except for medical matters rather than financial.

The Consent to Medical Treatment and Palliative Care Act 1995 allows for MPA which make a persons wishes known regarding possible future medical treatment and palliative care, in the event that they lose the ability to speak for themselves. This is fully enforcable under the law.

Typically an MPA appoints a Medical Agent who can make any decision about a persons treatment and can overrule spouces, family, doctors or even the courts (so long as the court recognises that the MPA is valid and that the Medical Agent is compentent to take advance directives from a MPA document.

It is good to think about such things as when it comes to medical care most people are clueless and as such can give bad directives to doctors on behalf of relatives.

When my grandmother had a MI, most of the family did not have a clue. One look at the ECG and
I took the attending Dr aside and stressed that she be made as comfortable as possible but not to resuscitate, to be provided oxygen but not ventilated unless she stuggled for breath.

Most of the family did not understand the seriousness of the situation and may well have adopted the "life at all costs" approach which would have been sad. She died peacefully with no dyspnea or obvious fluid buildup despite acidosis.

[Zisguy1]

Correct me if I'm wrong here but... because of the severity of her brain damage she won't "starve to death" the way that most people think of "starving to death" correct? She won't experience the psychological hunger pains along with the knowledge that she is dying from malnurishment. In essence, she is comatose without being completely unconscious. Am I correct in this assumption?

She will physically die of malnutrition and dehydration, but will probably not be aware of it happening.

The truth is nobody really knows what that state of consciousness would be like, because even those who eventually come out of it don't remember anything. There's just no way to know what she's experiencing, if anything. IMHO, with that level of brain damage she'd be entirely unaware of it, but I could be wrong -- just guessing really.

Ask yourself this -- even if she were aware of it on some level, is a relatively quick/painless death worse than just vegetating, sucking up society's resources and contributing *absolutely* nothing, creating nothing, enjoying nothing, just staring into space endlessly day after day, month after month, year after year? If I were in that state, there would be little to make life worth living. Maybe dying would be better. But not having experienced it, my opinion is still "I don't know."

I'm very grateful not to be involved in a case like this, in any way. It would play holy hell with my emotional state and my sanity. I feel very bad for Terri Shiavo's blood relatives and what they must be going through. Hope they manage to let go and find peace when all this is over.

[housepig]

Here's a FAQ with info on the case for some of us not yet hip-deep in the discussions...

...along with a CT scan of a normal brain....

... and one of Terri Schiavo's brain....

[AlecWest]

The Supreme Court just said "no" ... they won't take the case. It's all the hands of a higher power now.

[Zisguy1]

Edit -- deleted

[AlecWest]

I guess there is one option still on the table. Governor Bush has petitioned Judge Greer to allow Florida state to take "custody" of Terri, based on the recent statement of Dr. William Cheshire (mentioned earlier). It's doubtful this is going to work. But, Greer has taken it under advisement and says he'll rule within the hour.

[spiderman2k1]

I think she should die. But not the way they are doing it. It's just wrong to starve some one to death.

The one thing that bothers me is her husband. I think he's a scum bad that does not want to do any thing to help her. No physical therapy he said, no wheel chair to go out side. If she dies he gets one million dollars. He wants her to die.