Again, can you experience pain if there is no one there to experience it?
I disagree with the “doesn’t seem like a great guy” part because all the negative I’ve seen is propaganda. The accident happened in the early 90’s, right? But the husband didn’t start seeking his wife’s “right to die” until 1999 or so, when the medical establishment finally told him there was no hope. Husband believes the medical establishment and knows his wife’s wishes, and the parents don’t. That’s why there’s a fight here. There isn’t a neurologist in the world who agrees with the parents. I think the Right Wing villification of the husband is shameful. Look, I think her parents are nuts, but I give them the benefit of the doubt. They’re in pain. Their daughter died years ago yet they cannot grieve. They can’t move on. That’s horrible and they’ve got a propaganda machine propping them up and fueling their madness. I feel very sorry for Terry’s parents - but I don’t question their motives. I’ll leave that the “sanctity of life” people.
So, given that the husband cared for her, stood by her, fought for her until the doctors convinced him she was dead in all but the heart beating part - then he fights for her right to die I don’t see how you can fairly characterize him as “doesn’t seem like a great guy.” Lots of guys would have brushed their hands off after the accident and left their responsibilities to their wife far behind.
Aside from that I agree totally that she deserves a morphene overdose rather than the slower road to starvation. Vegetable or not, there’s no reason to draw it out and make it slow. The thing to remember is, Terry is already dead. God killed her. Humanity is keeping her alive and according the the husband and the courts of law, that’s against Terry’s wishes.
Then by this argument, it’s been inhumane to keep her alive all of this time. A tube stuck down one’s throat and into their stomach in order to provide nourishment is pretty painful (or at least profoundly uncomfortable, as anyone that’s had surgery and come to with one in their throat can attest to). Not to mention the bed sores, muscle atrophy, etc. Or we can turn her into a junkie, pumping her so full of painkillers she can’t feel anything.
The humane thing would be to give her a fatal shot of morphine to end her suffering, assuming she’s able to experience anything at all.
All it takes is a few neural receptors to experience pain. How is starvation/dehydration not painful? Can someone provide evidence more irrefutable that Andrew Bub’s wife’s hearsay?[/quote]
Suddenly you’re a neurologist? The credentialed experts I’ve seen give their opinion say she’s brain-dead, and basically a brainstem handling some autonomic responses & nothing else.
Actually, in cases like this the law requires “clear and convincing evidence” (not just a preponderance of evidence as you suggest). IANAL, but I think that’s the highest standard that is used in civil proceedings, isn’t it?
–milo
Desslock. My wife is the Clinical Nurse Specialist of Gerontology for Aurora Health Care here in Wisconsin. She’s spoken at NYU and is considered an expert in the dying process. But hey, if you wave your hand and call it “hearsay” none of that matters, right?
Her answer is “no” by the way. All she can say is that people refuse water and food when they die naturally. It’s such a common occurence/phenomenon that the plan of care for dying patients now is to severely limit or stop water and food intake. She doesn’t claim it isn’t painful (though with this woman’s limited brain, it’s also hard for her to imagine it is painful) and she’d rather there was a more humane method. Her evidence is that there’s a pain chart they use. It’s based on involuntary movements, facial expressions, etc., to denote severity of pain in Demented patients who can’t communicate. She says that once feeding and water are removed, they generally don’t see a marked increase in severity in the pain chart.
She also laughed out loud about your reference to the Indian in Cuckoo’s Nest.
I agree - that’s my main point.
It also just seems like the people most affected by this decision are the parents, and to the extent there’s any ambiguity or reasonable doubt on findings (and clearly there were experts and other individuals who provided contrary evidence)
But hey, if you wave your hand and call it “hearsay” none of that matters
Uh, it is hearsay, that’s all I said.
She doesn’t claim it isn’t painful (though with this woman’s limited brain, it’s also hard for her to imagine it is painful) and she’d rather there was a more humane method
.
Me too - again, my main point.
She also laughed out loud about your reference to the Indian in Cuckoo’s Nest.
I was starting to get concerned that people didn’t get it, heh. o.k., I now find your wife an incredibly astute, knowledgeable expert and defer to her clear medical (and movie) wisdom!
It also just seems like the people most affected by this decision are the parents.
Really, what would make you think that? Is this is general statement about legal guardianship rights?
Desslock, so I take it you’ve given up the libertarianism, and now it’s all about the utilitarianism? “I don’t see what the harm is,” “it affects this person the most”…
You mean, except for the husband? I heard this morning that traditionally in almost all cases in the US the spouse’s rights are valued higher than the parents. That’s part of what marriage does. Once a child reaches 18, the parents lose most of their guardianship rights and through marriage the spouse gains some of them.
As a spouse, I wouldn’t want my wife’s mother to have much say against my wishes in a case like this. As a parent myself, I might fight this fight if I believed as Terry’s parents do. But I don’t think I’d ever fight this long, this hard, or let my child be used as a pawn for groups with much larger agendas.
What’s more important than saving the life of your child, if you still think she’s capable of enjoying it on some level (as they clearly do)? They may be more blindly hopeful than realistic, but does anyone doubt that their beliefs are sincere? If that’s the way they actually believe, how could they do differently?
In terms of spousal rights - it’s hard to respect his, frankly, since he’s moved on and is living with a new family with another lover. Generally, when people do so, they get a “divorce” and no longer have spousal rights.
Desslock, so I take it you’ve given up the libertarianism, and now it’s all about the utilitarianism? “I don’t see what the harm is,” “it affects this person the most”…
It’s just that in this instance, the individual in question is no longer aware or capable of appreciating that her suicide wish is carried out is she’s a vegetable - while the parents are obviously very aware.
I dunno - I think we probably all agree it’s just a really sad, personal situation, and it just seems distasteful that it’s been elevated to the (inter)national stage.
I, and the courts, still think the spouse has rights here. But I agree that maybe this guy should have just granted the parents the custody they crave. Keep in mind though that the parents won’t be the one’s caring for her Desslock. It won’t be the enormous Right Wing political movement backing this fight either. She’ll remain in her hospice and the US taxpayers will continue footing the bill.
Yes. But what makes it even more sad is that it hasn’t been elevated to that stage by the spouse or the courts, really. They followed the law and Terry should have passed away a year or two ago. This was elevated by the parents and the Right to Life cause and now it’s being ratified by Congress or something.
I am astonished at the lengths of time and amount of money members of the federal government are willing to spend to keep a vegetable alive, considering how quickly they’re willing to throw lives away in the Middle East. I mean, holy shit, what’s next? Mandatory life support for everyone?
I think one of the thing both Tim and Desslock were getting at is this thought:
If Michael Schiavo believe his wife has no feeling and cannot experience pain why doesn’t he just wash his hands and let the parents care for her, legally divorce her and move on? If she can’t really experience pain then its no big deal if the parents keep her on in limbo 30 or 40 more years.
If it were MY decision, then I would consider that argument. I do believe that she probably can’t feel anything and especially when I consider taking on a vast coaltion of wealthy and politically powerful fervant religious believers, I might just give up.
However, there is another interpretation which is that there is some possibility that Terri CAN feel to some degree or in some sense. The right to life side jumps on this and says “well then starvation is cruel and unusual”. I don’t know the medical aspect of death by dehydration so I don’t know how cruel it is but it does SEEM somewhat cruel. So I am sensitive to this argument. However there is a strong counter which I described above: if she can feel then shes been in hell for 15 years: trapped in a bed unable to walk or speak or wipe herself, in a diaper with a feeding tube in her, for over five thousand days. This potential for suffering combined with the medical fact that there NO hope for recovery in my view would support ending her pain. And note, if death by morphine were legal, I would support that for her over death by dehydration. Michael Schiavo has said this is his position: he feels she is in limbo and wants to give her peace. He believe that the peace of death is what she would have wanted.
There are two more argument here though: no matter what I, Desslock, Tim, Jason or anybody think, this decision is Terri’s. Since she didn’t specify her decision, we resolve it in a court of law. And a court of law said she wouldn’t want to live this way. So one argument is just respect for the law: this is one of the most hard fought, appealed, and litigated cases in American history and yet its also one of the most one sided: other than temporary stays and a few motions, the Schindlers have LOST EVERY CASE: every trial (there were 2), every legal appeal (there were 12 major ones and dozens of minor ones), including multiple appeals to the US Supreme Court, along with filings in federal court. So if you respect the law at all you have to be aghast at the continued political intervention. Second, who the hell are we to impose this on Terri. The courts have found that wouldn’t want all this. All the people fighting “for” Terri: she doesn’t want it. You can disagree with that court finding but then your issue is with the court, and all the appeals are done, done, done and done.
It’s just that in this instance, the individual in question is no longer aware or capable of appreciating that her suicide wish is carried out is she’s a vegetable - while the parents are obviously very aware.
Using this logic, anyone with a relation should be able to just make off with your corpse for whatever they want once you’re dead, right?
Sharpe, regardless of whether she can feel right now or not: court has ruled she wouldn’t want to continue in this state. If that’s accurate, that’s it; the law is to follow the wishes of the patient. There’s no “override because her parents would prefer to keep her shell around” option.
Sometimes the blatant irony is just too much:
“A society is judged by the way that it treats its most vulnerable citizens,” said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.
(he was making this statement in support of the special law for Congress to intervene in Terri’s case).
<paging Jason McCullough> We need a pithy comment here about Republicans and budget cuts on vulnerable segments of the population.
So does this mean that Pence wants to repeal Bush’s tax cuts in order to fund medical care and social services for vulnerable citizens?
Pulled this from the AP:
"Family members believe that the footage and audio of Terri, 41, will convince opponents of the bill that she is not in a persistent vegetative state as her husband, Michael and several doctors say, but able to interact and emote.
Rep. Dave Weldon (news, bio, voting record) of Florida and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, both doctors and Republicans, said footage they have seen has convinced them that she is not in a vegetative state. "
So what gives? Has she made those miraculous improvements referred to earlier in this thread?
The rest of article talks about the legislation passed by Congress in this situation. I’m not sure how they can pass what seems to be hasty legislation that only applies to one specific person. Seems like any lawyer would try to use the legislation to help their client if given a chance.
So what gives? Has she made those miraculous improvements referred to earlier in this thread?
I did some reading; apparently the ability to randomally make noises, follow motion, and whatnot are normal in states like this; they’re controlled way back in the limbic system or something. If you don’t know the medical details, of course, it probably just looks like she’s really out of it, not brain-dead.
<paging Jason McCullough> We need a pithy comment here about Republicans and budget cuts on vulnerable segments of the population.
Why bother? I’m sure they have some bullshit rationalization already queued up. And that’s just one of the angles; see here:
By now most people who read liberal blogs are aware that George W. Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient’s family’s wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother’s wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday.
Those of us who read liberal blogs are also aware that Republicans have voted en masse to pull the plug (no pun intended) on medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country.
Those of us who read liberal blogs also understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo’s care thus far.
Those of us who read liberal blogs are aware that the bankruptcy bill will make it even more difficult for families who suffer a catastrophic illness like Terry Schivos because they will not be able to declare chapter 7 bankruptcy and get a fresh start when the gargantuan medical bills become overwhelming.
And those of us who read liberal blogs also know that this grandstanding by the congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative.
A local Florida paper has some analysis:
http://news.tbo.com/news/MGBQ67CTI6E.html
Bottom line is they are using about 4 minutes of snippets out of a 4 hour video. They are selectively choosing the times when Terri moves randomly at a point in time coinciding with an attempt to elicit a response and claim that her reflexive actions show conscious response. They are selectively avoiding the other 4 hours and 26 minutes of video that show Terri lying unresponsive and inert with her mouth hanging open and limbs flopped in an uncomfortable position.
In 2003 when Jeb Bush pushed through the first special law (which was later blown into bits by the courts) he appointed a special “Guardian Ad Litem” to review Terri’s case. This guardian was a staunch Republican and a Professor of Medial Ethics at a Florida University. Here is an interview with him:
WARNING THIS NEXT LINK IS GRAPHIC MEDICAL IMAGERY
Lastly here is a link to her brain scan compared to a normal brain:
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/03/18/terri-schiavo-news/
I still think it’s silly to spend time in this life telling people what you want done with your corpse. It takes a special kind of person to fight over whether to dispose of your corpse or prop it up in bed. If you’ve got those kind of folks, no living will is going change them–it’s just going to prevent them from fighting a single battle. My position is that–aside from opting into organ reaping–everyone should forget about what happens to their body after they die. If we all did just that, it would have the same effect as all of us creating a living will: no more worries about what to do with the body.
I also think Mrs Bub ought to consider getting a user account instead of using her husband to hammer or compliment us. :)
If by “special kind of person” you mean “80% of the population.”