Terri Schiavo: Please explain something to me...

sara1998 · #1 03-18-2005, 08:44 PM

Why can't they let her live, and let her folks take care of her, and let the husband out from under his marriage to her? Everyone could have their way on this one... why such the long, drawn out drama?? Is there something there I don't understand?

sara1998 · #3 03-18-2005, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lux

Isn't letting (making) her live a bit on the inhumane side? This is not a case of interest over here in Australia so I know no more than I've seen mentioned, but isn't her husband claiming that she requested her death anyway? Even if she didn't, I would still consider it inhumane.

I agree, it is inhumane... but why can't a divorce be granted, and guardianship be given to the parents? Why does she have to die, if the parents are willing to take care of her? If she didn't want to live like this, where was her living will??

ontheEdgeof17 · #4 03-18-2005, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sara1998

I agree, it is inhumane... but why can't a divorce be granted, and guardianship be given to the parents? Why does she have to die, if the parents are willing to take care of her? If she didn't want to live like this, where was her living will??

Who will continue her care when the parents are gone?

heyjupiter678 · #5 03-18-2005, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sara1998

If she didn't want to live like this, where was her living will??

She was 26 when she had a heart attack. How many people at that age actually have a living will?

sara1998 · #6 03-19-2005, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyjupiter678

She was 26 when she had a heart attack. How many people at that age actually have a living will?

I do.... I had it drawn up when I was 25. If you're that age and married, what better time to do it when you're young and mentally sound? You're right, though. Most people that age don't think of those things.

Kelly · #7 03-19-2005, 06:48 AM

I can see both sides...all I know is I wouldn't want to live that way. The ONE video they show of Terri was made by her parents. Several doctors have come forward to say the parents were there dozens of times with the balloons trying to get a reaction.......they testified it was purely coincidental that she smiled when the balloons were held up to her...she was NOT reacting to them.
I do agree, starving someone is inhumane but it is done every day in this country and they do say that Terri cannot feel pain like we do and will not feel the starving process. Whether that is true, I do not know but that is what the experts say. The whole case is heartbreaking with no winning answer. Letting her live and allowing her parents to care for her sounds ok in theory but what if that is not what Terri would have wanted? Maybe she would not want to be a burden on her parents or more importantly be artifically sustained when she has no quality of life?

heyjupiter678 · #8 03-19-2005, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sara1998

I do.... I had it drawn up when I was 25. If you're that age and married, what better time to do it when you're young and mentally sound? You're right, though. Most people that age don't think of those things.

That's really the one good thing that can come from all of this -- People realizing the importance of making their wishes known and drawing up a living will, no matter their age.

Sapphire Girl · #9 03-19-2005, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lux

Isn't letting (making) her live a bit on the inhumane side? This is not a case of interest over here in Australia so I know no more than I've seen mentioned, but isn't her husband claiming that she requested her death anyway? Even if she didn't, I would still consider it inhumane.

Michael Schiavo was awarded a jury settlement years ago. He said that he would use the money to take care of his wife Terri for the rest of her life. Then, not too long after he was awarded the money, he said that he suddenly remembered watching a movie about the Karen Ann Quindlan case (she was on a ventilator) and his wife commenting that she would not want to live like that. Nice timing, MF.

Mad4stevie · #10 03-19-2005, 07:54 PM

It appears that Congress has opened the door to another avenue for the reinsertion of Terri's feeding tube:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...woman_congress

heyjupiter678 · #11 03-20-2005, 10:41 AM

Here's a pretty unbiased overview of this whole situation, if anyone is interested.

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

jwd · #12 03-20-2005, 11:27 AM

I would think that her life would have to be sustained at any cost, since she doesn't have a living will. No one else should be able to make the decision if she should live or die, except for Terri. To think that they are "killing" her by taking away her food and water is very disturbing to me. It would be more humane to give her a lethal injection if she is left to starve to death. God bless the Schiavo family.

GateandGarden · #13 03-21-2005, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heyjupiter678

Here's a pretty unbiased overview of this whole situation, if anyone is interested.

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

Thanks for this, Mikki. I'm reading through it right now.

Mad4stevie · #14 03-18-2005, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sara1998

Why can't they let her live, and let her folks take care of her, and let the husband out from under his marriage to her? Everyone could have their way on this one... why such the long, drawn out drama?? Is there something there I don't understand?

Her husband has involved the court system, which has determined that she would have never wanted to live in this "persistent vegatative state" based upon testimony from the husband, brother in law and sister in law. That determination is what has brought us to this point because no matter what, a court has decided that it would have been Terri's wish that she would die instead of living in this type of condition. Essentially, everyone else's position, her parents (etc.) is irrelevant because the court has already determined that she would not have wanted to live this kind of existence.

At this point, most people take issue with this determination of Terri's will by the court system and whether the appropriate evidence was considered in this determination.

My issue is with the fact that they are starving this woman to death. How inhumane is that?

GODDESS6 · #15 03-18-2005, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad4stevie

My issue is with the fact that they are starving this woman to death. How inhumane is that?

exactly what i have been thinking no matter what side of the fence any1 is on, on this, the thought of them letting her starve & dehydrate 2 death is more inhumane 2 me than anything~ i was watching this allday on the news & i can't imagine what it must b like w/ the courts changing their minds every 1/2 an hour 2 remove, then not remove, then remove her feeding tube, what an emotional rollercoaster 2 b on~ there was a radio show on this morning & a lady called in stating that she was in a coma 4 6months & the dr's were telling her family there was no hope~ she said she could hear everything said & feel their touches but just couldn't respond @ the time, but was so relieved that when she did come around that her family didn't listen 2 the dr's evaluation of her & waited the situation out~ i realize terry has been like this 4 15 yrs but her folks say she does recognize them, their touch & responds back lovingly~ she may never get "better" but this whole thing breaks my heart immensly

!!!~