Welcome To CK5!
Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.
Score a FREE Membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.
Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by fordeater, Mar 31, 2005.
My prayers go out to her family and for the souls of the ghouls who feasted on this story to feed their fame.
I pray for her family.. At least she's not hurting anymore. They can take comfort in that.
As for the now ex husband, I guess he got what he wanted, but his g/f should be wondering what "till death do us part" really means to him and for her.
In my opinion, Terri died nearly a decade ago. The clips you saw on TV over and over are clips of the few rare times that she actually did anything that a cognitive human would, such as blinking, making noises, moving, etc. And chances are, they are clips from years ago.
I don't know about everyone else, but if I was in the same situation as Terri, I'd like to be let go of. I'd hate to know that I am dead, but the vessel that I was in was around being a burden to society for a decade to come...
I know lots of people will dissagree with me, but this is what I believe, and I am personally happy to know that her body has finally been laid to rest
or, more accurately, "Terry Shiavo was killed".
lock a healthy person in a room with no food or water and they die too (surprise surprise). Terri wasn't dying of anything, the courts allowed her husband to kill her because he wanted the money and she didn't have a "if i get ****ed up this is what i want to happen" legal document in writing. Pretty sad when you need a document saying that you want to live... IMO the way it should work is they always try to save you unless you have a document saying you want to die.
i'm with sierraclassic on that. I think it is just plain WRONG for all of these attorneys and judges, and everybody else who basically pursued it to make a name for themselves. I mean, its sad to lose somebody, but like it was mentioned earlier, she died along time ago, and the odds of her recovery from that brain damage were slim to none. What kind of parent would want to keep his/her child alive in that kind of state. If it was me, i would have let it go. They will go to a better place anyways. This is a cruel world, and nobody really cares about anybody but themselves. I don't believe the husband did any wrong by doing what he did, i would have done the same to my wife if she was in that state and i KNEW that she wouldn't get better.
Just my 2 cents
I agree, she was dead in 1990.
Im glad this is over for one reason, it is tearing up my mom now. A year and a half ago we had to let my dad go, we got in a car accident, and his neck broke in 3 spots along with brain trauma. They revived him in the ambulance with machines, but there was no chance for recovery, EVER. He would have just layed in a bed a vegetable the rest of his life, and we knew he wouldnt have wanted that. So we took him off life support, he was gone within minutes. Until this case, weve had no problem dealing with it, but now all you see on the news is people calling anyone who does this a monster, a murderer, ect. im sure you all know, youve seen it on the news. So my mom began questioning it, and when people where she worked would talk about it like that, it tore her up. These people have put everybody who has gone through this through agony, i bet that 99% of the people arguing for her to live have never had to make the decision themselves. I dont care about the case, or even the family anymore, i feel for everybody else who has gone through this that they are hurting. The parents were being selfish bastards IMHO throughout this whole ordeal.
To me, that wasnt my dad laying in that hospital bed, i still look at it that he died in the truck, that was just machines keeping his body alive. I wouldnt want to live like that, and neither did he. I sided with the husband in letting her go, and i know damn well I would never want to live like that, because that isnt living, thats just existing....
this sounds dangerously close to the arguements of the eugenics movement (ie the people whose ideology backed the Nazis, abortion as a means of getting rid of black people etc etc). Anytime you have 'person A' (or even worse, 'group A') saying "i know, lets kill person B because their qualifty of life is never going to be good" you have a serious problem. Its not up to 'person A' to determine if 'person B's life is worth living... that decision is up to person B. I mean, I "wouldn't want to live" like a person in a wheelchair and/or no legs... does this mean we should round them up and kill them all? Same goes for people who are mentally retarded by birth defect or trauma... kill them all? After all, we wouldn't want to live like them right? they'd never be productive members of society right? Insert other BS arguement cloaked in false compassion here. How about old people? they are useless AND they cost us a lot of money and hassel for the family, lets get rid of them too. Time to build some concentration camps I guess.
In matters of life and death like this, that sort of road should never ever be traveled upon. If you want to die, jump off a cliff, I'll support you all the way down... but don't tell me (or other people) whether I/they should live or die cause thats a load of bull unless I/they have given up that right via criminal activity. This situation is very easy to understand if you look at it from a personal point of view rather than the one of a bureaucrat. Don't think about killing someone else off and wondering if its a good idea... consider a scenario in which people you don't even really know want YOU dead for whatever reason and then see if it sounds like such a great idea.
As I've said before, she was dead since 1990, they should have never used heroic measures to revive her in the first place, that is not in question. Dr. Kervorkian has a place in our society and could have helped Terri.
No one deserves to starve to death, vegetable or not, it's just not humane.
its just sad how the media used this case, and how people used this case for fame. There are so many cases like this accross the world. Funny how none of them get mentioned, but this one is the topic of the media for a long time.
I want to post something that was posted on this topic on another forum I visit, it about sums up all of my beliefs without me having to type a three page report, lol
I realized how bad it sounded and how it could have been taken and edited it while you were typing that response, guess i should have proofread it before i submitted it. Apparently i struck a nerve too, sorry.
If the person wanted to live like that(PVS), fine, but if they didnt, and somebody wants them to stay like that, they are doing it for nobody else than themselves, and they are being selfish. That is how it should have come out. Everyone can have their views, and that is mine.
Main thing to keep in mind here is that Terry Shiavo was NOT on life support. There have been thousands of comparisons made b/t her and people that are on life support. I saw two little girls just this morning (due to my job) that were both living on feeding tubes. They are not on life support. In fact they were out and about with their parents. Terry Shiavo died today, NOT 15 years ago. Innocent life should end when GOD decides to take it. Why don't we take everyone else who is on a feeding tube and can't express themselves OFF their feeding tubes and let them die? After all their life is not worth living right? I agree with jekbrown. You are absolutley correct!!!
Kind of disturbing. Most of the people I find commenting on how she should have been let go like this haven't really studied the case much. The whole reason it's in the headlines and all the others like it are ignored is because there's serious doubt that she truly would want the plug pulled (this isn't about what YOU would want in that situation), there's serious doubt that her vegetative state would have been permanent (not that she would be back to her good old self with any recovery), and because of how poorly handled the entire incident has been.
The sequence is a little troubling, to say the least:
1. Terri brain experiences extended loss of oxygen
2. Flown around the country for experimental treatment
3. Medically recommended treatments are not followed.
4. Terri's husband swears he will care for her for the next 50 years (her court-testified life expectancy)
5. Terri's husband gets considerably less money than he was seeking in the malproactice suit when he intended to spend the rest of his life caring for her
6. Terri's husband begins court proceedings to have her life support removed
No more treatment attempts or examinations occur after the lawsuit is complete, unless they're court ordered during the fight to remove her life support.
I seriously doubt anyone posting here (or on any other board) has 100% of the facts.
Yeah, by now, after 12 years without any rehabilitative attempts, she was not able to be rehabbed at all, but so much time was wasted trying to "let her die" that could have been used to rehabilitate her, or AT LEAST determine if she would truly be in a vegetative state for the rest of her life.
ONE court/judge tried this case. All others checked and upheld that particular courts procedural execution, they did NOT examine evidence.
If that's like the all the other cases of people being taken off life support, then this country's become pretty forked up, and you should have to sign a living will when you get a drivers license.
Regarding "defying God's will", I can't resist a little laugh at that, and I'm not trying to be a jerk to anyone. The supreme being that created the universe, all matter and all souls, has been thwarted by machines and selfish people keeping life support running on this person he's been trying to make die. oooookaaaaay.
For anyone saying "she's been dead since 1990", I'm curious about how would you break that to the husband, when he's on the stand in 1992 suing for medical malpractice, after he testifies "I believe in the vows I took with my wife, through sickness, in health, for richer or poor. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that." (his court testimony)?
It's obviously what he claims to believe right now, but I'm wondering what you would say to him if you heard him say that then.
Not trying to pick on you, but I'll guess you're not much of an advocate for paramedic pay raises...
Because of the nature of this statement I will make it really brief. MY ultimate authority is the Word of God - ie. the Bible. I do not believe that the will of God is ever thwarted by anything. If someone is kept on life support, God's will is not being thwarted. The will of God is that they are on life support. I believe this, not because of my own personal opinion or "feelings" but because scripture says it. I know many disagree with me. No hard feelings to any that do. Just saying what I believe.
yeah, not buying the "Gods will" thing unless you can demonstrate that if you stop feeding a normal person they will be just fine. Terri wasn't dying of anything. Take away food/water and she'll die... guess what, so will YOU. In the past she HAD been fed by bottle (lets kill all the newborns now), and her husband forced the medical people to stop doing that. Why? because he wanted control and the capability of killing her. The guy was after the money pure and simple. He could have divorced terri (he was cheating on her for years BTW) and let her parents take care of her, but that wouldn't get him any money so instead of letting her live he wages a legal campaign to kill her so he can score some quick $. All the while he's spitting out legendary one-liners like "when is that bitch going to die?" and "when she dies, Im going to Europe, gonna buy a new car, a new boat...". IMO, the man is no different than Scott Petersen... Scott was just more clumsy about how he went about offing his wife.
You're misreading me brother. Her legal guardian (the asshole husband) is the one that screwed this whole situation up. I am kind of in the middle on this deal, I believe in the right to die and the right to live, depending on the "victim's" (for lack of a better word) beliefs. I would not want to live like Terri, that's my choice and I have that in writing, not to mention discussing it with my family well before any of this Shiavo stuff came out in the media.
You're also ignoring my first post, I feel that the media vultures and both sides of her family are robbing her of her innate human dignity, and making her a pawn.
Her husband changed his mind several times over the course of the last 15 years and most of his actions that are known are unconscionable. As far as he unknown actions, it has been postulated that he caused this condition to begin with. All I am stating in my post are my own beliefs, and only serve to tate how I would want to be treated.
Terri was in my opinion in a vegetative state with little chance to recover. That being said, I do not claim to know the will of God or the workings of the Universe. I am not a particularly religious person and am trying o look at this as objectively as possible. It is entirely possible that she would wake up some day, however improbable.
I personally think Michael Sciavo comes off as an insencere dirtbag and I don't trust him. That does not change the fact that every legal ruling says that he is the guardian and has the choice of what to do with her life.
As far as my statement about "heroic measures", it is my understanding that after her initial collapse due to an overload of potassium she clearly had severe brain damage and that in the first stages she was under true "life support" (not just a feeding tube), at that point any decision should have been made (and stuck to) regarding her life, not 15 years after the fact when nothing of substance has changed about the situation.
As far as your comment about paramedic pay raises, I'm not sure what that means. Paramedics and nurses are the most underappreciated persons in medicine, doctors are outrageously overpaid but I have no such feelings about paramedics or nurses.
Again, for the umpteenth time, my only beef here is that they did not "pull the plug" in the traditional sense. We are talking about a human starving to death over 13 days, which is inhumane.
I too have heard those quotes attributed to him by the former nurse, and I personally believe the guy is that much of a chode, but in all fairness it's only the word of that one person against his. I believe that he probably contributed to her death and he will surely get his for that, there's just no proof yet. I am still holding out hope for the autopsy though.
What makes me sick is scum like Jesse Jackson jumping on the band wagon towrds the end. He knew he couldn't do anything, but got involved too get his face on TV.
This is a totaly different situation Joez, dont get me wrong, my heart goes out to anyone who goes through what you went through and the decisions your family had to make about your father. As you stated, you father passed within minuites of being taken off life support, not days or weeks. Terri was unable to EAT on her own, but her heart and lungs worked as god intended them to. She might not have been able to to eat or move or show expression, but she was still very much alive on her own. The machine she was on is no more than an IV with food instead of medicine. My father was on a feeding tube just a few months back when he had a treach put it in his throat. He was awake and communicating, but he was on a feeding tube. Should we have taken him off the tube and let him starve to death??? HELL NO!!! No one can say what this woman knew and what she didnt. For all any of us know, she might have been thinking damn im hungry or why is everyone fighting???
I dont want to get into a pi$$ing match about what is legal and what is illegal, but In my opinion, what they did to her is illegle. If you were to do the same thing to a baby,(who also can not eat on their own) or a family pet, you would be arrested!!! Point blank, no questions asked, do not pass go!!! They simply starved a living breathing human to death and that is against the law.
It is our opinion that once her husband met another woman and had kids and had moved on with his life, he should have done just that, moved on. He didnt want what was best for her, he wanted what was best for HIM. She was just a hinderance to him that he didnt want to deal with anymore.
Separate names with a comma.