Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 384
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    JEEBUS! Would you do some research instead of just repeating Fox News innuendo!

    This man has NOTHING to gain and everything to lose by fighting this fight. Yes, he knew Terry would not want ot be a vegtable but she further degenerated over those 7 years. NO FRONTAL CORTEX replaced with spinal fluid, which can not regenerate. He saw there was no hope and is following through on what he understandws his wife would want in that situation. The parents want a frigging animated doll they change forever!

    Now your a doctor. Quite the resume you have.

    Oh and I havent watched fox news in over 2 months. Funny how you only ever comment on the stuff that can be attacked as conservative talking points.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  2. #222  
    I think that the parents have just been selfish. I think that the reason they are trying to keep her alive is because they need to see her. They can't handle the idea of her dying. They are not thinking at all about what SHE would want! Can they honestly say they believe she wants to go on living like she is, assuming she's even aware that she's alive?!

    Maybe they're guilt-ridden because they never got her help when she was having the eating disorder that made her like this in the first place. So now they're trying to make up for not helping her by "helping" her now. If they're supposedly god-believing people (as are so many of the people who want to keep her from being allowed to die), why can't they be happy that SHE'LL DIE AND GO TO A BETTER PLACE?! I mean really! The girl’s at death's door, not living any kind of a life worth living, and all that stands between her and being with GOD forever is a bunch of busybodies who won't simply let her have her right to die! You'd think that people who believe in the paradise of heaven would not stand in the way of someone's getting there!

    This is what religion makes people do?
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    JEEBUS! Would you do some research instead of just repeating Fox News innuendo!
    Hey now, I watch Fox...it is possible to have a Fair and Balanced opinion of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    This man has NOTHING to gain and everything to lose by fighting this fight. Yes, he knew Terry would not want ot be a vegtable but she further degenerated over those 7 years. NO FRONTAL CORTEX replaced with spinal fluid, which can not regenerate. He saw there was no hope and is following through on what he understandws his wife would want in that situation. The parents want a frigging animated doll they change forever!
    And I want an animated Kiran Chetry doll that I can...well...nevermind. Yeah, What you said, daT!!!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  4. #224  
    Clairegrrl.

    I think I disagree with a lot of your politics, based on previous posts. But I think you're dead on (no pun intended) on this one. Christian's should want to see her finally go to heaven, and not have to suffer any longer.

    And conservative commentators, who are complaining that the government is deciding who should live and who should die, have it exactly backwards. Right now, her closest family is deciding. If the the Courts, or the Congress, intervene to keep her alive, THEN the government is deciding who should live, or die. And that's not something I want the government deciding for me.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  5. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #225  
    daThomas, Are these the people you were refering to?






    Last edited by NRG; 03/25/2005 at 08:37 AM.
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Now your a doctor. Quite the resume you have.

    Oh and I havent watched fox news in over 2 months. Funny how you only ever comment on the stuff that can be attacked as conservative talking points.
    He's not a doctor, Woof, but his point is pretty valid.

    From a
    USA Today artcle a few days back:

    "She's not experiencing hunger — she's not experiencing anything," Albin says. (my edit: Albin would be Roger Albin, neurologist at the University of Michigan.)

    Patients in such a state don't get better because the body is unable to repair such a massive injury to the brain, says James Bernat, a neurologist at the Dartmouth Medical School in Hanover, N.H.

    "If you're in a state like this for three months or more, your chance of recovery is zero," Albin says.

    That point is disputed by Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, who are battling Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo, to get Terri's feeding tube reinserted.

    The condition is confusing because patients in a persistent vegetative state still have the use of a primitive part of the brain, the stem. The brain stem allows them to go through sleep-wake cycles, keeps them breathing and produces facial expressions that can make it look as though they are aware of their surroundings, Albin says.

    But those movements are merely reflexes, says Bruce Sigsbee, a neurologist in Rockport, Maine.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  7. #227  
    I was just wondering...

    -she's in this state due to an eating disorder-so if she didnt want to eat when she was alive & healthy, what makes anyone think she wants to eat now?

    -How many of these church goin' people who are trying to feed her now ever visted her in the past 17 years ? How many were concerned about her before the tv cameras came to town?
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joebar
    Tumpet players?
    Exactly
  9. #229  
    what about us guitar players??
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  10. #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzi
    I don't understand? Isn't the husband her most immediate family member?
    I never said he wasn't. I just said it is hardly a universal sentiment throughout the people that love and care for her, that she should die. I don't think framing this as a gov't versus private affairs argument is going to work. There are private people on both sides of the issue.
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by meyerweb
    Right now, her closest family is deciding.
    Depending on your point of view, her closest family is actually being kept from deciding.
  12. #232  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    I couldn't say it better!
    Well, at least give it a try!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  13. #233  
    okay. I'm in no mood to argue with an ostrich.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  14. #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    I never said he wasn't. I just said it is hardly a universal sentiment throughout the people that love and care for her, that she should die. I don't think framing this as a gov't versus private affairs argument is going to work. There are private people on both sides of the issue.
    The courts have decided what Terri's intentions would be in this type of situation based on testimony of the adult CLOSEST to her, her husband, AND testimony of her friends. AGAIN, realize the THRASHING this guy is taking to ensure that Terri's wishes are carried out. He could easily just walk away. Hell, he's been offered millions to walk away.
  15. #235  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    I never said he wasn't. I just said it is hardly a universal sentiment throughout the people that love and care for her, that she should die. I don't think framing this as a gov't versus private affairs argument is going to work. There are private people on both sides of the issue.
    I don't disagree that there are differing opinions, but politicians are confused -- you don't decide these kind of personal, familial issues with a vote. If the family had to cast ballots, I think we know that Mrs. Schiavo would be in this state for a longer period.

    What I've also missed in this debate, is that the judges decisions have all stated that they have been convinced that this is not how she would want to live. Is it possible they know something that we don't?
  16. #236  
    I wonder, if Terry would suddenly be able to fed herself if provided with food, at least well enough to get some sustenance, without changing anything else about her condition or abilities, would Mike and everyone else want her to die?

    Some of you have spoken of "quality of life". That is pretty funny IMO. Who determines quality? And to think that you could say today in your healthy state what you would want in a badly handicapped state what you would want is silly too IMO. People change their minds daily on any number of subjects because surrounding factors have changed. Are you saying that doesnt happen here? Can you say for sure that when faced with death or a very limited life you would choose death?

    Lets look at some example and gauge the "quality of life".

    Convicted killer. Confined to an 8x8 cell. No phone, friends, car, internet, running in the park, beach, sex, any of the stuff normal people can do. Does he have quality of life? IMO he doesnt, so we should just let him die right? (of course a killer may deserve that more but that isnt the point here)

    13 year old boy in a motorcycle accident (I know this kid) has limited use of one hand and the rest is paralyzed. Needs 24 hour care. Can't do anything a normal 13 yr old can do and never will be able to. His quality of life sucks. Should we starve him to death?

    Severe burn victim. (90% pecent burned. Totally unrecognizable to anyone who knew him. Every movement causes severe pain. Almost died because the flames where inhaled and his lungs and larynx were burned too. Herioc measures were performed and he lived. Gets winded walking across the room. Can no longer do any of the things he used to do. was a very active physically fit firefighter before the accident. His quality of life is a shadow of what it was. Should we have just let him die? Should we starve him now?

    All three of these people want to live. They have minimal quality of life compared to what they had before but they are alive and that fact is worth everything to them. (I have this from the last two personally). Life is more precious to them than all the stuff they lost.

    Now there are millions in this world that have a crappy quality of life compared to what we see as normal. Is that an excuse to starve them to death? Guess we should go to Africa and wipe out whole villages because their quality of life is so poor.

    Quality of life is a poor excuse made up by people who want to be able to justify not having to take care of someone that cant do it themselves.

    People can change their minds about anything at any time. We all do it every day. And most of us do it without putting it in writing for or loved ones to see. Look at how many times politicians change their minds.

    If you were suddenly in a situation where all you had left was life, can you be sure you would give it up so easily? If you were suddenly unable to move or communicate or give any outward sign that you were still in there and no one could determine that you were still in there, BUT YOU WERE AWARE OF EVERYTHING, would you hope someone would kill you? What if all the docs said theres nothing we can do but feed you and keep you nourished, but it looks to us like theres nothing there and you could see and know what was going on but were unable to communicate that, would you want them to kill you?

    Some here have said it is selfish to keep Terry alive. If your child were in this state and you felt they knew you were there and could tell that you loved them and cared for them, you would do anything to keep them alive and not give up hope. I have been told that losing a child is harder than anything. I have two and I know that I would do anything for them, including die so they might live. If this were my child I would do my best to care for her as long as was possible, because thats what parents do. I could not live with myself if I thought there was even the slightest possibility that my child would think I didnt love them and was willing to let them die because I wanted to move on with my life.

    If all Terry needs to live is feeding and basic care and someone to love her, how is she any different than any of us? If her parents and family are willing to do this, why not let them? Give Mike Schiavo a divorce and let him get on with his life. He clearly doesnt want the job.

    Why not err on the side of life? If Terry feels no pain what would it hurt?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  17. #237  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzi
    Is it possible they know something that we don't?
    Probably...

    This from the Wikipedia site's article on the case: "The credentials of the doctors under the employ of Mrs. Schiavo's parents is strongly questioned. One of their physicians is not trained or certified as a neurologist, and the other (Dr. William Hammesfahr, who is a certified neurologist) is a quack who was disciplined in 2003 by the Florida board of medicine for making false claims about an untested therapy developed by him (which he touted in 2001 to be effective in treating patients in a persistent vegetative state). Dr. Hammesfahr also falsely claimed, and as of March, 2005 (when he appeared on Fox News's Hannity and Colmes and MSNBC's Scarborough Country) continues to falsely claim, to be a Nobel Prize nominee (he was nominated by an ineligable nominator and his "nomination" never came before the Nobel committee)."

    Maybe they should get Ward Churchill involved. He could do some wannabe Indian rain dance, or plagiarize someone else's medical research.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  18. #238  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    I wonder, if Terry would suddenly be able to fed herself if provided with food, at least well enough to get some sustenance, without changing anything else about her condition or abilities, would Mike and everyone else want her to die?
    She would not be able to feed herself without changing her condition or abilites. In that case, it would be argued that she is no longer a PVS patient.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Some of you have spoken of "quality of life". That is pretty funny IMO. Who determines quality? And to think that you could say today in your healthy state what you would want in a badly handicapped state what you would want is silly too IMO. People change their minds daily on any number of subjects because surrounding factors have changed. Are you saying that doesnt happen here? Can you say for sure that when faced with death or a very limited life you would choose death?
    I can say if i were in her condition, take me out. in fact, here it is for public record (even though I have a living will), I DO NOT WISH TO LIVE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Lets look at some example and gauge the "quality of life".

    Convicted killer. Confined to an 8x8 cell. No phone, friends, car, internet, running in the park, beach, sex, any of the stuff normal people can do. Does he have quality of life? IMO he doesnt, so we should just let him die right? (of course a killer may deserve that more but that isnt the point here)
    I would hope he would be executed in a timely manner, myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    13 year old boy in a motorcycle accident (I know this kid) has limited use of one hand and the rest is paralyzed. Needs 24 hour care. Can't do anything a normal 13 yr old can do and never will be able to. His quality of life sucks. Should we starve him to death?
    Minor. Unless he is also PVS, he can't nor could his parents choose death. But I guess if at 18, he wanted to kill himself, it should be his choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Severe burn victim. (90% pecent burned. Totally unrecognizable to anyone who knew him. Every movement causes severe pain. Almost died because the flames where inhaled and his lungs and larynx were burned too. Herioc measures were performed and he lived. Gets winded walking across the room. Can no longer do any of the things he used to do. was a very active physically fit firefighter before the accident. His quality of life is a shadow of what it was. Should we have just let him die? Should we starve him now?
    Again his decision, though I doubt he would've survived such an ordeal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    All three of these people want to live. They have minimal quality of life compared to what they had before but they are alive and that fact is worth everything to them. (I have this from the last two personally). Life is more precious to them than all the stuff they lost.
    Bad examples. All three of these "people" have deductive abilities. They aren't PVS. If THEY choose to go on like that, more power to them. If they chose to end it, that should be their right as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Now there are millions in this world that have a crappy quality of life compared to what we see as normal. Is that an excuse to starve them to death? Guess we should go to Africa and wipe out whole villages because their quality of life is so poor.
    Warring African factions are doing a good enough job of this. We need not lend a hand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Quality of life is a poor excuse made up by people who want to be able to justify not having to take care of someone that cant do it themselves.

    People can change their minds about anything at any time. We all do it every day. And most of us do it without putting it in writing for or loved ones to see. Look at how many times politicians change their minds.
    If you have the ability to CHANGE YOUR MIND. Terri Schiavo doesn't even have a mind to speak of. In fact, Chicks ostrich is more aware and able to think than Terri Schivo is at this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    If you were suddenly in a situation where all you had left was life, can you be sure you would give it up so easily? If you were suddenly unable to move or communicate or give any outward sign that you were still in there and no one could determine that you were still in there, BUT YOU WERE AWARE OF EVERYTHING, would you hope someone would kill you? What if all the docs said theres nothing we can do but feed you and keep you nourished, but it looks to us like theres nothing there and you could see and know what was going on but were unable to communicate that, would you want them to kill you?
    Why would I want to "live" like that?

    "Jim, they took Spocks brain!"

    I would never want that. That would be Hell on Earth, living in my own tomb.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Some here have said it is selfish to keep Terry alive. If your child were in this state and you felt they knew you were there and could tell that you loved them and cared for them, you would do anything to keep them alive and not give up hope. I have been told that losing a child is harder than anything. I have two and I know that I would do anything for them, including die so they might live. If this were my child I would do my best to care for her as long as was possible, because thats what parents do. I could not live with myself if I thought there was even the slightest possibility that my child would think I didnt love them and was willing to let them die because I wanted to move on with my life.
    It's an emotional arguement. Doctors have said she is never coming back. You can find a doctor out there to disagree if you really want. Trust me, I went through a workers comp case, and the company doctors assessment of my injury was quite a bit different than my doctors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    If all Terry needs to live is feeding and basic care and someone to love her, how is she any different than any of us? If her parents and family are willing to do this, why not let them? Give Mike Schiavo a divorce and let him get on with his life. He clearly doesnt want the job.

    Why not err on the side of life? If Terry feels no pain what would it hurt?
    Because, HE is the gaurdian in this matter. It has been determined that it was her wishes to die, therefore HE (and NOT the Schindlers) bears the responsibility. That's what courts are for.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  19. #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Depending on your point of view, her closest family is actually being kept from deciding.
    Well, if you're point of view is to ignore or deny hundreds of years of tradition and legal precedent, then maybe I can see your point. But in every state in this country, it is a clear and long held principle that spouses are closer, and have greater rights, than do parents.

    If I get sick, it's my wife who is consulted on treatment, not my parents (or children.) If I die, it's my wife who inherits my estate, and makes decisions on my affairs, not my parents (unless, of course, I have a will stating otherwise). If I get divorced, only my wife and I contest assets, not my or her parents. And if I'm brain-dead, it's my wife who makes decisions on whether to keep me alive with a feeding tube, respirator, or other "extremem measures," not my parents.

    This is true in every state in the land, and it's been upheld by state courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. But if you want to be a revolutionary and overturn the law because you disagree with it, then that's your decision.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  20. #240  
    Terri (or what was Terri) is not going to come back. What is left is an animated shell. Everything we recognize as the persona of an individual was destroyed by hypoxia. Yes, the lights are on. But nobody's there to answer the door. Her parents, understandably, are very aggrieved over Terri. They have a lot of anguish. They probably feel guilt for failing to see what Terri was doing to herself. Terri, of her own free will, already starved herself to death. If her husband had not been (or came) home, she would've been unresuscitatable by the time anyone had found her. Modern medicine stepped in and salvaged the body. The brain was already gone.

    If Michael's motives were less than pure, he could just accept any one of several multi-million dollar offers to grant custody to the Schindlers. This is not about the money. He already is dealing with people saying that he's after money. So it's not for that reason that he doesn't accept. Can it possibly be that he genuinely wants Terri's soul to be put to rest in accordance with her wishes?

Posting Permissions