The Final insult

[Guest charlie]

SJ, go directly to the site; there you can link to the actual documentation, testimony, who testified, quotes etc! Geesh, do I have to do everything for you?

he would have known after one or two years what was going on

He probably did especially after becoming a nurse; but pulling the plug or the feeding tube on someone you love can't be an easy decision to make. Looks to me waiting 8 years is erring on the side of caution. I read somewhere when this thing was being played out that 6 months is usually tops for most families.

[ted]

Ok, given that the courts had decided that it was in her interest that she should die and not remain in her condition, should they have simply given her a lethal injection rather than allow her a slow death via dehydration?

Thanks,

t.

[Guest charlie]

Oooh Ted - if you do that aren't you setting up a dangerous prescedent.... ala Jack Kavorkian style?

[ted]

Perhaps, although it wasn't the intention of the question. The case itself was decided in court, or more specifically, a series of courts. The end result was that it was determined, legally, that she was to die. Given that, and given that pretty much everyone knew what the ultimate result would be, would it have been more "humane" to bring about the end faster and with less potential for the victim to suffer?

Personally, I didn't agree with the court's decision, but I understand my opinion means squat in the grand scheme of things. I would think, though, that the ones that made the ultimate decision would have the guts to bring about the end in a more, let's say, civilized manner.

t.

[Guest charlie]

That method sounds very dangerous to me; but I'm just one person.

What do you guys think?

Edited June 26, 2005 by charlie

[ted]

Thanks Reb.

Yes, the question I posed was concerning the method of elimination once it has been decided that a life should should not go on by the courts.

Two seperate and distinct situations. It has been determined, in this case, anyway, that the life should not go on. Given that, would it be appropriate to end the life in a quicker, and perhaps, less painful way?

I say perhaps because I'm not sure if she felt the effects of dehydration and starvation but the possibility was there, I guess. Who can say with certainty one way or the other?

But, that of course, brings up another issue entirely.

My focus now is, if they are going to do it, shouldn't they do it in a fashion that minimizes the effects for the person?

t.

[Gerioke]

Thanks Reb.

Yes, the question I posed was concerning the method of elimination once it has been decided that a life should should not go on by the courts.

Two seperate and distinct situations. It has been determined, in this case, anyway, that the life should not go on. Given that, would it be appropriate to end the life in a quicker, and perhaps, less painful way?

I say perhaps because I'm not sure if she felt the effects of dehydration and starvation but the possibility was there, I guess. Who can say with certainty one way or the other? 

But, that of course, brings up another issue entirely.

My focus now is, if they are going to do it, shouldn't they do it in a fashion that minimizes the effects for the person?

t.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah. Why condone torture by starvation and dehydration and then go all squirrely about the torture of military enemies?

Jesus wouldn't condone either from what I gather.

[RustyAngeL]

How? She would never be able to eat on her own, would have never been able to get better, and there was no hope of recovery. At what point do you suggest that letting the person die with some dignity? Especially when that is what she wanted in the first place.

It shocks me that people here have so much compassion for a woman who was in such a state and so little for thousands of Iraqis killed in an immoral war.

Talk about a double standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let's have a reality check here Cerran, I would love to know how you wove the war into this. Yes I know you hate the US you hate the president, you hate anyone who care about both. As I said while I disagree on how it was ended for Ms Shiavo don't how you can equate that about Iraqis being killed. OH and let me just give you a heads up...it's the suicide bombers that are killing the "innocent Iraqis along with our men and women in uniform I notice you dont' say anything about the American service men and women who are dying. .Care to make a dig at them? You and I do agree on one thing...This poor lady would never be any better then she was without God doing a miracle. However doing what they did do to her makes me sick. Let's try and stay focused okay we are trying to do a job over there and your slandering our troops, the president and this country. Better stop before I say something that isn't' to nice and I'll have to apolgize for.

[Guest charlie]

Thanks Reb.

Yes, the question I posed was concerning the method of elimination once it has been decided that a life should should not go on by the courts.

Two seperate and distinct situations. It has been determined, in this case, anyway, that the life should not go on. Given that, would it be appropriate to end the life in a quicker, and perhaps, less painful way?

I say perhaps because I'm not sure if she felt the effects of dehydration and starvation but the possibility was there, I guess. Who can say with certainty one way or the other? 

But, that of course, brings up another issue entirely.

My focus now is, if they are going to do it, shouldn't they do it in a fashion that minimizes the effects for the person?

t.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, chances are that Terri Shiavo didn't feel a thing with her brain being so far gone; thus how can dehydration be torture?

I know 3 families who had a loved one die in excruiating pain; two adults from brain cancer and one child from lukemia. All were aware and cognizant the whole time despite the use of ineffective painkillers. All three families were Christians and it sure changed their attitudes about the "right to die" debate. All three families said they wanted to "end it", "to give em a shot" or something....anything just to end it quickly because it was so awful to witness that kind of agony in someone they loved. All three said when death finally did come it was a blessing, a relief; the grief came later.

My grandfather died of cancer (not brain) when he finally just stopped eating and drinking on his own. He'd turn his head away when my grandmother offered him water.

I think each case is different and should be treated as such. I'd like to see more scientific research into pain-killers so that people who are terminal can make the most of their remaining days.

It's real easy for all of us, myself included, to sit back and say "you should do this or that" or "I'd do this or that" when in reality, unless we're put in that situation with a loved one, we REALLY don't know what we'd do.

[hmh]

Even though her brain may have been half the size of a normal human, the proof of what truly happened will only be told when Christ returns and her husband stands before God to answer for all he has done, providing he doesn't change and truly gives his life over to God before then, she was still a human being who deserved the same dignity as the rest of us.

Unbelieveable! YOU are assuming the husband is guilty of something when nothing of the kind has been proven. To the contrary all the FACTS in this case point to justice for Terri finally being done and the husband being in the "right". If anybody involved in this has something to worry about on judgement day imo it would be all of those pundits and lawmakers who made a big "show" of this tragedy for their own personal gain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You know something charlie? This kind of statement coming from an individual who has already admitted that not all of the bible can be true and from God does not surprise me. You refer to Terry as "it" because in your opinion she was dead. In my medical training, she was still alive because her brain was functioning to allow involuntary actions, such as breathing and blinking. In God's eyes she was still one of his children, even though she was not functioning fully due to her brain damage. If you have a problem with that, take it up with management.