Should the tube be reinserted?

[IHL]

Should the feeding tube for Terri Shaivo be reinserted. This is not the debate about her right to die or not or the husbands right. This question is strictly regarding the emergency appeal to have the tube reinserted while the other issues are sorted out.

[Wadi66]

Should the feeding tube for Terri Shaivo be reinserted. This is not the debate about her right to die or not or the husbands right. This question is strictly regarding the emergency appeal to have the tube reinserted while the other issues are sorted out.I believe it should. Starving anyone to death is inhumane.

[chi1088]

I'm not going to vote because the poll makes it sound morbid to pick the second one. "No. She should be left to die." There's no neglect here. Michael has waited 16 years and she isn't showing improvement and requires a machine to live. Would you want to live like this? Being hooked up to a machine and having to stay in one spot is not life. Michael should have the right to pull the tube and move on.

[DoubleU]

In order to show improvement she would have to get therapy.

[Iamright]

In order to show improvement she would have to get therapy.
BINGO!!!

[BloodyWill]

Then why hasn't she gotten therapy? Is it something Michael is pushing against? Or is it something that her religious-zealot parents are saying "isn't God's will"?

However, as much of a supporter as I am of President Bush, I lost a lot of respect when he signed this bill. He wants the lower courts to follow the letter of the constitution, but when it doesn't mesh with his desires, he says that, what, 12 judges are wrong and a NEW one needs to come in and say something he wants to hear?

[IHL]

Chi, you are reading more into the question. I'm not talking about long term and the 16 previous years. What I'm talking about is that the courts are still deciding all of those issues. Those are seperate issues.

My question is - during the period of time between now and when the long term final decisions are made, should the tube be reinserted? This question deals with the short term feeding. Should she be fed while the courts decide her ultimate fate?

But you raise a good point about the No option. I have changed the wording.

By the way, I'm not sure you can call feeding someone "being on a machine".

[DoubleU]

Then why hasn't she gotten therapy? Is it something Michael is pushing against? Or is it something that her religious-zealot parents are saying "isn't God's will"?

I didn't know her parents were religious zealots, did they use the word "God" once? Michael is responsible for her. From what I read (and I don't believe everything I read) he ordered all therapy stopped.

[BloodyWill]

Then that answers my question about the therapy. Sorry, it wasn't meant to sound like a challenge, but I see it did.

However, my understanding of the situation is that her parents are Roman Catholic. And I did let my prejudice of that particular sect of religious groups get in the way by calling them "religious zealots." They are, however, stating that Terri would not want this to happen because she was a Roman Catholic; which is to say, they would rather her live as a lump of meat when multiple doctors said there's no hope of recovery (perhaps Michael's reasons for cessation of therapy), based on the diagnosis of ONE doctor who said she MAY be able to recover SOMEWHAT with therapy.

Therefore, since the parents and family state that she would not want to die because she was Roman Catholic, God was brought in, albeit not in direct address.

[DoubleU]

I am not to sure what being a Roman Catholic has to do with anything.

[bird]

If you look and think deeper into this whole issue, it makes me wonder what kind of precedent is set if they allow her to die. What about parents with severely retarded children, would they be allowed to starve them to death because of some courtroom technicality? If so, then where does it stop? Who should decide if an innocent life should be starved to death?

[BloodyWill]

Double U-- It has everything to do with being overly religious. The philosophies behind the Roman Catholic church and the parent's beliefs that Terri wouldn't want to die because she was a Roman Catholic bring God into it. That's my explanation, and as clear as I can make it.

Bird-- on the flip side, what precedent is set if they make her live? What if my wife later in life decides she doesn't want me to go and asks a court to void my living will that says I die in a situation like that? There would be perfect precedent-- this case. Something to think about as well.

[DoubleU]

Next time I go to church I will have to check in on the being over religious zealots thing. I think I might be lacking there.

[BloodyWill]

...And I did let my prejudice of that particular sect of religious groups [Roman Catholics] get in the way by calling them "religious zealots."...

I will add to this statement I made in a previous post, then:

I apologize for any offense you took from my statement. I will not apologize, as I never do, for feeling this way, however.

[bird]

Bird-- on the flip side, what precedent is set if they make her live? What if my wife later in life decides she doesn't want me to go and asks a court to void my living will that says I die in a situation like that? There would be perfect precedent-- this case. Something to think about as well.

I agree, that is why it is very important for people to make their wishes known to all, especially in a legal document.

People's feeding tubes are removed everyday, all over the country. There is no court battle because the person made their wishes public, or there were no opposing family members. The bad thing about this case is that since it is going to Federal court, there may be some rulings that trickle down to other cases. We all know that court rulings may seem innocuous at the time, but some time later an ACLU activist, or fame hungry attorney wants to capitalize on an innuendo, not the whole ruling. That's when we're in trouble. The more the courts get involved in private affairs, the more our privacy and freedoms are degraded.

Bottom line, I agree with Pres Bush, "Err on the side of Life"

[BloodyWill]

I just worry that both sides will meet with problems due to this new law passed. That's why I say that the government should stay out of this issue. IMHO, it's been decided.

As for the life statement-- I disagree that it's life, but will take that into another topic.

[Raver]

Everyone should read these articles before forming an adamant opinion on the matter:

http://www.rense.com/general44/vege.htm

http://www.rense.com/general63/aff.htm

[The anti liberal]

Raver, Those two articles were every interesting. I was listening to Micheal Savage a few hours ago and he had on as a guest the same nurse Carla Iyer, that gave that affidavit. She said on the show the same exact things that were in her affidavit. It is almost like micheal shiavo wants terry dead to either get the money that was supposed to go to her health care,( I understand that money was never even touched) or to try and cover up something that he did to her that my have caused her current state. I heard that there were some x-rays taken of terry after her incident and thay showed some sort of bone structurel Truama damage that would not result from a stroke or heart attack. There might be something fishy going on here!

[DoubleU]

Because he is scum, if he loved her he would turn her over to her parents.

Liberal Larry (http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/2005/03/the_last_terri_.html) over at Blame Bush has an interesting article.

[tamuct]

If you look and think deeper into this whole issue, it makes me wonder what kind of precedent is set if they allow her to die. What about parents with severely retarded children, would they be allowed to starve them to death because of some courtroom technicality? If so, then where does it stop? Who should decide if an innocent life should be starved to death?
I call BS on this. Comparing Terry and retarded children are two VERY different topics. Terry was born healthy and because of an accident is now a vegetable. Just let the poor woman die.

[chi1088]

I call BS on this. Comparing Terry and retarded children are two VERY different topics. Terry was born healthy and because of an accident is now a vegetable. Just let the poor woman die.

Amen.

[God v2.0]

The courts said to remove it, to put it back in before the courts say so is a crime.

[DoubleU]

This case keeps getting stranger by the minute. (Don't read past this Chi, Michael LOOOOOOOOVVVVVVESSSSS HER)



Life Like Pundits (http://www.lifelikepundits.com/) ]

Again, another revelation (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43493) that does not surprise me: the day after the judges ruling in the Terri Schiavo case, the husband's lawyer (George Felos), donated to the judges re-election campaign ($250).

The judge is not responsible for people who contribute to his campaign but he is responsible if he does not return the money. For the judge to accept campain cash from this attorney is unethical and demonstrates the incestual relationship between Michael Schiavo's counsel and the judge.

[chi1088]

I might not be the only one in this forum that still believes Michael loves her.

[VOLT]

The woman is brain damaged. I've said this before, she is not on artificial life support. Nothing is helping her breath. She is simply unable to feed herself. Vegatative state? I guess sitting up and opening your eyes on command is a reflex? I guess following a balloon to show your comprehending is reflex?

Micael Schiavo has moved on with his life. He has a women, and kids. Why is he holding on to Terri? Why wont he divorse her, and allow her parents to take care of her? Maybe its because he will get her share of the medical malpractice suit she was rewarded. SO MAYBE THE PARENTS WANT IT!!! but at least they're not willing to let someone die to get it.