Curtis L . Russell 23 March 2005 18:40:41 [ permanent link ]
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:22 -0800, Tim Lines <linest253CLOTHES@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't believe she's really brain dead. Acceptable proof of brain >death would involve a series of usenet posts to RBR.
Vegetative state, not brain dead. Doesn't take away from a valid point, and I think we need to check the source of some of the anonymous posters, especially the crossposting twits.
Carl is more easily amused than I thought BTW, joining in that thread. Its like starting a thread on how you wrap handlebar tape and actually giving a serious answer.
Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...
It is also worth noting that Mrs. Schiavo is in the PVS because she was buliemic. Seems to me if she was concerened enough with her physicality (pathologically or not) she would be horrified by the state she is in. If you are willing to risk your life to stay thin. You are likely to not want to be alive as a unattractive vegetable.
I think this case is more about the mom and dad irrationally not wanting to let go and Michael Schiavo finally letting go.
Let me see, what you're saying is that the LAW is killing Terri Schiavo> and not Michael Schiavo?
No, no, not at all. The law in question is a Texas law (signed by GWB when he was governor). Terri Schiavo isn't in the state of Texas: the state she's in is persistently vegetative. Your state is rather easier to determine: although I've never examined you (thank god for that) I do happen to have been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in Medicine. My expert diagnosis is that you're persistently annoying.
Steven L. Sheffield 26 March 2005 20:51:05 [ permanent link ]
On 03/25/2005 06:05 PM, in article gz21e.4738$H06.2330@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
Terri Schiavo wasn't being "treated" and hasn't been since about '92 when> the law suit was settled. At that point ALL treatment for Terri stopped cold> in its tracks.
Obviously not all treatment, as someone has been feeding her, changing her, cleaning her, making sure she has no bedsores, etc.
-- Steven L. Sheffield stevens at veloworks dot com bellum pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea eye tee why you ti ay aitch aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [foreword] slash
"Robert Chung" <me@address.invalid> wrote in message news:3akgtnF6d2q7tU1@individual.net...> Tom Kunich wrote:>>
Let me see, what you're saying is that the LAW is killing Terri Schiavo>> and not Michael Schiavo?>
No, no, not at all. The law in question is a Texas law (signed by GWB when> he was governor). Terri Schiavo isn't in the state of Texas: the state> she's in is persistently vegetative. Your state is rather easier to> determine: although I've never examined you (thank god for that) I do> happen to have been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in Medicine. My> expert diagnosis is that you're persistently annoying.
Robert, I have a rather higher opinion of you than you apparently have of anyone else. Evidence of Terri Schiavo being capable of speaking - of reacting to the world around her - has been consistently disallowed from a court in a greater hurry to kill her than to spend some time trying to rehabilitate her.
Here's the bottom line - there should be NO possibility of anyone killing off someone without express written living wills on the subject. Her husband, her parents and no government agency should ever be able to do so.
And YES, I disagree with the wording of the Texas law but it was written for a reason and apparently you would much rather make your own interpretations than to find out what those reasons are.
Here's the bottom line - there should be NO possibility of anyone> killing off someone without express written living wills on the> subject. Her husband, her parents and no government agency should ever> be able to do so.
"Robert Chung" <me@address.invalid> wrote in message news:3an3hmF6d6erlU1@individual.net...> Tom Kunich wrote:>
Here's the bottom line - there should be NO possibility of anyone>> killing off someone without express written living wills on the>> subject. Her husband, her parents and no government agency should ever>> be able to do so.>
I guess I don't follow you. I had to stop them from hooking my mother up to machines that would have then required a court order to remove. I allowed her to die naturally from a series of escalating strokes that took more and more of her away. I also grew up with my paralyzed uncle in the house. He traveled the world for 40 years and then was struck down by polio. How many here would adjudge his life as not worth living?
I think that I have some idea of why the right to die laws were written. The problem arises when they're used as political weapons as they have been in the Schiavo case. She recieved at least a million dollars to maintain her life and as soon as the settlement was reached all rehabilitation ceased and the attempt to kill her began. Terri had reached a stabilized life. Perhaps not one that you or I would wish, but to imply that somehow her life isn't worthy of living, makes me wonder what you'd do if you permanently injured yourself.
