February 22, 2005

Life or death? (updated)

You know from my previous posts that I am on the fence about abortions. It is pretty similar to the way I feel about euthanasia. I personally would prefer dying to living like a vegetable, I always thought. Now, I am not so sure - I might want to live just so I can see how my son is growing up every day. This kind of thing makes me re-examine my thoughts towards things like quality of life and right to life or death.

I have written about Terry Schiavo before (1, 2). I am not going to sit here and judge her husband, though I find it very hard to treat him as completely objective given he has been with another women for so many years now and kids by her, not to mention the huge sum of money he would inherit if Terry died.

I find it extremely sad that parents are being denied all rights in this case to argue to keep their daughter alive. I really don’t understand why the husband who obviously has conflicted interests can be given any importance over parents who only want the best for their daughter. If it were a question of someone simply turning a switch off so death would occur in a minute or so, I don’t think I would have a problem. That is not the case here - Terry’s feeding tube is going to removed and she is going to starve and die of thirst in a few days. Would you do that to a dog? Why would you do that a human being who has loving family who want nothing but to take care of her?

Court: Feeding Can End for Brain-Damaged Fla. Woman
CLEARWATER, Fla. (Reuters) - A Florida man can remove the feeding tube that has kept his brain-damaged wife alive since 1990, an appeals court ruled on Tuesday in what could be the final chapter in a bitterly fought right-to-die case.


Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeal dissolved a stay that had kept the feeding tube in place during a legal battle over the fate of Theresa “Terri” Schiavo, 41. Some doctors said she has been in a persistent vegetative state since suffering a heart attack that severely damaged her brain.

There are plenty more blogs who are talking about Terry - read them. Take all the information in - then think about it - assuming you were going to be wrong anyways, would you rather be wrong in saving a life or taking one?

update: Terri has been granted a stay of execution for one more day.

Read here for her family’s version of Terri’s condition. See here for a video her parents made of her. After all that, tell me that no one should life a finger while somebody decides she should be starved to death.

Posted by shanti at February 22, 2005 1:48 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.realwomenonline.com/scgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/3230

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Life or death? (updated):


Comments

Shanti —-you talk about removing the tube being worse than what one’d do to a dog. But for some, living in such a vegetative state is exponentially worse than being a dog.

The basic thing is here us that —- imposing one’s morals onto Terry is just being selfish.
What matters is what Terry would have wanted. And given that
a. Empirically most people would not want to remain in a vegetative state
b. Her husband says she didn’t want either,

I’d say pulling the tube is the right option. Your morals or mine are irrelevant.

Posted by: seven_times_six at February 22, 2005 9:25 PM




euthanesia is a much debated thing - there’s no preset right or wrong, each case is unique. the thing most people forget is euthanesia means pulling the plug on someone with THAT person’s full consent - no one else’s.

anyways, as far as terry is concerned, what does she want? i guess that’s what matters.

Posted by: chikuado at February 23, 2005 2:05 AM




seven_times_six, per the press releases put forward by her parents and videos released, Terry is able to communicate and smile at her family. They say she doesn’t appear dejected usually but was horrified the last time they told her she might die.

It is not a question of imposing morals on someone. It is still a question of whether you would kill a person since you think you wouldn’t want to live like her or keep her alive since those who are close to her say she wants to live.

Posted by: Shanti at February 23, 2005 7:32 AM




Shanthi,
What else do you expect the family to come up with when they have almost a fixed slot on FOX News.

To pull the plug or not is not something you and I should be worried about. If you do not like the idea - don’t do it. Can’t stop others from from choosing against going broke.

Posted by: Nilu at February 23, 2005 8:25 AM




Nilu, your argument borders on the ridiculous. I am not asking someone to conform to my wishes. I am asking that someone listen to the family of the person involved. What is so wrong with that?

What does being on FOX news have to do with a family wanting to keep their daughter alive? If it were me, I would camp out on whichever gave me time enough to air my views, be it CNN, FOX or Al-Jazeera.

Who is going broke by keeping Terri alive? Not her husband for sure. All he has to do is divorce her and walk away. Her family wants to take care of her bills and everything. Got any more arguments?

Posted by: Shanti at February 23, 2005 8:56 AM




I wouldn’t want to live as a vegetable either.

What strikes me here about the people who say “go ahead and starve Terri” is that they’re projecting their own wishes and morals onto this woman’s family.

They say Mr. Schiavo long ago left his wife. He has been living with another woman he’s had kids with for about a decade now. They also say all they ask is that they be allowed to take care of their daughter. They say she interacts with them, is happy when she’s allowed to see them, and is frightened of dying when asked about it.

That should be enough for any sane or decent person.

Posted by: Dean Esmay at February 23, 2005 2:21 PM




I am asking that someone listen to the family of the person involved

Who is family?…..It is so easy to succumb to moral posturing on a right wing channel. So someone in the family will always do that. If I were her broher or father, and even if I think otherwise - I will hog all the limelight on T.V. as long I don’t foot the bill.

And Divorce???..After such publicity?
The man will be seen by millions as heartless SOB.

Posted by: Nilu at February 23, 2005 3:20 PM




Nilu, FYI I don’t watch TV much. I only watch Survivor, Apprentice and the NBA games. I don’t have the time or the inclination to watch anything, so I really didn’t know Terri’s family was on FOX till you mentioned it to me. If that is their biggest mistake though, I’d rather not condemn their daughter for it.

Terri’s family are her parents and siblings - everybody apart from her husband. They have been fighting this issue over the years now - I last wrote about this issue years ago. They have been spending their time, energy and money fighting this.

You think divorcing Terri will make her husband seem like a heartless SOB but starving her to death so he can live with his girlfriend of seven years and their children won’t?

Posted by: Shanti at February 23, 2005 3:25 PM




You see - pulling the plug will be a one time event.

But divorcing her will prolong the damn event and will make fantastic talking points for Bill O’Reilley every other time he is short on right wing stories.

My point is this : Those who fight for her life should foot her medical bill. Ask them to put their money where their mouth is. Then lets see what they have to say.

Posted by: Nilu at February 23, 2005 3:36 PM




Nilu, but that is exactly what the family is prepared to do. They ask her husband to simply walk away and that they will take care of her for the rest of her life. They are not asking him for any money. They just want custody.

When did you start letting Bill O’Reilly decide where you should stand on morality? I really don’t see why any talkshow host’s opinion on this should make any difference to the case.

Posted by: Shanti at February 23, 2005 4:20 PM




Terri has literally no brain and no hope of recovery. Aside from the brain stem, her skull is filled with CSF. The videos of her responding to stimulus is her brain stem causing involuntary movement. She has no conciousness. None.

Posted by: Hipocrite at February 25, 2005 9:05 AM




Hipocrite, if she really has no consciousness then what is the harm in keeping her alive? It isn’t like she is suffering or anything, right?

Posted by: Shanti at February 25, 2005 9:15 AM




Everyone that thinks the tube should be removed should be made to watch this woman suffer, suffer horribly, and die. A dog would be “put down” with lethal injection. Terri Schiavo can’t be because, in effect, that would be murder. If putting her out of her misery is murder, why isn’t starving her to death.

Posted by: George lyster at February 25, 2005 4:13 PM




Exactly, George - if they think Terri should be killed anyways, why don’t they simply inject her with something lethal and put her out of the misery in one fell swoop? Why do they have to starve her instead?

Posted by: Shanti at February 25, 2005 4:16 PM




the bible says thy shalt not kill, to me that is what will happen if terri feeding tube stays out, its like dying a slow death, I beleive that that God will not put more on that family that they can bear,the husband to seems to just want to go on with his life by doing away with terri, he should just go on and let her parents take care of her, only God knows when terri time is up.I do beleive in the mercy of the Lord and his word.how can man try to play God ?I pray for terri and her parents and all those that love her and are willing to help keep her alive. remember the saying WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

Posted by: janet aldridge at March 19, 2005 6:48 AM




Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)
angry beam confused blush ;) :evil: :huh: :mad: :shocked: :smartass: :tongue3: :( :nice: