[Angelic_Raine]

As you all have probably heard Terri Schindler-Schiavo died today. She will be in my prayers. Well, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding the removal of her feeding tube and whether or not it was the correct thing to do.

In the 1990's Terri suffered brain damage, which I found in a recent article to have been unexplained, and had to have a feeding tube injected due to the fact she could no longer feed herself. She wasn't in any visable pain and was breathing, making noise and moving her head and neck yet her husband made the decsion, despite her families strong beliefs against it, to remove her feeding tube and let Terri pass on. She lived for an astonishing 13 more days! So, here is my question to the members of this board: Do you think what Micheal Schiavo did to his wife was right or wrong and state good reason as to why. However, before you answer I suggest researching the following website, it strongly changed my views and I am utterly disgusted with what they put this poor woman through. Both sides fought over her like dogs but I think it was ultimately wrong to have her die in such an inhumane way, it is torture! Slowly starving to death? Could you imagine the pain? Would you kill a mentally handicapped kid? The only difference between Terri and a mentally challenged child in a wheel chair was ability to swallow and I heard from the website listed below that she was beginning to learn to swallow on her own. I think it wasn't Euthanasia but murder, that is of course my personal opinion. My father thinks otherwise but doesn't give much reason for doing so and I'd like to see it from his point of view, so if anyone out there can give reason, other than theory, as to why it was right please do so. I just, at this present time, cannot understand the reasoning of Micheal Schiavo when the family would gladly have taken care of her...

http://www.terrisfight.org/index2.html

EDIT: Sorry I just wanted to add that there is a press release from a Dr. which leads me to believe there was foul play and is my "proof" as to why it was wrong.

March 24, 2005
Dr. Craddock,

Terri Schiavo's condition is consistent with attempted strangulation. Her healthy heart functioning for the last 12 years is not consistent with a "heart attack from an eating disorder" having ever occurred.

Disallowing replacement of the feeding tube in this woman is homicide.

Critical facts in plain view must have time to be reviewed. This can be accomplished in 7 days.

Respectfully,

George Eddington McClane, M.D.
Director - Forensic Medical Unit - Department of the Family Justice Center
City of San Diego

In other words she may not have gotten brain damage due to a heart attack which was previously thought, but I guess we will see after they are done the autopsy...

[Enoch]

Studies were done on her, and have concluded that Terri wouldn't feel the pain if she had her feeding tube removed, because her brain is so distorted. That website that you mentioned is a little out-dated.

All I know is that if it were me, I'd want to stay alive. But nobody knows what she actualy would have wanted. Nobody! I could roll with either side of the discussion.

[Andross]

Terri Schiavo having a 'healthy heart' doesn't indicate anything. My step-grandfather had the same exact thing happen to him (heart attack, went comatose, didn't become completely vegitated however, but most of the way). His heart functioned fine, and he had no post-stress. He died recently though due to pneumonia (no need for condolences please, I didn't even know him :P).

In addition, those 'videos' are clips, snippets, and are arguably outdated. They were probably taped in the mid 90s, or 1998ish. She would still have limited motor functions. But it is now 15 years in total she's been like this, and her brain has become total mush. The only reason she breathes is because those are random impulses in the brain that happen even when we are not thinking. We can override them, but if you hold your breath long enough, you eventually faint, and you breath automatically.

Random reflexes also occur as a result of these impulses (eye twitches, random movement in sleep, etc.), and as I said before, those 'videos' are too old to be viable evidence towards her condition today.

As Enoch said, she felt no pain. Neither was it cruel. She felt nothing when she died. And it's not a miracle she lived two weeks. It was expected. Read the news reports before hand - doctors said she'd live for a week, two weeks max.

It was ultimately the husband's decision though, and he obviously loved her, because if he DIDN'T care for her, he would've divorced her by now and left her to the parents. But he wanted to make sure she could die in a dignified manner, so he didn't leave her.

Whats unfortunate is the circus that ensued. We should've never come to know Schiavo's case. The gov't was trying to overstep their bounds, but Michael was in the right folks. He had the power to make the decision. If he was told Schiavo had a chance at recovery, he wouldn't have been letting her die in the first place. But he accepted it, and knew Terry wouldn't want to live as a drone.

IMO, I think it was more merciful to put her out of her condition. I wouldn't want to be stuck as a person who couldn't do anything except sit, breath, and twitch. It's disheartening and woeful.

[Tachyon360]

Loved her? Her husband was quoted asking, "When will the ***** die?" If that's loving her, then the world is one really messed up place. On top of that, he was also quoted saying that he didn't know what to do after Terri got her brain damage.

Her brain wasn't degenerating, so her motor functions could not have dulled. It it was degenerating, she would've been dead long ago. The reason she wasn't improving was because her husband denied her therapy. And many nurses caring for Terri testified that up until her death she had been doing conscious actions, such as physically responding to pain stimuli (including her starvation), following family members with her eyes, responding with joy or sorrow to her family, and apparently trying to communicate answers meaningfully to nurses' questions.

"terrisfight.org" said:

Terri's behavior does not meet the medical or statutory definition of persistent vegetative state. Terri responds to stimuli, tries to communicate verbally, follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposefully with her environment.

It was more than just random twitches that some doctors, who only observed her for minutes at a time, noted. It's also worth noting that "14 independent medical professionals (6 of them neurologists) have given either statements or testimony that Terri is NOT in a Persistent Vegetative State."

If she really were a vegetable, I'd have no trouble with this case. I do believe, however, that she was quite conscious enough. There are a handful of retarded or brain-damaged students at my school that have conditions similar to Terri's. They're very much concious, but they look like veggies with only a few minutes worth of observation. Would you recommend killing them as well? I certainly wouldn't.

And now the jerk wants her cremated. Why? Because cremation is much cheaper than a burial, and since all eyes are watching him, I doubt he'd want to leave all the payments to Terri's parents, making him look like even more of an ass. So, he went with what's cheapest for him without looking like a cheap *******.

And yes, I know I said I choose to hold no opinions, but this pretty much boils down to a black-and-white "Was she a vegetable or not?" All the evidence seems to point to "No, she was not." http://terrisfight.org/timeline.html

[Nick Presta]

Quote

My step-grandfather had the same exact thing happen to him (heart attack, went comatose, didn't become completely vegitated however, but most of the way)

Same thing to my Grandfather. He had a stroke, went comatose, and lost half his brain function (Memory damaged severly).

I am torn when it comes to Terry. At one glance, I know how hard it is to have someone who can't respond very well, if at all, in your presence for such a long time, especially if you care about them. It's painful to watch someone you love "waste" their life but being in a vegetative state. "Pulling the plug" so to speak, is not only humane but easier on everyone involved (I can image how Terry must have felt-not really having a sense of awareness, yet knowing something was going on)

On the other hand, she is a person and every person has the right to live, no matter what.

[Andross]

Tachyon360, on Apr 3 2005, 04:46 AM, said:

Loved her? Her husband was quoted asking, "When will the ***** die?" If that's loving her, then the world is one really messed up place. On top of that, he was also quoted saying that he didn't know what to do after Terri got her brain damage.

Her brain wasn't degenerating, so her motor functions could not have dulled. It it was degenerating, she would've been dead long ago. The reason she wasn't improving was because her husband denied her therapy. And many nurses caring for Terri testified that up until her death she had been doing conscious actions, such as physically responding to pain stimuli (including her starvation), following family members with her eyes, responding with joy or sorrow to her family, and apparently trying to communicate answers meaningfully to nurses' questions.

"terrisfight.org" said:

Terri's behavior does not meet the medical or statutory definition of persistent vegetative state. Terri responds to stimuli, tries to communicate verbally, follows limited commands, laughs or cries in interaction with loved ones, physically distances herself from irritating or painful stimulation and watches loved ones as they move around her. None of these behaviors are simple reflexes and are, instead, voluntary and cognitive. Though Terri has limitations, she does interact purposefully with her environment.

It was more than just random twitches that some doctors, who only observed her for minutes at a time, noted. It's also worth noting that "14 independent medical professionals (6 of them neurologists) have given either statements or testimony that Terri is NOT in a Persistent Vegetative State."

If she really were a vegetable, I'd have no trouble with this case. I do believe, however, that she was quite conscious enough. There are a handful of retarded or brain-damaged students at my school that have conditions similar to Terri's. They're very much concious, but they look like veggies with only a few minutes worth of observation. Would you recommend killing them as well? I certainly wouldn't.

And now the jerk wants her cremated. Why? Because cremation is much cheaper than a burial, and since all eyes are watching him, I doubt he'd want to leave all the payments to Terri's parents, making him look like even more of an ass. So, he went with what's cheapest for him without looking like a cheap *******.

And yes, I know I said I choose to hold no opinions, but this pretty much boils down to a black-and-white "Was she a vegetable or not?" All the evidence seems to point to "No, she was not." http://terrisfight.org/timeline.html

http://www.sweetcan.net/archives/schiavo_scan.jpg

Looks pretty liquified to me. That is, IF it is accurate. I obtained it from my bro's website, and he can't exactly verify it. But if that is an accurate brain scan, then it can be assumed she was in a vegitative state.

BTW, if what you say is true, then I'd like to see where your source was. (And if its terrisfight.org, then come up with corroborating evidence to support it).

[Enoch]

I never heard Terri's husband call her the "B" word.(excuse my substitution)
Otherwise it would have been on the news. I did hear that some guy attempted to pay the husband like 1 million dollers to pull the plug when she was in the begginning of her vegitative state, and he wouldn't. I also heard that The husband payed lots of money to give his wife the best of care, as well as overseeing operations done on her.

In the end, he only did what his wife would have wanted him to do.

Andross;

I saw that exact same brain scan on the news at one point.

[Omega]

Whoa what's up with her brain? That's REALLY messed up.... BTW I think I've heard of this "Terri" but I can't quite remember the details.... (OMFG! I'M TALKING LIKE A GROWN UP... DARE I SAY IT.. "MATURE PERSON!" NOOOOOOO!)

[Enoch]

Yeah Omega! Who would have thought, You, mature!

Anyways, yeah, I think that it was the right choice in the end anyways. But now coarts are debating wether or not to have an autopsy. The husband is in favor, but the parents are again in disagreement. They never see eye to eye.

[Tachyon360]

Andross, those are two different kinds of pictures (one's a greyscale screen capture, the other is a sheet of printed plastic illumnated from behind). Show two pictures of the same kind and then we'll talk.

True, she did sustain brain damage, but her brain could still function. You don't need all of it to be able to think, albeit with very huge limitations. As I've said before, there are severely brain-damaged kids in my school that behave much in the way Terri did, and they are fed through tube going into their stomachs. Does that mean they're vegetables that aught to be starved as well? No, of course not.

As for evidence, this PDF has the affadavit of a neurologist testifying for the side that Terri was not in a PVS. I'd be more inclined to believe this guy and his peers than the panel of doctors Michael hand-picked to testify for his side, since the former group supposedly researched the case from a non-biased standpoint, whereas Michael's guys would do things in his favor.

[Andross]

Tachyon360, on Apr 11 2005, 11:27 PM, said:

Andross, those are two different kinds of pictures (one's a greyscale screen capture, the other is a sheet of printed plastic illumnated from behind). Show two pictures of the same kind and then we'll talk.

Um, both show the content of the brain. One just happens to be on a blue backlight and looks to be a computer scan rather than a picture.

But I already said, I'm not confident on the source. AND, I said find a source that doesn't stem from terrifights.org. I'd rather see publications in scientific journals and whatnot. But as far as this issue goes, I'm not going to bother debating, because I don't see a point right now. The only point to discuss is why people should fill out a living will, and other items that could have prevented this case.

[Enoch]

Also the autopsy. Wether or not they should have one. The husband sayes yes, but the parents say no.

[Tachyon360]

Andross, on Apr 11 2005, 09:38 PM, said:

But I already said, I'm not confident on the source. AND, I said find a source that doesn't stem from terrifights.org.

Sure, it came from terrisfight.org, but why would they post a fradulent testimony? It's merely a scan of an actual print copy, but it's legitimate nonetheless.

As for the scan, you're right both show the damage in her brain, but the actual difference two different types of displays can be pretty marked. You can't just point to the dark region and say, "It looks pretty liquefied to me; compare it to this greyscale image."

Anyway, you're right about there being no point to debate it now. What's done is done. The only thing I'll put on my living will is that only my immediate blood-family has the right to interpret it and not my spouse or doctor, and as long as anyone in my family wants me alive, I should be kept alive. That, and getting a Cathloic funeral and burial when I finally do die.

[Enoch]

My spouse would be allowed to interperate my will. I trust her, whoever she may be. But when the time cmes, I would like to live, though that just may be me. I actualy think that Terri wouldn't want to live.