Lawmakers Widen Schiavo Right-To-Die Fight

buffettbride · Post by **buffettbride** » March 22, 2005 5:58 pm

FFishstick wrote:Everyone is worth the effort. As a pro-life advocate I am concerned that any legislation that comes out of this case could be very damaging to the human condition. Starvation and dehydration are cruel and inhumane, yet, one can't overlook the medical facts. The "truths" of this case have been twisted, politicized, and distorted, virtualy making her a pawn in a difference of opinion on a political stage. This case is not the battle ground for defining when life starts, and when life ends, and what constitutes life for that matter. As one who values life I can simply say that what has happened to this woman over the last 15 years is a damn shame and I hope that God's plan for her is played out quickly.

I appreciate your opinions, I really do. And I've had to work REAL hard to bite my tongue most of this thread. I do think it's wonderful that people have some really passionate views about this.

Where you and I differ most, is the anti-abortion activists have really jumped on with this case as well. Although it makes some sense for them to do that, there are so many other implications of letting Congress decide what is right and not right in this situation, that it could directly impact a woman's right to choose. I know you adamantly disagree with that, and I'm OK with that too...but I don't think any judge in their right mind is ready to make that decision.

Overall, my opinion about Terri is that yes I think the tube should be removed. No I don't think Congress should have any say in the matter. The husband is pretty sketchy, but if he is truly acting on his wife's wishes, then I feel it should be removed. I don't have a huge problem with the parents wanting to keep her alive...trying to wear their shoes I most certainly would have a hard time letting go of my own little one in the same situation...but I truly honestly feel it is time to let Terri go.

AlbatrossFlyer · Post by **AlbatrossFlyer** » March 22, 2005 6:09 pm

i prefer to view this case as not a right-to-life or right-to-die case, rather a challenge to spousal rights. for 200 plus years this country has had as the rule of law a presumption that spousal decision making trumps parental or sibling rights. now, led by the very same people attempting to protect the sanctity of marriage between husband and wife, they are trying to distroy this premise.

FFishstick · Post by **FFishstick** » March 22, 2005 6:17 pm

AlbatrossFlyer wrote:i prefer to view this case as not a right-to-life or right-to-die case, rather a challenge to spousal rights. for 200 plus years this country has had as the rule of law a presumption that spousal decision making trumps parental or sibling rights. now, led by the very same people attempting to protect the sanctity of marriage between husband and wife, they are trying to distroy this premise.

Proof that the "truths" of this case have been twisted, distorted, and politicized. And no, I am not agreeing with your point of view.

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » March 22, 2005 8:36 pm

FFishstick wrote:
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:i prefer to view this case as not a right-to-life or right-to-die case, rather a challenge to spousal rights. for 200 plus years this country has had as the rule of law a presumption that spousal decision making trumps parental or sibling rights. now, led by the very same people attempting to protect the sanctity of marriage between husband and wife, they are trying to distroy this premise.
Proof that the "truths" of this case have been twisted, distorted, and politicized. And no, I am not agreeing with your point of view.

The distortion is in thinking the case is about the ethics of right-to-die. If she'd had a living will she would be dead and no one would be questioning the morality of her decision. People are removed from life-sustaining care all the time - it certainly doesn't make the headlines.

AF is right - the issue before the court is about who has the right to make the decisions.

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » March 22, 2005 8:42 pm

carolinagirl wrote:We don't put retarded people to death by starvation. I don't think it's a matter of "will she return to her former quality of life?" She won't. But she IS alive, and she doesn't deserve to die. She is permanently brain-damaged, but so are some other people in nursing homes.

You clearly don't understand the depth of her injuries.

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » March 22, 2005 8:44 pm

Wino you know wrote:The thing is-Terry IS concious, alert, and does respond to people by smiling, moving her head, blinking her eyes, and reacting to people touching her.

No, she only appears that way.

She has reflexes, but there is no brain activity that indicates any consiousness.

captainjoe · Post by **captainjoe** » March 22, 2005 8:46 pm

Did anyone catch The Daily Show the other night? This was the episode where people were applauding the medical knowledge of Sen. Bill Frist and then they showed footage of Sen. Frist talking about what he thinks Terry's prognosis is. The next shot was Sen Frist saying that HIV and AIDS can be spread through tears and saliva. Tell me this is just not another instance where Republicans want to tell the rest of the world how to live. I still can't believe that Congress would get involved. Why are Republicans so interested in running everyone's lives? If they are the party of "small government", then they took a giant leap backwards with this nonsense.

Can any Republican say honestly that they want this much government in our day to day lives?

AlbatrossFlyer · Post by **AlbatrossFlyer** » March 22, 2005 8:52 pm

you have to have a cortex to have consciousness. neither of which JS has.

Elrod · Post by **Elrod** » March 22, 2005 9:01 pm

captainjoe wrote:I still can't believe that Congress would get involved. Why are Republicans so interested in running everyone's lives? If they are the party of "small government", then they took a giant leap backwards with this nonsense.

Don't bother going to www.rnc.org and searching for the word "schiavo." It isn't there. I think that the congressional "leadership" and el presidente are off-the-reservation on this one.

captainjoe wrote:Can any Republican say honestly that they want this much government in our day to day lives?

This Independent sure doesn't want this much government in his day to day life.

To paraphrase Eddie Chiles: I want the government to defend our shores, deliver the mail, and stay off my back.

SchoolGirlHeart · Post by **SchoolGirlHeart** » March 22, 2005 9:19 pm

Interestingly and unfortunately, government interference in these issues isn't new. In 1988, a judge in RI had to order a brain damaged woman's feeding tube to be removed. But in this case, the woman's husband and parents were in agreement; it was the state-owned hospital that refused to remove the feeding tube.... The judge ordered the hospital to remove the tube or transfer her to a hospital that would. They transfered her.

bravedave · Post by **bravedave** » March 22, 2005 10:48 pm

Key Lime Lee wrote:If she'd had a living will she would be dead and no one would be questioning the morality of her decision.

I beg to disagree. There have been arguments put forth by many (even some on this board) that do more than suggest that her own will might not be enough to justify letting her starve to death as long as there were someone with a public voice who hoped for a miracle.

If she'd had a living will and the ensuing media (and government) circus still took place I guarantee it would have brought people out of the woodwork who would plead for just one more chance to save her life/soul/whatever.

It ain't about the issue(s), it's all about the hype.

This issue has already been settled numerous times in hospitals and hospices all over the country.

Terri Schiavo is the new poster child for attention whores.

buffettbride · Post by **buffettbride** » March 22, 2005 11:04 pm

AlbatrossFlyer wrote:i prefer to view this case as not a right-to-life or right-to-die case, rather a challenge to spousal rights.

it most definitely is. but the religious-right has chosen to piggy back the abortion cause onto terri schaivo, and it can't be ignored.

DonnaKayDunbar · Post by **DonnaKayDunbar** » March 23, 2005 12:11 am

bravedave wrote: Terri Schiavo is the new poster child for attention whores.

O.M.G.

that is all.

Lightning Bolt · Post by **Lightning Bolt** » March 23, 2005 12:44 am

bravedave wrote:
Key Lime Lee wrote:If she'd had a living will she would be dead and no one would be questioning the morality of her decision.
I beg to disagree. There have been arguments put forth by many (even some on this board) that do more than suggest that her own will might not be enough to justify letting her starve to death as long as there were someone with a public voice who hoped for a miracle.

If she'd had a living will and the ensuing media (and government) circus still took place I guarantee it would have brought people out of the woodwork who would plead for just one more chance to save her life/soul/whatever.

It ain't about the issue(s), it's all about the hype.

This issue has already been settled numerous times in hospitals and hospices all over the country.

Terri Schiavo is the new poster child for attention whores.

BD, not saying you're all wrong.....but

dude, that has got to be the shallowest, most oversimplified, insensitive post I've read on this subject yet!

I don't know what other kind of response you're looking for....

ph4ever · Post by **ph4ever** » March 23, 2005 9:19 am

Those of you that are against the tube's removal in this case I commend you for sticking to your guns on this issue. I have to ask - if this case had not received the attention that it has would your feelings be the same? It's been stated that hers is not the only case in the US where a feeding tube has been removed. It's received the attention it has because her parents chose to bring it into the national spotlight. Considering your feelings on this case, what are you doing to champion for a change of the laws in your state? You are fighting so hard for Terri but what about the others - do you not care about them because they aren't in the national spotlight? Just exactly what are you doing to change the laws? Any of you actually contacted you state representatives on this issue or even so much as joined a group to work towards having the laws governing living wills and right to die changed??

olemissbrad · Post by **olemissbrad** » March 23, 2005 12:21 pm

DonnaKayDunbar wrote:
bravedave wrote: Terri Schiavo is the new poster child for attention whores.
O.M.G.

that is all.

Could ya'll take anything more out of context than ya'll have this comment?

Wino you know · Post by **Wino you know** » March 23, 2005 12:32 pm

ph4ever wrote:Those of you that are against the tube's removal in this case I commend you for sticking to your guns on this issue. I have to ask - if this case had not received the attention that it has would your feelings be the same? It's been stated that hers is not the only case in the US where a feeding tube has been removed. It's received the attention it has because her parents chose to bring it into the national spotlight. Considering your feelings on this case, what are you doing to champion for a change of the laws in your state? You are fighting so hard for Terri but what about the others - do you not care about them because they aren't in the national spotlight? Just exactly what are you doing to change the laws? Any of you actually contacted you state representatives on this issue or even so much as joined a group to work towards having the laws governing living wills and right to die changed??

Connie-
You know I love you and Don and wish you two the best always, so I hope I don't over-react to you.
Yes, I'd feel the same way if this wasn't in the national spotlight, and yes, my heart aches for all the "unknowns" going through the same thing. Unless they're TOTALLY unconcious and unaware, I could never advocate starving ANY living person to death. I HAVE called both of my U.S. Senators (one Republican and one Democrat) several times over this and aired my thoughts more vehemently each time. It's become so heated that BOTH have started hanging up on me. (Go figure).

All I can say is that if Terry Schiavo was MY wife, she'd probably outlive me.

Key Lime Lee · Post by **Key Lime Lee** » March 23, 2005 12:38 pm

Wino you know wrote:Unless they're TOTALLY unconcious and unaware, I could never advocate starving ANY living person to death.

She is totally unconscious and unaware.

Tiki Bar · Post by **Tiki Bar** » March 23, 2005 12:44 pm

Wino you know wrote:It's become so heated that BOTH have started hanging up on me. (Go figure).

olemissbrad · Post by **olemissbrad** » March 23, 2005 12:46 pm

Key Lime Lee wrote:
Wino you know wrote:Unless they're TOTALLY unconcious and unaware, I could never advocate starving ANY living person to death.
She is totally unconscious and unaware.

Just like most JB fans