Just for argument sake......

[TheRightWing]

So your young and sitting in a hospital watching a relative hooked to machines keeping you alive and you tell your spouse....If I'm brain dead PLEASE don't let me live on machines etc! So then a few years go by without writinging up a will and then the Terri Sheivo hits that point of no return? I think if I'm a husband of that person and that conversation took place a few years back......Why wouldn't you fight for what you and your spouse discussed??????

 

[DarrylParsons]

I would surely want to see the issue get resolved before I go and start a new family with another woman...if I divorced her before she got into that state (in reality, not necessarily legally), then I wouldn't get involved at all. But if I divorced her BECAUSE of her state, then I'm an ásshole and don't deserve to have my wishes respected.

 

[Ego74]

Fact is, Terri WAS NEVER on a machine, clinging to life.

 

[TheRightWing]

No I'm not saying she was on a machine but my understanding was way back one of their relatives were and they went to visit etc and she was really moved and she told her hubby she wouldn't want that if that ever came to that.

 

[D2bets]

Fact is, Terri WAS NEVER on a machine, clinging to life.

I guess it depends how you define machine. A feeding tube is an artificial means of life support.

 

[Ego74]

I guess it depends how you define machine. A feeding tube is an artificial means of life support.

In that case, they need to hurry up and pull the plug from that dastardly, no good Pope

 

[PatPatriot]

I actually believe she said that,who hasn't?.But if there is nothing on paper and the parents are willing to give her food,and water, whats the problem.Especially if the husband is not a suitable guardian (or that it can be proven).

Its not like she was in a iron lung or something,she wasn't in a coma and all she needed was food and water.

You wouldn't do that to a dog....but a probate court did.

 

[Jointpleasure]

I guess it depends how you define machine. A feeding tube is an artificial means of life support.

So if humans had beaks like birds we could feed our young, sick and old, using our beaks. But we don't have beaks like birds so a judge must rule on it. Nuts.
The frickin' tube is about the diameter of 150 pound fishing line. If there was a market for this tube in the future you could pick it up at the local hardware store for a buck a foot. It's not like medication is a natural means of therapy either.

 

[TheRightWing]

Guess my post missed what I'm trying to say and that if Terri's wishes were if I go braindead or can't live like I'm living now please don't keep me alive.And no legal document to say that shouldn't her husband at that time carry out her wishes?

 

[PatPatriot]

TRW I agree with your premise but its hear say.

Would you think it was right if a court sent someone to death based on hearsay from 1 person?

 

[cussin'it]

Fact is, Terri WAS NEVER on a machine, clinging to life.

Fact was she was on artificial life-sustenance, having no cerebral cortex, and zero % probabilty of recovery.

 

[TheRightWing]

Pat,


No on your question I wouldn't want that and agree it's hersay.... so how come hersay overruled what happen or is the FL law say whatever the legal guardian says is what we go by now? It's all confusing to me now She lived 15 yrs like this and now they pull the feeding tube out?

 

[xpanda]

It doesn't matter if she had that conversation with her husband or not. He has the legal right to tend to her care, and thus has the legal right to withdraw her care. If she'd had a living will saying she would want to be kept alive in that condition, then her parents could have used it as grounds to gain POA rights. Otherwise, it's her husband's decision, no matter.

 

[cussin'it]

In that case, they need to hurry up and pull the plug from that dastardly, no good Pope

See herein lies the problem with your kind of ideologue, uncompromising mindset.

You are comparing apples to oranges, making widespread generalizations based purely on emotional reaction.

The law is the law. It was enacted by representatives of the people of each state, by elected officials from both sides of the isle. They furiously debate, research, define, then hammer out what is constitutional and compromise on specific laws, ensuring they are Constitutional, and acceptable as public policy.

The fact is there are different levels of incapacitation. They are legally determined. If you have nothing but JELLO for a cerebral cortex, you are at the extreme end of the scale.

The pope has a physiological condition specific to his throat, and ability to swallow, NOTHING to do with his higher brain function.

I can't believe that you simply don't understand that statutorily the greatest respect is for the husband/wife union. That takes precedence over any other relationship. Countless judges, courts, lawyers, professionals have reviewed this case and come to the same determination.
The trial court judge made his findings (prob in spite of his emotional feeling, since he IS a Conservative judge) based on the law and the rule of law. Accept it or have your state reps change the law.

Frankly my wife knows my desires, many of which I don't have to specifically state. And my union with her legally trumps any other. What she says when/should I become incapacitated goes. PERIOD.

Use your brain or give it to someone who will use it.

 

[PatPatriot]

TRW,

I really don't feel bad for Terry I feel bad for her folks who were willing to care for her...I don't know why the husband wasn't proven to be an unworthy guardian and therefore has no say in her future.

If the courts were so sure of themselves why didn't they order euthanasia by injection or something....because there is no law in place for that.
To have state troopers in place to not allow her parents to give her food and water is an abomination.

 

[Ego74]

I can't believe that you simply don't understand that statutorily the greatest respect is for the husband/wife union

didn't that respect come to an end when Mr. Schiavo forgot about the "for better or worse, till death do us part" in his marraige vows, and took up with another woman and had 2 kids???

 

[one9]

It doesn't matter if she had that conversation with her husband or not. He has the legal right to tend to her care, and thus has the legal right to withdraw her care. If she'd had a living will saying she would want to be kept alive in that condition, then her parents could have used it as grounds to gain POA rights. Otherwise, it's her husband's decision, no matter.

End of story.

 

[cussin'it]

didn't that respect come to an end when Mr. Schiavo forgot about the "for better or worse, till death do us part" in his marraige vows, and took up with another woman and had 2 kids???

In reality, that is not your or my decision to make. It is a matter to be determined according to the statutes of the respective state and Constitutional law. Your republican judges, representatives, and operatives have worked this angle literally to the end, and yet, what, some 18 plus reviews come up with the same conclusion, their private utterances are sacrosant. Do you want to choose to forget the fact that he diligently pushed for and provided daily attention and care for her for years?
Do we not want for him to go on with his life??? (as her parents even suggested to him)
Is that fair? I think not.

Pal, if there was indeed a nefarious element, a "smoking gun", I would bet my last red cent that you'alls right wing judges would have found it and ordered a reversal. Countless reviews, and evidence poured over, and here you all are questioning the adjudication of one of your own hacks. For the love of Christ, you expect us all to sit back and allow for the tyranny of the majority to be fully implemented along with throwing out hundreds of years of common law?

They found nothing to refute the findings of the trial judge....The Supreme Court, stacked with your right-wingers, DENIED THE APPEAL...............End of Story.

 

[JinnRikki]

I don't know how many here are married. The way it goes in mine is usually during the day you don't have time to discuss matters of life and death. Those discussions are generally held at night, in bed after a long day. My wife and I determined a long time ago we would not want artificial means keeping us alive if there was no hope. We have had living wills for some time. Most young people don't think of dying enough to make out that will.

I have one simple question; who here would want to live in a vegetative state for a year, two years, twenty years?