Comments on: My daily Schiavo post

By: charles

charles — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:51:17 +0000

As a future consumer of terminal medical care, as we all must be someday, I say a plague on both houses. No, I don’t want lawyers and politicans and judges and experts sticking their noses in. No, I don’t want to die of starvation and thirst either; dogs and cats receive more humane deaths. Really, as I roll this one around, I come to the conclusion that either the religous nut fringe or Dr. Kavorkian is absolutely right. It’s the people who aren’t willing to go either way who make a ghoulish mess of it.
Now, you doctors don’t have to comment on this if you don’t want to, but years ago, never mind who, when and where, the guy who delivered me told my mother that he’d routinely arrange for babies with birth defects to be left by an open window in the maternity ward. Many years later, when my father was dying, miserably, of brain cancer, our family learned the verb “to snow”, which we requested of the staff treating him, quite informally as you can imagine. They didn’t; perhaps by mentioning the practice, we blew it. Perhaps times have just changed, but definitely not for the better!

By: over my med body!

over my med body! — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:48:28 +0000

[...] to be a case in Florida involving a woman named Terri Schaivo-the scoop’s been had, RANTS DB! Some excellent summaries of points you won’t hear on cable news. F [...]

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 28 Mar 2005 02:58:12 +0000

Your nod the legal sphere of power in this nation is interesting. I personally take exception to a judge in Florida taking this womans life into his hands. As more and more information is released about this case it is more and more obvious that the legal establishment is just that. An established position with no thought for circumstance. The “Legal History” that makes up precedent has no room for amendment it would seem. Of course I speak from a particular viewpoint and one formed only by that media information available to me. What I see is the will of the people thwarted by elitist legal positions that do not account for the merits of someones life and only account for the right of the husband. The right of the wife to live is immediately assumed to be null and void because the husband says so and the few doctors that have actually been involved in the case agree with him. I would be perfectly content with this “unusual” case ending as it is, if the following had occurred.
1-New tests conducted by specialists with no connection to the case and no known “life or death” agenda to support were given orders by a federal court to review her current diagnosis and condition with all modern capabilities.
2-A full review of the case by a federal court instead of some sort of appeal process that was used to shuffle this case under the rug after the people made known their wish that Terri be given the benefit of the doubt.
3-Assuming that the husband and judge are so absolutely right, I would ask that they end the “shell” of Terri, by administering a lethal injection proscribed for Fair and Humane treatment for death row killers. Allowing a living breathing “shell” of a human being to starve to death is murder by cruel and unusual punishment.

The fact that some doctors swear she feels nothing does not mean they are right. If you are in essence going to kill someone then by all means at least face your decision head on and have the balls to do what is right. Unwanted Dogs get better treatment than this woman.

By: DrTony

DrTony — Fri, 25 Mar 2005 01:14:27 +0000

I have posted on my blog regarding this post. It was relatively long and I didn’t want to post that much here.

By: Justine Dykoski

Justine Dykoski — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 21:05:26 +0000

It is easy to voice our opinion when we sit at home or work in a confortable situation. I am a parent and a wife. I know that I love my children more than anything in this world. It is my natural born instinct as a mother to fight for their life no matter what. I really trust Terri’s parents and siblings more than her husband to make a decision what is best for Terri. From interviews with nurses and doctors that have come in contact with Michael they have spoken of him being arrogant and uncaring to Terri’s care. Her parents have only showed love and care. My God…..who are we going to trust? Its pretty clear to me. It a sad day when we are more concerned about following the law then following are hearts. I weep for us all.

By: Stef

Stef — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:14:46 +0000

Krauthammer draws out the grounds for his own sympathy with keeping Terri Schiavo alive, not to argue that this should in fact be done, but only to show how and why he personally feels troubled with the conclusion that the legal proceedings have reached. And yet, he remains explicitly respectful of that legal process, a characteristic that distinguishes his commentary from many others.

What I find most exemplary in his writing is his willingness to explicitly separate his moral sentiments from his appreciation for the role and functioning of the law in this case. Most of us wish to see the law embody our moral sentiments, and we feel offense when it does not. We are tempted to denigrate the judge, the jury, the processâ€¦surely no process is fair which reaches a conclusion alien to where our own moral compass pointed, right?

The protests from members of the public, and the actions by Congress (and threatened actions by Governor Jeb Bush of Florida today) all seem to fail to approach the standard that Krauthammer surmounts.

As much as we struggle with the questions surrounding the life and death of Terri Schiavo, however, it seems important to point out that countless others have died today, or this month, or this year, all over the world, and that at least some of those deaths occurred needlessly and in ways that perhaps we had the power to prevent. Whether one speaks of the thousands who have died in the less-and-less discussed (but ever-ongoing) genocide in Darfur, or the 25 U.S. troops who died in Iraq this month, or persons dying of treatable conditions all over the world, it’s hard to argue that our reflections should be restricted only to this one tragic case in Florida.

By: LibraryGryffon

LibraryGryffon — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:47:12 +0000

And then there is the sworn testimony of several of the nurses who have cared for her over the last ten years that she could swallow, but only thin liquids, and that she seemed to enjoy them.

If there was recent testing from doctors who don’t have a history of finding PVS patients under every rock, (all of whom apparently want to die), who agree that “no one is home”, I’d be a lot less uncomfortable with this. And I do agree with Krauthammer, that if there really is no one home, then keeping the shell alive if it benefits the parents isn’t harming her, so why not, if they and others are willing to pay for the care? What else was that malpractice award for anyway?

I like the idea of a “Terri’s law”, to presume for life whenever there is any doubt or disagreement. For those of us who are religious, perhaps that is why Terri is still here after all these years, for this debate to become huge and public, and for our society to be allowed to discover what it really believes and act on it.

By: Steve Seiden

Steve Seiden — Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:18:53 +0000

DB,
Congratulations on an excellent discussion of this terrible case, more balanced and thoughtful than I’ve seen in any other venue.
As a practicing physician myself, it’s been my observation that one of the most fundamental characteristics of the human organism is the need nad desire to take nourishment. Absent some obvious reversible interference with this, the loss of the instict for food and liquids frequently seems to signal the end of meaningful life. The elderly patient with a long history of dementia will suddenly stop eating. The patient with cancer will lose interest in food after months of participating in aggressive treatment. Thee patient with chronic CHF sill start losing weight despite family forcing food on him. The list goes on. Placing a feeding tube rarely ends well in these or other cases.
Terry’s apparent lack of interest in food and hydration signals to me that meaningful life functions are probably lacking.
The case is complicated by legal definitions of guardianship, moral and religious wrangling over the meaning of life and death. But this simple observation in my experience usually provides insight into what course to follow.
Keep up the good work.
Steve Seiden