bmoc, I'm pretty sure it's around a week but I'll check.
-
Fair or unfair? The Schiavo case
-
maybe i'm thinking in extreme conditions, like a desert, where you lose more than 8 cups or pints of water a day...but i heard on the news tonight, she shouldn't make it past another week
-
most of the info I can find supports the "less than a week". Some of it says, much less. If she makes it past this weekend, I will suspect some sort of interferance.Just to reiterate, I don't approve of this methode but I think Terri is gone and her body should be let go.
-
If Terry really isn't 'there', and it's just her body. Why does anyone care if her body stays alive? (this is not directed at unsupervised )Don't yell at me guys. I'm just curious why people think she should die.
-
True that my personal cases didn't have all the legal involvement. Very quick deaths, one was from poisoning(liver failure), although, the illness was long, the death was quick once it was decided that there was nothing that could be done for him to enjoy a productive life.In Terri's case, to me it is the same thing, she cannot enjoy a productive life, and she should be let to "go home" (sorry for stealing someone elses statement). Even with this beleif, it is still hard to think it is taking so long, I feel more for the family than I do for Terri on that note. They are sitting there waiting, her parents are praying for miracles, and her husband wishes it were already over.
-
In reply to: her husband wishes it were already over. Sure he's wishing it was over, I'm sure he's ready to move on with his girlfriend and children he has with her. That's one problem I have with this case, why does the husband still have power of attorney over his "wife" when he's not even being faithful to the woman? Why doesn't he divorce her and let her parent's decide what's best for Terri? Is he in it for the money? I don't understand it.... Now I'm not sying I'm all for letting her stay hooked to machines and I'm not saying let her die from starvation/dehydration. Either way I don't think it's fair to Terri or her family... but what other option is there? Theres not one.
-
It is just how our laws are, he is married to her, he has that right first. Why he doesn't give it up and move on is another story. (I haven't read enough about him to know the whole story.) As far as the law goes, the court can't order him out of power of attorney, because there are SO many other cases that it could affect where the court doesn't need to be involved. Good ol' stari decisis.
-
In reply to:Sure he's wishing it was over, I'm sure he's ready to move on with his girlfriend and children he has with her. That's one problem I have with this case, why does the husband still have power of attorney over his "wife" when he's not even being faithful to the woman?As mentioned, as long as he's married to her, he has the right to make the decisions regarding her care. Is it possible that, even though he's moved on with his life, he still has the best intentions for his wife, and is really carrying out her wishes? While we're here speculating based on little first-hand information, many, many judges have heard the evidence, and have decided in his favor every time. You have to weigh our knowledge of the case and his intentions with that of the judges.
-
In reply to: You have to weigh our knowledge of the case and his intentions with that of the judges. EXACTLY.
-
In reply to: If Terry really isn't 'there', and it's just her body. Why does anyone care if her body stays alive? Well, many of us think that there is more than just a body 'there'. That's why we believe her body should be allowed to stay alive.
-
In reply to: Is it possible that, even though he's moved on with his life, he still has the best intentions for his wife, and is really carrying out her wishes? I would be a lot easier for me to believe that if he had started yelling "unplug her!" before he started seeing another woman and having children with her. And it would have been a whole lot easier for me to swallow if he had yelled "unplug her!" before there was any talk about insurance settlement.jsut a thought...
-
If you're sure about that, then write a letter to the judges. They obviously don't get it.Do you advocate keeping someone who's truly brain dead (as opposed to being in a persistent vegetative state, which is the case under discussion) indefinitely? What exactly imbues a body that contains no living brain?What if someone gets their leg amputated? If we find a way to keep that tissue alive in a big test tube, should we?
-
Thakns lish & pepsi.
I must reiterate that I believe that Terri's body must be allowed to go but I certainly dissagree with the methode!
-
After having read all about it, what specifically disturbs you about the process, other than that it's not a pretty sight?
-
i don't think that dying of dehydration is a nice way to go. If she can breath, etc. she has a functional limbic system, so she can feel pain. It makes me sad to think that she might suffer
-
You read the articles? OK, then.You think the medical people who posit opinions on the matter don't know what a limibic system is? What happens when you're on the operating table, and the cerebral cortex is knocked out of commission, but the limbic system if functioning fine? If it weren't, the heart would stop.If part of the limbic system does respond to pain in some way, does it have real meaning if there's no cortex? Or is it like a tree falling in a non-observed forest?Does your hypothesis mean that we should consider not doing surgery anymore?
-
not too sure what you're trying to say. I just don't want her to suffer.
-
The question is, do you think someone who's anesthetized for surgery suffers from pain? An anesthetized person has a non-functioning cerebral cortex, but a functioning limbic system.
I suppose it's not a perfect comparison, because anesthesia goes beyond shutting down the cerebral cortex. And "pain" is a more specific metric than "suffering".
But people who are congizant and aware who are deprived of food and nutrition at end-of-life claim not to suffer. Apparently, after going without food for a while, the body goes into ketosis, and endorphins are produced. So, no suffering. And that's for people with intact brains.
-
your net-surfing is admireable
-
Cat Scans show profound atrophy, and there are no brain waves (if you can believe what folks say on CNN).