Should the Feeding Tube be Removed? Share Your Vote and Reasoning.

[Norman]

Not all, most of it, but not all

There's no evidence that she wanted to die, only the word of her husband, a man that possibly abused of her according to this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiavo

Their parents want that she live. Morally I think that the persons that gave her life should have more power when it comes to decide her future

Really? You cannot choose your parents, but she chose to marry this man. I, as a soon to be married man, would want my wife making these decisions for me, if this were to ever happen to me. I am going to make a solemn vow (and a legally binding one) to her and I think that carries much more weight (both morally and legally) than simply her parents rights. She is a grown adult and is/was married to this man. I am sure he still loves her and is trying to do what he thinks is best, I hope. I am not a parent so I cannot even comprehend what her parents must be going through, but I think they need to come to terms with the fact that she has been in this state for over 10 years and will not improve, that is a very long time. I just cannot believe that this has become such a national issue. I do understand why everyone seems to have an opinion on the matter though.

 

[Norman]

There's no evidence that she wanted to die, only the word of her husband, a man that possibly abused of her according to this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiavo

This is not a correct statement. He has been found innocent of any abuse and the charges were ruled by a court to be baseless. Please read the article you site carefully:

The Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF) has begun another investigation of the abuse allegations. Previous investigations have found Schiavo innocent, and the charges baseless. ([9] (http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/wolfson%27s%20report.pdf ) PDF Report) The doctors who were the defendants in the 1992 malpractice lawsuit made no attempt to introduce any evidence suggesting that Mrs. Schiavo was battered as part of an affirmative defense to mitigate their responsibility for her cardiac arrest.

 

[Monique]

It's illegal [to give an injection]. Taking someone off of life support is not considered euthanasia. Actively taking the life is.

If you take someone off of life support, you are actively taking life when you know they can't live without it. Take late Christopher Reeve: if they would've stopped feeding him, it would not have been euthanasia?

The way I see it, if her cortex is indeed gone, then the effect on her is irrelevant. She has no knowledge of her condition.

Should we not take into consideration that there might be more going on than meets the eye? The brain is known to move the function of damaged areas to other parts of the brain, theoretically it is possible that in her brain things have taken place that we have no knowledge of. I'm not saying that it did, but think about it.

 

[Danger]

If you take someone off of life support, you are actively taking life when you know they can't live without it. Take late Christopher Reeve: if they would've stopped feeding him, it would not have been euthanasia?

Should we not take into consideration that there might be more going on than meets the eye? The brain is known to move the function of damaged areas to other parts of the brain, theoretically it is possible that in her brain things have taken place that we have no knowledge of. I'm not saying that it did, but think about it.

I'm not a neurophysiologist (as I've mentioned before, I never finished high school), but I did research brain structure and function fairly extensively for my own purposes. The brain certainly does rewire itself for the sake of saving function. (Not in the sense of rearranging neurons; just altering use thereof.) Such function transfer is almost exclusively restricted to the lobe or segment thereof which is normally responsible for the missing activity, and only occurs if the damage is within reasonable limits. If the cortex, which is the seat of consciousness, is destroyed, no other brain structure is capable of taking over its duties. It's the most specialized brain structure of all, and what separates us from the lower animals. You could not, for example, train the reptillian hindbrain to write a novel or do math.
I do really wish that a specialist in this area would jump in.

 

[faust9]

If you take someone off of life support, you are actively taking life when you know they can't live without it. Take late Christopher Reeve: if they would've stopped feeding him, it would not have been euthanasia?

Should we not take into consideration that there might be more going on than meets the eye? The brain is known to move the function of damaged areas to other parts of the brain, theoretically it is possible that in her brain things have taken place that we have no knowledge of. I'm not saying that it did, but think about it.

No one, and I mean no one, has every recovered from a labotomy. There is a difference between this situation where a woman who expresed her wishes to more than her husband is in a position where thought as we know it no longer occurs. She is not the daughter the Schindlers claim she is. She is a tube fed shell with no congative faculties. She has only enough basic functions to keep her heart and lungs and kidneys and liver in working order. Other than that, she is not a person. She looks like a person but she is not. She is a shell. A body and a spinal cord. She did not want to be in this condition(she told friends and relatives this--more than just her husband). She is not her parents daughter anymore--she is her husbands wife. She is a lifeless body who just happens to have a heart beat.

Her eyes open and close. She smiles. She twitches. She moves. She does all of this for no real reason. I urge you to go to a nursing home, hospice, or hospital and spend some time with a person is this condition. They are not alive--they are just heart beats. They are not people anymore(though they look that way)--they are hollow minds.

The difference in your analogy and real life is that Superman could think. He could feel love and pain. He didn't want to die. Superman wanted to live. Terrie Schaivo told people she did not want to be this position; unfortunetly, it has taken 15 years for her famaily to follow through on HER wishes. Her parents want you to think they are right; however, they have been told "you have no say, you are wrong" by the courts 23 times now. Terrie let multiple people know her feelings on being kept alive for no real reason other than to let her parents put off the enevitible--mortality. Terrie's mind died 15 years ago and no matter what theropy we do to her body she is never coming back.

The difference between superman and Terrie is "euthenising" Christopher Reeves would have remove a congative person from society. Letting Terrie go is removing a conscience. That happened 15 years ago.

 

[Monique]

I urge you to go to a nursing home, hospice, or hospital and spend some time with a person is this condition. They are not alive--they are just heart beats. They are not people anymore(though they look that way)--they are hollow minds.

I am not against letting her go, in the part you quoted me on I argued the fact that taking someone off of life support is not considered actively taking life.

 

[Moses]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
REMOVED? Killing a human being by having it removed?
Its costy, so? If the poeple around her want her to die, its not their business?

This who killed one soul, as she/he killed the whole humanity.
With the right of her to live, and not her soul to be taken but if she commit an act that its punishemnt is death.

About the tube removal, simply: No.

 

[faust9]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
REMOVED? Killing a human being by having it removed?
Its costy, so? If the poeple around her want her to die, its not their business?

This who killed one soul, as she/he killed the whole humanity.
With the right of her to live, and not her soul to be taken but if she commit an act that its punishemnt is death.

About the tube removal, simply: No.

Please, tell me the history of the term "soul". Who is believed to have coined the phrase, and when? To what is the soul attached the mind or the body? If the soul is attached to the body ther why is it that only human bodies have souls? Just curious.

 

[Danger]

This who killed one soul, as she/he killed the whole humanity.
With the right of her to live, and not her soul to be taken but if she commit an act that its punishemnt is death.

If you happen to believe in a soul or spirit or whatever (which I most assuredly do not), it still doesn't matter: it's been gone for 15 years. Who or what she was no longer exists.

 

[Moses]

Please, tell me the history of the term "soul". Who is believed to have coined the phrase, and when? To what is the soul attached the mind or the body? If the soul is attached to the body ther why is it that only human bodies have souls? Just curious.

Well, the history of the term soul i don't claim i do know it exactly. Still, i do believe in it from the ideology/religion i believe in which make it a valid issue existed, and proved by logic. At least to me is had been logically proven that God told intellectual creatures on this planet that soul do exist.

Humans and Animals has souls accrording to what i think. Still, soul is a topic that the limited humans may not cover it completely regardless how much our knowledge will exapnd in the future. Persoanlly i guess the soul may be in the brain.

I hope i have given a "satisfied answer"

 

[kaos]

Well, the history of the term soul i don't claim i do know it exactly. Still, i do believe in it from the ideology/religion i believe in which make it a valid issue existed, and proved by logic. At least to me is had been logically proven that God told intellectual creatures on this planet that soul do exist.

Humans and Animals has souls accrording to what i think. Still, soul is a topic that the limited humans may not cover it completely regardless how much our knowledge will exapnd in the future. Persoanlly i guess the soul may be in the brain.

I hope i have given a "satisfied answer"

logically proven? how were souls logically proven? u said it yourself that it is a topic which humans cannot cover. so how was it proven?

btw god telling creatures that souls exist is not a valid premise.

 

[Danger]

btw god telling creatures that souls exist is not a valid premise.

Right. It presupposes the existence thereof.

 

[1123581321]

i said no because
1. she is not vegetated, go see a video of her (you will notice that while braindamaged, she is capable of some function
2.Her wishes are not clear
3.Her 'husband' was quoted as saying "when is the B**** going to die, would not allow treatment etc
Besides, why the rush, convicted killers get 8-20 years to appeal

 

[faust9]

i said no because
1. she is not vegetated, go see a video of her (you will notice that while braindamaged, she is capable of some function
2.Her wishes are not clear
3.Her 'husband' was quoted as saying "when is the B**** going to die, would not allow treatment etc
Besides, why the rush, convicted killers get 8-20 years to appeal

1)How many people in vegetative states have you spent time with? Go spend some time with someone in that condition. Your appraisal will change.[edit]picking and choosing small bits of video taken over a seven year period to support a claim is not proof. Its simply random. Terri is no capacity for thought than Kizmet.
2)How so?
3)Proof.

 

[fifiki]

i said no because
1. she is not vegetated, go see a video of her (you will notice that while braindamaged, she is capable of some function
2.Her wishes are not clear
3.Her 'husband' was quoted as saying "when is the B**** going to die, would not allow treatment etc
Besides, why the rush, convicted killers get 8-20 years to appeal

1. what functions are you referring to? Blinking and turning her head? The cerebral cortex is responsible for language, information processing, reasoning, perception...and other "higher-order" functions. Without it, there is no Terri.

2. As clear as it can be given that she told several people what she wanted, not only her husband.

3. The nurse who made this allegation was found to be lacking in credibility and completely unconvincing by the court. It was found that in order for her allegation to be proved true requires an elaborate and grand conspiracy between the hospital personnel, the doctors, the police, and even Terri's parents. Further, the nurse's testimony is contradicted by the medical records and even what a person who lacks a cerebral cortex are able to do.

The only way there is any hope for Terri is if science miraculously found a way to regrow a brain.

 

[meteor]

1. what functions are you referring to? Blinking and turning her head? The cerebral cortex is responsible for language, information processing, reasoning, perception...and other "higher-order" functions. Without it, there is no Terri.

2. As clear as it can be given that she told several people what she wanted, not only her husband.

3. The nurse who made this allegation was found to be lacking in credibility and completely unconvincing by the court. It was found that in order for her allegation to be proved true requires an elaborate and grand conspiracy between the hospital personnel, the doctors, the police, and even Terri's parents. Further, the nurse's testimony is contradicted by the medical records and even what a person who lacks a cerebral cortex are able to do.

The only way there is any hope for Terri is if science miraculously found a way to regrow a brain.

May I ask, if Terri was your daughter, would you also agree to remove the feeding tube?

 

[Danger]

The only way there is any hope for Terri is if science miraculously found a way to regrow a brain.

Not even then. Since the cortex is the seat of identity, from whence arises the sense of 'self', growing a new one would result in a different self. It still wouldn't be Terry.

 

[fifiki]

May I ask, if Terri was your daughter, would you also agree to remove the feeding tube?

Whatever her wish is, I would follow it. No matter how much I would want her to remain with me, if she wants the tube removed, I would have to accept that.

 

[russ_watters]

i said no because
1. she is not vegetated, go see a video of her (you will notice that while braindamaged, she is capable of some function

This is simply not correct. What you see, you do not understand. The part of her brain in which conscious thought happens (the cerebral cortex) is physically gone.

 

[mattmns]

I voted yes. Please kill her already.

 

[quantumdude]

I would have voted, "Absolutely not, under any circumstances", but I had to settle for a simple "no".

You can put a dog to sleep and you can gas a mass murderer, but an innocent person has to be starved and dehydrated to be put to rest. In the threads that I see across the internet the expression "let her die with dignity" is mentioned a lot, but I think that if there is any TV footage of Terri Schiavo at the end, it will be more than apparent that this is just about the most undignified way a person can exit life. I think that it's a disgrace that it is legal for anyone to die this way.

 

[russ_watters]

I'm not going to start an argument, but just out of curiosity, Tom, do you favor euthenasia or just keeping her on the feeding tube?

 

[Evo]

I think euthanasia should be legalized in a case where it has been decided to remove a patient from life support. In this case it's a feeding tube. In other cases a machine is breathing for the patient, remove the machine that's breathing for them, they suffocate. A more violent death than starvation. As it has been pointed out, in starvation there is a euphoric state caused by food deprivation, in the remote possibility that one in the condition Terri is in could even feel it.

I believe that a person should have the right to die in cases such as this. I think it's horrible that euthanasia is not allowed. How can people object to legalizing euthanasia for these cases?

 

[quantumdude]

I'm not going to start an argument, but just out of curiosity, Tom, do you favor euthenasia or just keeping her on the feeding tube?

I would support euthanasia in general. I do not claim to know whether it is appropriate for Terri Schiavo.

 

[BobG]

I voted "yes" for the same reason Tom voted "no".

The entire last week has to be about the most undignified way a person could possibly die.

You have two Terri Schiavos: the one before her heart attack and the current version. Which image do you think she would most identify with? Which do you think she'd like to be the memory left with her loved ones? She's lucky she has no conciousness otherwise the national coverage over the last week would be enough to make her want to die for sure.

At least, with the legal proceedings seemingly nearing an end and with Schiavo's life also seemingly near an end, the news networks seem to be showing a little more sensitivity and the balance of before pictures is starting to catch up with the after pictures.

Actually, there's no way to know what the 'right' thing to do as an outside observer. If I'm going to have an opinion one way or the other, it's going to be about the people making the decision, not about Terri Schiavo, whom I don't even know. Either I believe that most judges are competent and try to do the best that they can or I believe that most judges are motivated by evil and corruption. The former is far more likely. All of the judges involved in this have come to the same conclusion, so I have to believe their decision is the closest to the 'right' decision that we're going to get to.

To be perfectly honest, the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo play very little part in my opinion. Being in the midst of a feud that both desparately want to win, very little publicly said by either side should carry too much weight.

 

[Danger]

I think that it's a disgrace that it is legal for anyone to die this way.

The main thing that you and a few other people are either overlooking or ignoring is that for all intents and purposes she is already dead. Her dignity isn't even an issue; you have to be aware to possesses any.

 

[meteor]

for all intents and purposes she is already dead

How do you know that? According to Barbara Weller, she attempted to say: "I want to live". Please, don't read only biased informations
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/mar/05032309.htm

I'm sorry if my attitude offends anyone, but I don't believe in the afterlife, so i think that all the efforts for saving a human life should be carried the further possible

 

[faust9]

How do you know that? According to Barbara Weller, she attempted to say: "I want to live". Please, don't read only biased informations
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/mar/05032309.htm

I'm sorry if my attitude offends anyone, but I don't believe in the afterlife, so i think that all the efforts for saving a human life should be carried the further possible

No, according to Ms Weller she said Ahhhhhh Waaaaaa which Ms Weller took for "I want to live." Maybe she wanted to say(now granted the part of her brain with the ability to form speech is gone)"I want to go with dignity" or "I want the tube removed" or anyone of a number of things. The point is she doesn't have the portion of the brain needed to form a thought, and any sound she makes is seen as her wanting to live by the Schindlers. The Schindlers took Ahhh Waaa for what they needed it to be to placate their own pain.

It's odd that the Schindlers waited this long to bring this evidence to light though isn't it?(rhetorical question BTW)

 

[quantumdude]

for all intents and purposes she is already dead.

There is simply no way of knowing if what you say is true. As long as that is the case, I am against any course of action that is irreversible, as this one is.

 

[Danger]

I'm sorry if my attitude offends anyone, but I don't believe in the afterlife, so i think that all the efforts for saving a human life should be carried the further possible

I don't either, which also means that I don't believe in any consciousness outside of the part of her brain that isn't there.
I don't have time to look that that link now, but I promise that I will once things slow down here.