The parents or the husband?

H

Hero

Scooby
Joined
Oct 18, 2003
Messages
2,880
There's a case flying around every newspaper and television news show. It's about a woman who had a heart attack and the supply of oxygen to her brain was cut off. It was gone for five minutes and then came back some how. Now she's in a vegitative state and every doctor that sees her says there is no hope that she's going to get any better. A feeding tube is the only thing keeping her alive. They took her feeding tube out on Friday, which means she'll be dead soon. The parents are fighting to get the tube put back in, while the husband says they should take it out. Keep in mind she's been in her vegitative state for 20 years; she can't walk, talk, feel, anything. Who's decission do you think it should be to keep her alive? The parents or her husband?
 
From the cases i've seen previously its normally the husband as he is generally the next of kin. I can see the parents point of view, its their daughter and they don't want to let her go. But neither does the husband. It comes down to the fact that her brain is dead and her body hasn't caught onto that fact yet. It is not a reasonable level of life and the fact that her family have to see her like this is emotionally taxing.

If it were a member of my family chances are i'd let her go, but saying that its one of those things that you don't really know until you are in that situation because you don't want to let them go.
 
I agree with the Faith and the husband. I'd rather die then not be able to walk, talk, or feel! That's not *really* living, anyways. I think it should be the hubby's decision.
 
Well, the husband wants her to be taken off the feeding tube, so he wants her to die. The husband was also planning on getting a divorce. The reason he wants her to be taken off the feeding tube might be because he wants to get married to a new wife and can't with her still alive.

I don't know. There are a lot of factors in the case.

...hm... there's a hostage situation 20 minutes from me... it's on the news...

anyway, yeah...
 
*thinks to herself* so is this what my social studies teacher was talking about yesterday?

She was saying that some guy, who was married to a woman on a coma (or something) and has been for along time, has kids and another girlfriend somewhere else and he'd like to mary his new girl but he can't because his wife hasn't died yet.


Well, I'm kinda mutual now! That jerk!
 
Hero said:
Well, the husband wants her to be taken off the feeding tube, so he wants her to die. The husband was also planning on getting a divorce. The reason he wants her to be taken off the feeding tube might be because he wants to get married to a new wife and can't with her still alive.

I don't know. There are a lot of factors in the case.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't know that. Not really been keeping up with the news, had my head buried under essays. Will look into this one as you said a lot of factors in the case. You say that she's been like this for 20 years? Were they split up prior to this happening or was it while afterwards?

See this is the thing about cases like this, especially where the media is concerned, as it is often the situation that we never know the true facts and what we do know can be twisted. I mean like his wife he to is entitled to a life but if these are his main reasons for wanting to let her go then it seems wrong, as he is thinking of the benefit to himself not the wellbeing of his wife.
 
Faith said:
Oh I didn't know that. Not really been keeping up with the news, had my head buried under essays. Will look into this one as you said a lot of factors in the case. You say that she's been like this for 20 years? Were they split up prior to this happening or was it while afterwards?
Click to expand...

Yeah, she's been like this for 15 or 20 years. It's been a pretty long time. They were planning on getting a divorce, but they had not split up prior to her accident.
 
I had thought the husband was right until I heard myself on the news this morning about the husband's girlfriend and the two kids he has with her.

I don't think he's acting in his wife's or her family's best interest.
 
15 or 20 years? I would say let her be dead... I mean, vegetative state is just like being dead except that the family can't mourn because of that slight hope they have... but 15 or 20 years... I think it's quite clear she's dead right? Even though she woke up, after all this time, it would take the rest of her life to get back her basic abilities...

In the meantime, it's true that this divorce things doesn't help, but all the time the husband has been quite patient right? I think he is allowed to live now.. more freely.
 
Well i think him wanting her to die so he can get married is really stupid and cruel but i still agree with the husband. If she's been this way for 20 years its like she's dead already. She basically doesn't know whats going on around here and chances are she wont come out of it anytime soon. I would rather be dead and have my family and friends morn for a little while longer then have them have false hopes and saddness the rest of there live i'd want them to be happy with new lives. Including my husband, its not right to the girl to keep her alive. her body may still be alive but her brain is dead.
 
When things get this bad there should be some kinda morality police or something. Not just a regular court, but someone who specialises in this type of case and they'd have to decide. The family, both parents and husband does know the person (most of the time) best, but at the same time their judgements are clouded by their connection to the person in question.

Take it out of the family and judge it on a case to case basis.
 
I agree with ape, it makes sense, and they should have that.

I dunno if the husband's been patient though, I'm trying to remember the exacts on what I read and what was discussed in class, and I do agree that he should move on because there's little hope, but he moved on really really fast and he stands to get a lot of money.
So I'm not sure if he wants it done for the money and the new lady (which is wrong reasons) or to end her suffering, but feeding tube takes about two weeks to die by starvation. Which, I don't agree with at all, but because America is against assisted suicide, she wil die slowly with more pain and suffering, and I don't agree with it. I'm not sure she should hang around though either. Some people would argue her soul is trapped, but I don't know where I stand on that.

It's a really sticky issue with no clear cut right or wrong....
 
Hm, for some reason I can't edit last post, but, wanted to amend something I said as not sure to its correctness, I read in an article yesterday there's no life insurance on the wife, but I do remember reading awhile ago there was, so eh, I guess I'm saying ignore that part please?...sorry bout double post as well. stupid comp.
 
soo this mans wife effectively 'died' 20 years ago and he moved on?

fairs enough

im confused as to if your asking

"should she have the right to live"

or

"should he say if she has the right to live"
 
Perhaps the question is the other way around

"Does she have the right to die" or "Does he have the right to say she has the right to die?"

Crazy words, but you know what I mean.
 
I think she has the right to die if that is her wish.

My only concern is that I don't know if he has the right to say that she has the right to die due to the circumstances.
 
Oh dear lord, I have been following this case for a year now, and I am so upset that Terri didn't get any press until they removed her feeding tube. Listen up folks, cause here are the Facts:

Terri Schindler Schiavo had a cardiac arrest because she had an eating disorder. The oxygen to her brain was cut off, and was restored when she revived. That was 15 years ago. in that time, her husband, Micheal Schiavo has not allowed her any kind of medical treatment or speech therapy. She hasn't even been allowed to see a dentist in 15 years. The words "persistive vegitative state" which is her "official" diagnosis, were placed on her by a doctor who had never examined her and never even been in a room with her. He diagnosed her by video. Those words conjure up an image of someone unconcious, in a coma, don't they? Well, she's not. She's awake, alert, she breathes on her own, she reacts when her parents or friends come in to talk to her. The only life support she was on was her feeding tube which is ONLY inserted at mealtimes, because she was unable to feed herself. Terri is a devout Roman Catholic, and the Pope has stated that to remove nourishment from someone who needs it and can't get it for themselves is tantamount to murder. More importantly, Terri has no living will (which is a legal document outlining the circumstances under which life support should be removed) and the only evidence the court has that she had ever expressed a desire to die under these circumstances is her husband's word. That is classified as hearsay and SHOULD be inadmissable in court. But for some reason Judge Grier in Florida allows that as evidence, despite the fact that this man is quoted as having said things like "Is she dead yet? When is that b**** going to die?" as early as 7 years ago.

Now, I could say a lot of nasty things about Michael Schiavo, but I won't. I'll just say that from what I know about the case, it doesn't sound to me as if there is sufficient evidence to support his claims that Terri told him that she wouldn't want to live this way. If I felt sure that Terri would want to die in these circumstances, I would never stand in the way of that. But there's no reason to say that she did. If you want to see the truth about Terri, go to terrisfight.org
 
It's her husband choose.

Her parents are only thinking about themselves, not about her.
She's not there any more, her mind and spirit are gone and only the body remains.
She's lost to them and they don't want to let go. This would be happening now if her husband would have done this years ago.

I know if I was like that and there was no way that I would be able to recover from it I wouldn't want to be in a vegetable state for the rest of my life.
 
Anchovy said:
If you want to see the truth about Terri, go to terrisfight.org
Click to expand...

Hmm I've been following it for a few years now too. Yes she had severe bulemia and suffered from a potassium deficiency which in turn caused the vegetative state.

I've read ALOT about this case..both sides..and of course there's mudslinging every which way. But there is quite a bit of question as to the legitimacy of what is available (information-wise, video-wise) on the terrisfight sight.

I could write pages and pages but basically it comes down to the fact that her husband has power of attorney..he could have divorced her but didn't (despite wanting to get on with his own life with his new family/fiance), he has been paying a LARGE portion of her care (via moneys awarded him during a lawsuit) - MediCare is only covering a very small amount of it.

I feel that if there ever was a case for legalized euthanasia..this would be it. I hope they jack up her pain meds and just let her go..her family has been clinging on to her for so long..you'd think they would want her to just pass away with some dignity but it's turned into a media circus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom