BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case

Subject: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 06:15 PM

The Supreme Court ruled against Gov. Jeb Bush and the State Of Florida to allow Terry Schiavo's husband to disconnect her feeding tube, much to the chagrin and dismay of her parents. I do not think that this is morally right. This is a case of judicialy sanctioned murder. As much as I do not like President Bush I do think that his brother Jeb is a very decent and kind hearted man. I applaud the extrodinary efforts that he made to save the life of this helpless human being from a very cruel death. I despise the husband who seeks to terminate Terry's life so that he could shack up with another woman and inherit her estate. I feel sorry for her parents who are trying to save her. My feelings are very strong in this matter. This is euthanasia as practiced by Nazi Germany.

                                                SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 06:37 PM

I am 180 opposite you Sol. I welcomed this ruling, and hope the woman's suffering, and the suffering of her husband, will now quickly end. No one but the husband ever should have been involved in this decision. No one. Not even the girl's parents, no matter how well intentioned they might be. But I truly question their intentions. They seem more interested in making their daughter's life a political football among right wing Christians, than doing the right thing by their daughter and her husband.

This decision is not just a victory for the right to die community, of which I count myself a member, but also a victory for spousal rights, which had been badly damaged by this case. Parental rights in law should never be allowed to trump a spouse's rights in law inc ases like this, unless abuse or neglect or some other negative motive or intent can be proven in court.

I believe the parents never had a legal right or standing to intervene in this case. The Supreme Court obviously saw it that way too, because they refused to hear the appeal of the Florida Supreme Court ruling that the state has no legal standing in this case.

I have to say, I couldn't disagree more with your opinion about Jeb Bush too.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 07:02 PM

Guest,
       It appears that even a convicted murderer on death row has more legal rights for appeal then Terri Schiavo. You have anti death penalty advocates arguing that death by lethal injection is cruel and inhuman punishment. They are even fighting for the muderer in Connecticut who wants to die and does not want their help. I submit to you that the lethal injection given in executions is a lot more humane than taking away food and hydration which will cause a slow and painful death that may take as much as a week. Hell! You do not even submit animals that are euthanized to that kind of barbaric treatment. Where are all the animal rights groups such as PETA ?

                                                   SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Nancy King
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 07:23 PM

I'll have to go with "GUEST" on this one. I have been watching this case for some time, and was appalled when Gov. Bush intervened to force the re-insertion of the feeding tube. The State had no business getting involved in this private family matter. Good for the Supreme Court.

Nobody makes this kind of decision easily or lightly. It's been obvious for many years that Terri was never going to get better. If it hasn't happened in 14 years, it's not going to happen. I can't imagine what makes the parents think she'll recover. And since she was married, they are no longer her next of kin -- her husband is. I doubt very seriously if he cares a fig for her "estate" (which can't be much after all these years of nursing home care), but I'm sure he does want to get on with his life, and I think he ought to be able to. Living with this kind of limbo is horrible for everyone involved.

Several years ago, my father suffered a severe stroke which left him unable to speak or otherwise communicate, and unable to swallow, which meant he got a feeding tube. He'd been a journalist all his life, and not being able to speak or write must have been hell for him. I know it was hell for my mother, who had to take care of him. He did have a "living will," stating he didn't want to be kept alive by artificial means, including a feeding tube, but for a long time the doctors kept telling my mother he would get better. But he never did -- just kept getting worse -- until my mother's doctor realized that if the living will was not invoked and the feeding tube removed, she would probably die before he did.

It was a very difficult decision, but it was obvious to everyone in the family that he (and she) had suffered enough, and it was time to end it. During that time, I had to deal with all the non-family members who felt a need to add their two cents' worth. One night I was screamed at on the phone by two people -- one a home-care worker who insisted it was murder and that we were all murderers, etc., etc., and the other an old family friend who yelled at me for letting it go on so long -- "this should have been done two years ago!" But the decision was not theirs to make. It was my mother's, and she did. It was the right thing to do, but definitely not easy.

Well, none of that has anything to do with Terri Schiavo, but it may explain why I feel so strongly that this poor woman must be allowed to die.

Nancy

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Sorcha
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:03 PM

I'm with Guest and Nancy on this one too. I watched my father die a slow agonizing death after being on a ventilator for 6 weeks in spite of a DNR order. It took him another 9 mos to die. Besides, Terri has been legally dead for 14 years.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:08 PM

In the UK a man came around from a full coma after 19 years. I wish I could recall his name so as to provde a link.

He opened his eyes, and his first words were "pepsi" and "milk". His mother had cared for him daily. His memory was affected to the extent that he still thought he was 20 yrs old. He thought his daughter was his wife etc.

But he is alive and improving. Before I read his story I was in the euthanasia camp. Now I don't think I could make that decision.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:09 PM

Sorry Sorcha. I am above guest. I too watched my father die an agonising death from secondary brain cancer. I would have given anything to have speeded that up too.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:15 PM

With GUEST, also...

And the Nizi comparasion was way off base... Way off...

And fir the record, if I'm in a vegetative state and the P-Vine won't pull the plug, will someone here please do it... I have my danged friggin' dignity, gol dangit.

(And no comments about me allready in a vegetative state....)

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:18 PM

Terri Schiavo has been in a coma for 15 years. The family's life has been in a bizarre state of limbo for as long. Jeb Bush only contributed to their suffering. While the position of her parents is understandable, after 15 years if they don't "get it," they never will. Their daughter, as they knew her, is not in that shell on the feeding tube, and to drag her misery on is inhumane. (Reminds me of They Shoot Horses, Don't They?)

Rabbi Sol, you are more than entitled to your opinion, but more than just expressing it, you're playing powerful manipulative games yourself in suggesting that by choosing to end the misery of his vegetative-state wife this man is like a Nazi. And knowing the state that his wife is in and will always be in as long as she lives, you begrudge him another attempt at a life with a spouse and a family? He should wait 15 years (or more) in this purgatory? The woman and their children, who are now his family now deserve kind recognition for the apparently selfless role they have taken. The all-but-common-law wife, in particular, in understanding that the basis of their relationship might not be legalized for many years.

Blame Terri's parents for keeping everyone in this miserable state for years, don't blame the husband.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:24 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3052433.stm

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Teresa
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:26 PM

Well, I don't know a lot about the specific case. But here are my two cents on this matter.

I think it's a private decision on the part of the patient/loved ones. This is why having a living will or some such other arrangements is so important. Each individual has his/her own wishes, and they should be respected, whatever they are.

Teresa

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 08:41 PM

For those of you who believe in legal murder, why don't you just give her a lethal injection like you do at an execution instead of removing food and hydration ? You put animals to sleep. You don't starve and dehydrate them to death. Does a human being deserve worse than an animal ?
                                                SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 09:05 PM

My mother just died on January 10th. She battled lung cancer, emphysema, diabetes, and crippling arthritis right up until the very end.

She also chose, and we supported, going into a hospice program. I watched her die. Every single day. For the last two months. She never had a feeding tube, or an IV for hydration or pain.

I think, Rabbi Sol, you have never been close to death. I base this on your description of withdrawing food and hydration to a person as euthanasia. That is not only wrong, it shows you have absolutely no knowledge of what a natural death looks and feels like.

For your information, patients withdraw from food and hydration of their own volition when allowed to die a natural death. She lost a lot of weight pretty quickly. As she ate and drank less, her body began it's natural process of dying. In her last 4 or 5 days, she didn't eat or drink much of anything. She remained fully conscious until the day before she died. She never complained of any discomfort from lack of food or water or hydration.

She eventually slipped out of consciousness when her pain medication was doubled. This is referred to nowadays as "terminal sedation". It is done only when the patient is in so much pain, it is intolerable for them to bear. My mother would scream every time she was moved. It was a blessing for her, and for us, that the time had arrived. She had been suffering tremendously. She was 81, and ready to go.

Maybe you would understand more, Rabbi Sol, be less afraid of your own and your loved ones' deaths, and have more compassion about the suffering of others, if you read up on what happens to the body when it is allowed to die a natural death, without medical interference. The websites my family found to be of great benefit to us were these two:

Family Care America

Americans for Better Care of the Dying

It isn't euthanasia. It is caring for our loved ones as they are dying. We are all going to die. Or as my dad always says "Life is terminal. Nobody gets out of here alive."

Hope the information helps you. If not, I'm sure others will find it useful. If you click on the "Handbook for Mortals" link, and then click on "Coping with events near death" you'll gain a much better understanding of what quality of life, and death with dignity is all about. And hopefully be much less fearful, too.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:04 PM

And let me just add one more experience, R-Sol, for your contemplation.

While nuthin' as long, drawn out and painfull as the husband has experienced, I watched as my late wife, Judym died right here within feet of where I am writing this. Her mother and I took care of her through a valiant and couragous battle with cancer. Unlike the Schiavo case, Judy had some level of hope for the first year but after that it was another month long slow spiral toward her death. This din't happen in hospitals but here in our home. It was just the 3 of us, Judy, her mom and me... A couple months before her death, Judy's quality of life had been reduces to zero. I'm not too sure you know what that is like... We're not talking Nazi's here, pal...

I remember reading the Bible to her at night not knowing if she actually was hearing me but hoping that she was... About a week before she died things started to shut down entirely in her body and she like, ahhhh, went away. Yeah, the body was still alive but Judy had gone...

So I now how Mr. Schiavo feels... There is a point at which you just pray that the good Lord just comes for the loved one. I Judy's case it was both her mom and me..

This man has gone thru 15 years of what Judy's Mom and I experoence for a few months and I'm here to say that it was the hardest struggle of me life...

So, RabbiSol, you may think you are serving God but you aren't. All you are serving is some very nessed up set of values that someone, who has never been thru this, has instilled in you...

You are on the wrong side of this issue, my friend.

I know...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:10 PM

...another "7" month...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Sorcha
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:11 PM

Actually, Rabbi, I would if I could.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:28 PM

And my mother, after weeks of treatment for her metastatic breast cancer, couldn't accept the hospital's routine of painkiller on demand. Mom wanted it in a constant way, and after the frustration of no one responding adequately to family requests, the took matters into her own hands. She refused all medications, refused food and water. The painkiller was finally administered through a subcutaneous pump. And has been noted by others above, as she slipped from the final coma into death it was a relief, not a form of torture.

Rabbi Sol, you are addressing this particular issue with a lot of Jewish cultural baggage that isn't germane to the decision at hand. Name calling and character assassination aren't called for. "Legal Murder." A contradiction in terms, inserted into the dialog to assign guilt instead of compassion. It's simply not working on this group who have seen enough death in their own lifetimes to have come to a few conclusions regarding what is appropriate.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:33 PM

Rabbi-Sol,

I have to diagree with you on this one buddy. I enjoy your posts, especially the music related ones.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:39 PM

SRS,

We both know...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:50 PM

SRS, I'm not sure that calling it "Jewish cultural baggage" is quite accurate; there are a lot of different people that relate to being Jewish in many different ways than Sol's.

My wife and I, one a cultural but non-religious Jew and one a former Christian, both have living wills in hope neither of us will be put through the hell that the Sciavo's have experienced, and both of our plans include refusing both "life-extending" medication and nourishment if the end is inevitable and the path to it is slow and painful. I also believe that active euthenasia should be available in such cases, and I trust my wife to make that kind of decision for me if I am unable to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:52 PM

In the case of Terri Schiavo we are not talking about anyone who is suffering from terminal cancer or who is in constant unbearable pain. We are talking about somone who is in a constant vegetative state mentally but can physically keep on living as long as food and hydration are supplied. She is not suffering at all and feels no pain whatsoever The only one suffering is that good for nothing husband of hers; from guilt. He wants to get her out of the way so he can get his peter serviced by another woman legally. This case is in no way similar to the cases you have all cited above. This would be killing a human being in a most barbaric way. Let us be fair and compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges.

                                                    SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:54 PM

Rabbi, my friend. I hear a lot of pain in your posts about this, and I think in the grip of that pain, you have two different lines of argument very mixed up. I am hearing you are against state-dictated euthanasia, but I am also hearing that you wish for humane euthansia. Rabbi, I would just ask, is even humane euthanasia of human beings really all right with you?

Ah, there is the place where our too-human compassion meets our theology, eh?

Yet, must we not bless a Creator who gives us our own will with which to wrestle that out ourselves, one heart at a time?

It is very hard to find only pure compassion in one's heart... so, in the humanness of our pain, we argue as we look for it. Rabbi, I hope you find peace in this somewhere, and I hope when you do, you will send me a PM about it.

I pray for all concerned.

And Bobert-- aw, my friend. I didn't know. I did not know. That big ole heart of yours-- it must have been so sorely tried. I'm glad you still leave it open to loving people as deeply as I know you do.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 11:24 PM

Susan,
       For the record I am AGAINST all forms of euthanasia.

I was only using an example of lethal injection vs. witholding food and water for argument's sake. I was trying to show that we do not treat cats and dogs the way that some people on this board would like to treat a fellow human being. I trust that I made my position perfectly clear.
                                             SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 11:41 PM

Fine, Sol, may you be so badly injured and live for 40 years in a vegetarive state while yer family keeps a 24 hour vigil and looze their lives in the interst in keeping yor vegetative state in tack.

Like I said, you have not been thru this or you would not be so righteously indignant...

Step into my or SRS's world, my frined...

You are so wrong on this one, pal... So wrong...

And in defending yer turf? It just makes you more wrong...

Take a moment to *think* what you are saying. Reread SRS's and my experiences. Shakespeare, or somebody, said that we are all students and I think this is one time in yer life where you need to be the student...

Peace

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 11:42 PM

Art, my reference was only to the baggage that Sol has introduced into the thread. He seems to be suggesting that Jews have cornered the market on horrible deaths. It's too easy to cite genocide after genocide in recorded human history to let him take that moral high ground. This includes many 20th century "genocides", but no mention of the millions of New World Indians who died from the 16th century forward. As horrible as the Nazi plan was, there have been much worse and over longer periods of time.

Sol said "She is not suffering at all and feels no pain whatsoever." You know this, do you Sol? So you've spoken to her? She told you she's not suffering and wants to lie in bed fighting bedsores and pernicious infections while she has a tube running into her stomach to pump in calories a few times a day?

You haven't been reading the articles very closely. You've decided that her husband is an axe murderer with a hatchet in one hand and his dick in the other. You need to let the dead die. Just because they can keep her body alive with nutrition doesn't mean she is truly alive. Whereas her husband is alive, and is trying to move on with his life. Where is your compassion for the living?

I can't imagine a worse torture that to be in Terri Schiavo's position. And if she's somehow aware under the burden of the brain damage and the non-responsive body, what a horrible fate to have to endure it for 15 years. 15 years. Putting myself in her place, I would have wanted long ago to slip off into sleep and leave it behind.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 11:52 PM

His dick is not in his other hand. Unfortunately it is in another woman' vagina. That more than anything else is infuencing his determination that Terri must die. This is hardly the type of person who should be deciding the fate of another.

                                           SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:11 AM

You are sick, pal....and no rabbi...

You try to reduce this suffering to a man, who has spent 15 faithfull years to a virtually dead woman, to this man's emotional needs...

How long should he go with a dead wife? 50 years? 100 years?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:28 AM

Bobert,

To be candid, step into my sister's world. I was unable to be there with my mother at the end. She went fast, once she had the news of the returned cancer. Two weeks, tops. I was there for much of that time, but I also had a young family here in Texas. Mom hung on, as the hospital made her more and more uncomfortable. She rebelled while I was away, and at 2 in the morning the day after Memorial Day Katy called to say Mom had died. I was scheduled to fly back the next day, to help spell Katy. But Mom took it out of all of our hands.

I truly believe that had the medical establishment been more concerned with dealing effectively with her pain than their worry that they were dispensing high doses of a narcotic she would have lived longer and far more comfortably. (Were they afraid she'd get high? That's not an issue with chronic pain from terminal cancer!) She was lucid, and in a position to choose death, and that's what she chose.

Think of how much further down Terri is in all of this. And how it is all out of her hands. Her husband is her only hope for liberation from the hell she has endured. The torture she has suffered is at the hands of her parents and the state and all of the do-gooders who would put their ideals ahead of the actual "life" that Terri's body is living. In the 1980s there was another case, that of Nancy Klein--her husband Martin fought several courts and pro-life "absolute strangers" who tried to gain custody of the fetus--to get the abortion her doctors felt was necessary to save her life. They finally did the abortion, and she came out of the coma. The marriage ended up in divorce, but she lived. Sol seems to be suggesting that Schiavo is choosing murder as more expedient than divorce. In making this claim he is traveling a heinous theoretical path. Schiavo has chosen to stay married to do what is right and best for the brain-dead body of his poor wife, because no one else seems to have her best interest in mind. If he were to divorce her, her custody would no doubt be handed back to her parents, who would continue to prop her up and prolong what her husband knows she didn't want.

His is a very selfless act, all things considered. More than most people could probably manage.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: michaelr
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:17 AM

I thought rabbis were supposed to be wise men...

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Pauline L
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 02:56 AM

I have been so moved by reading the stories of everyone on this thread who wrote about the death and dying of a loved one. I second what WYSIWYG said to Bobert and extend it to the others who have written. I am sympathize with you in your suffering and I am so glad that you can love again.

"Rabbi" Sol's allusions to Nazism and sex are crass as well as illogical.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST,Brucie
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 09:28 AM

My grandfather died in agony as did my stepdad. Both from cancers. I would have helped pull the pin for both. However, I respect Sol's position. I don't agree, but I respect it. I think there would not have been such an outcry that makes reference to his religion had he said "This is euthanasia as practiced by the Turks on the Armenians" instead of "This is euthanasia as practiced by Nazi Germany."

Sol is humane, and he has had hard decisions to make before with regard to life and death; I remark about that because someone said he'd obviously never experienced that sort of pain in his life. Few people of the cloth have not. I do not envy him his personal agonies in that regard. I think it is wrong of people to impune his dignity. If you choose to disagree with him, do so. But please be polite about it.

Bruce Murdoch

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 09:52 AM

With all due respect, people of the cloth are not the people who care for the dying. They are not the people who sit on the death watch, and witness the long term suffering.

IMO, it isn't all that difficult for people of the cloth to avoid the most painful aspects of death, even in the case of their closest relatives, because they have church/temple ladies to come in and care for their sick and dying relatives, while they attend to their flocks.

Just so you know, it is rarely men who do the caregiving for the dying. It is almost exclusively women, in every culture around the world, who care for the dying.

Good on Bobert, he appears to have been the rare exception.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 10:08 AM

With all due respect, people of the cloth are not the people who care for the dying. They are not the people who sit on the death watch, and witness the long term suffering.

No, we don't, because we have to circulate among those who are dying and sitting the death watch, sharing what moments in the process we can, because we serve SO MANY.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 10:18 AM

I understand the reasons for them not being present, and they are perfectly legitimate. But it also means that a person of the cloth may very well NOT have direct experience with the suffering, and likely are not necessarily personally intimately acquainted with the facts of dying.

I don't know if Sol is a Rabbi or not. But anyone who believes that withholding food and hydration from dying person--and a person in a coma for 15 years is always on the verge of death, as they cannot care for themselves, have high risks of many complications that can kill them, etc--is euthanasia, is just plain ignorant, a right to life zealot, or somehow otherwise reacting from a deeply irrational emotional level about something that isn't relevant to natural death and dying.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 10:51 AM

actually the US supreme court did NOT rule against Jeb bush et al. they declined to hear the case - so it is the FLORIDA court's decision which stands that the law passed to prevent the withdrawing of the feeding tube is unconstitutional and illegal.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 11:14 AM

Bruce, you may have missed the link I posted above. It only touches on the geneocides of the twentieth century and earlier. (No mention of at all of what happened in Asia or India). Sol claims moral high ground based on his Jewishness and the atrocities surrounding WWII, like this is worse than all of the others. It is simply the one best known and well-publicized, and most revisited. The Turks didn't treat the Armenians the same as the Nazis treated those they exterminated, they simply slaughtered them where they found them, is my understanding of the deaths of more than 1 million Armenians at the beginning of the last century. Any codified policy of wiping out another race is horrible--and to weigh them on a sliding scale is a pretty bizarre approach to "how bad was this genocide compared to others." They're all nasty all the way through.

Sol's characterization of the situation, to compare a moral choice that is embedded with medical decisions and good science to any war atrocities is inappropriate.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 11:39 AM

Possibly so, SRS, but I know him to be humane and decent. This issue triggers many emotions in those of us who have sat and nursed dying people. I do not mean to lecture anyone, SRS. No acrimony. I simply feel maybe we could all take a small step back and realize that we perceive this with the vision of our personal experience.

What I am seeing here is many people whom I admire for their views, abilities in debate and kindness to others beginning to fight, and that really gets to me in a way I have a hard time explaining. It is like getting a deep cut an eighth of an inch at a time.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Jim Tailor
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 11:47 AM

This just seems to be such a BAD case upon which to hang a great deal of legal precedence upon. Apparently the comotose subject arrived that way due to self-destructive behavior. On the other hand, according to nurses' affidavit, the estranged husband kindly asked "when is the bitch going to die?!", and serves to gain financially even if the finacial gain is slowly but surely dwindling at the hands of the true vipers of the case -- the lawyers.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:05 PM

Since both of these events are hearsay (without merit), and since blaming the victim is such a popular American passtime (both individuals being victims in this case) I predict a long media run for the topic.

Brucie's right. We do bring our own experiences to this. And our own fears--for me, that I would never be trapped in a body like this for years and years. Even if I were lucid in there, with no way to communicate or have any control of anything, I wouldn't want to continue that way.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:23 PM

I work emergency rescue and respond to about 75-90 fire or emergency scenes per year. Some are very humdrum and others are horrific. I do know that from the time I spent as an EMR on ambulance calls, and from the occasional fire/rescue scene--well, I have DNR figuratively stapled to my chest in LARGE letters. I carry a 'living will' type statement in my wallet nad have made it clear to those who would have to make the decision on my behalf that MY decision is already made and that they don't have a decision to make on my behalf. Personally, I would not want to be that type of burden to those who care for me or love me--few enough as that number is, their collective pain would be too much for my conscience to carry into whatever follows thai life. Even too heavy to carry out of this one.

SRS, thank you sincerely for being so gracious.

BM

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:25 PM

I'm choked, guys... My heart to those of you like Bobert who have given the ultimate love offering - care in death. May I never have to do it myself, and may I never cause others to have to offer it.

Rabbi-Sol, I am usually on your side of the fence on several issues. But not on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:59 PM

Of course everyone brings their personal experiences with them to this issue--but that is true of everything, isn't it?

There are legal issues though, that I for one think are very important in this case. Two matter a great deal to me:

1) the State's intervention in a medical decision they had no business sticking their nose into, and;

2) the right of the spouse, not the parents, to make the decision to remove the feeding tube.

The Florida Supreme Court only decided on the first one, as I understand their ruling.

The second issue, the one of legal standing, is still in the lower Florida courts, I believe.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a legal process in place for arbitration when there is this sort of a disconnect within a family. But it is just plain sick that the parents took it to this level, IMO. Really sick. And utterly selfish.

We had a similar case which received national attention some years ago, the Karen Ann Quinlan case.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:08 PM

Sorry, I meant to also provide a link to the Nancy Cruzan case, the now famous right to die case that was eventually decided by the US Supreme Court.

I'm pretty sure, if I am understanding the arguments being made by "legal experts" in the press on the news programs about this, that the Supremes likely turned down the Schiavo case because of the Florida SC decision, with this as the US Supreme Court's legal precedent in a right to die case.

The Nancy Cruzan case is the one most similar to the Schiavo case in terms of medical intervention. My understanding is Nancy Cruzan wasn't on a respirator, just a feeding tube. She died within a few days of having the feeding tube removed.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:11 PM

And people also deserve to know that it is the anti-abortion, right to life movement that is bankrolling this case, and pushing for what it calls the "Model Starvation and Dehydration of Persons with Disabilities Prevention Act." They want to be able to trump families' wishes on withdrawing feeding and hydration tubes from the terminally ill, and those in comas.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:22 PM

In the Karen Ann Quinlan case the parents fought against the State to have her removed from a respirator. However, after she was removed from the respirator to the surprise of everyone, she was able to breathe on her own and continued to live for a long time thereafter.
There was not even a consideration on the part of the parents to take the next step and withdraw food and water from her to insure her death. That would have been considered barbaric years ago. The fact that such an action is being considered today and has been given legal sanction by the courts only shows how much our moral values as a society have deteriorated in the modern age.

                                                 SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:36 PM

I disagree. It shows that we have developed a great deal as moral, ethical, and compassionate human beings.

You either believe families should be free to make these decisions on behalf of loved ones, or that the State should make these decisions.

I vote for the families to make these decisions.

Again, anyone who thinks removing feeding and hydration tubes from people suffering from terminal illness or from people in permanent vegetative states, hasn't had any first hand experience with natural death.

Thank god for Elizabeth Kubler-Ross and the hospice movement, who continues to have to battle the right-to-lifers like Rabbi Sol.

And everyone here who says they hope they never have to deal with these issues, I can't urge you strongly enough to make sure you have executed an Advanced Care Directive, and that your loved ones have, and that you have all had a TAPE RECORDED--OR EVEN BETTER, VIDEOTAPED CONVERSATION about your wishes.

If you haven't got one, you run the risk of people like the Schiavo parents or the Rabbi Sols of this world deciding what is best for you and your family--which will mean you being kept alive artificially with extraordinary medical measures, like respirators, feeding tubes and hydration tubes. For as long as they can keep you alive.

As to the Karen Ann Quinlan case, yes she did survive after the respirator was removed. No, they didn't remove the feeding tubes. But to claim they thought that idea was barbaric shows complete ignorance of the case. They were in touch with Nancy Cruzan's parents throughout their ordeal, and very much respected the choice of the Cruzans.

It is totally obvious to me, Rabbi Sol, that this is just another right wing, conservative hot button political topic for you. It's also totally obvious that not one person here agrees with you, and is appalled at the way you are politicizing this case. That's why so many people DON'T support the stupid NRLC's attempts to shove their religion down the nation's throat on right to die issues. Too many of us have personal, intimate experience of caring for dying loved ones to buy the right wing political propaganda you are espousing, Rabbi Sol.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Kim C
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:44 PM

What about that "in sickness and in health" clause?

Anyhow, I'd be curious to know how many people who side with Mr. Schiavo also oppose the death penalty. Just wonderin.

I don't actually have an opinion about this. I don't think I know enough of the facts to make an educated decision. All I can say is, if it were me, I'd not want to be a burden on my family, and I'd want Mister to go on and live his life.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:57 PM

Therefore to carry the argument of the majority on this board one step further, we should also take all the Alzheimer patients who no longer recognize any of their loved ones and are mental vegetables for all practical purposes and refuse to give them food and water, so they will die sooner rather than later. Furthermore priority should be given to those who have partners with pressing sexual needs so that they can be guilt free when being serviced elsewhere. Make s sense to me.
                                              SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:58 PM

"Too many of us have personal, intimate experience of caring for dying loved ones to buy the right wing political propaganda you are espousing, Rabbi Sol."

I don't find it to be propaganda OR right wing. I'm left wing on the political spectrum and I find myself in disagreement with the above statement. FYI.

Subject: RE: BS: High Court Rules In Terry Schiavo Case
From: GUEST,milk monitor
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:59 PM

I agree with the ruling in the case, and oppose the death penalty.

Nursing a terminally ill parent is a great leveller. I saw my father's death as a merciful release. The hospice treated him with the compassion and respect he deserved.

I don't agree with death as a punishment.