Terri Schiavo

[NoMyths]

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos

So basically, by NOT feeding a helpless person, it absolves them of her death? By NOT sticking the feeding tube in, and KNOWING that that person is going to die because of not having the feeding tube... what difference does it make from administering a lethal injection? It's the same thing. Jeez.

Actually, no, it's not the same thing. This is one of the reasons I'm irritated that the SAT booted the analogies portion of the test...too many folks are unable to tell the difference between much of anything.

Or, in other words: by your reasoning we are administering lethal injections to everyone who is dying from natural causes in our country if we aren't doing everything we can to keep their conditions from killing them. And considering the pronounced opposition of most conservatives to socialized medicine, that would make their position tantamount to a murderous one. See the problem now?

She's going to die anyway, why prolong the agony. The husband wants his wife dead, the courts agreed with him, so let's do it... fuck all this waiting for her to die naturally, she's going to die anyway. I am personally disgusted by all the waiting for her to die "naturally". It's like she hasn't suffered enough. End it already.

Euthanasia is not legal in America.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos

So basically, by NOT feeding a helpless person, it absolves them of her death? By NOT sticking the feeding tube in, and KNOWING that that person is going to die because of not having the feeding tube... what difference does it make from administering a lethal injection? It's the same thing. Jeez.

She's going to die anyway, why prolong the agony. The husband wants his wife dead, the courts agreed with him, so let's do it... fuck all this waiting for her to die naturally, she's going to die anyway. I am personally disgusted by all the waiting for her to die "naturally". It's like she hasn't suffered enough. End it already.

In general I agree but it's important to note that there is NO agony. She's beyond feeling any such feelings on any level. What makes the death seem ghoulish is because we reflect on how we'd "feel" if we were starving to death and unfortunately these feelings don't apply here.

Still, I'd prefer a quicker, cleaner method of letting her go. I just wanted to comment on this one sentence.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by NoMyths

Euthanasia is not legal in America.

That's correct and I say good thing. The euthanasia should stay where they belong, in Asia, at least until they grow up.

[Honolulu_Blue]

CNN is reporting Terri Schiavo has died.

I hope she rests in peace...

[Bea-Arthurs Hip]

In general I agree but it's important to note that there is NO agony. She's beyond feeling any such feelings on any level. What makes the death seem ghoulish is because we reflect on how we'd "feel" if we were starving to death and unfortunately these feelings don't apply here.

Show me where this is proven. Also, if this is true why was she given pain medication until recently?

May God have mercy on her soul and all who were involved in her starvation.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Show me where this is proven. Also, if this is true why was she given pain medication until recently?

May God have mercy on her soul and all who were involved in her starvation.

Maybe all who were involved would be appropriate. You should drop the starvation clause. If God had been trying to bring Terri home all this time with the destruction of her brain and it being filled with spinal fluid, keeping her earthbound with a feeding tube was not the right thing to do.

[Masked]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Show me where this is proven. Also, if this is true why was she given pain medication until recently?

May God have mercy on her soul and all who were involved in her starvation.

The vast majority of the experts agree that she had no awareness of the pain because she had no higher brain functions. Her cortex, which controls all higher functions, was severely damaged in the initial trauma and had degenerated further over the past 15 years. The "proof" would be that all neurologic test confirmed this diagnosis and CT scans showed a severely abnormal cortex.

The pain medication was thus probably unnecessary; however, it is standard practice when removing a patient from life support. I do not know ehat effect morphine has on the PNS which was intact in Terri Schiavo.

[chinaski]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Show me where this is proven. Also, if this is true why was she given pain medication until recently?

May God have mercy on her soul and all who were involved in her starvation.

You could find this information out yourself instead of asking people to show you, but since youre unable to educate yourself...
http://news.google.com/news?q=effect...ff&sa=N&tab=wn

There isnt a single doctor that will tell you any differently. Its proven, via that nasty science thing, that the body after a few days without food, chemicals known as ketones build up in the blood and cause a mild euphoria that serves as a natural anesthetic. The weakening brain releases a surge of feel-good hormones called endorphins, which block pain recepticles.

But, in Terris case, this STILL doesnt even matter, becuase she is unable to even register pain, thats how far gone she is/was.

RE: The Pain Medication. Again, you could have easy found this out yourself, but she wasnt given "pain" medication. Again, everyone needs to be reminded, Terri Schiavos brain damage does not allow her to even feel pain. She was given Morphine to control muscle spasms, there was NO OTHER REASON for the morphine.

Did you guys even know she has had all of her tendons severed, because she has no control over her own body and if they werent cut, she would be a balled up mess of twisted arms and legs?

[Flasch186]

Rest in Peace and god Bless you, Terri.

[Bea-Arthurs Hip]

Chinaksi –

Ok..So she will only (did) feel pain for the first few days.

“So far gone” that is a scientific term I have never heard of in all my years, I will
have to look that one up .

Again, show me medical facts based on her specific condition . Also explain to me why they gave her Ibuprofen for her menstal pains. Could it be because they noticed discomfort or possible pain in her during these times?

In the medical world , the term “art of science” is used often. . There is no such thing as perfect or sure science. Unless you can post a hyper link to it.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and takes shots at you as being scientifically uneducated. So answer me this: Why weren’t PET scans allowed on her? This would permit a view of her brain functioning as opposed to its structure(EEG). Why didn’t this happen?

The bioethics world has turned rigorously secular . Instead of the traditional emphasis on the sanctity of life, bioethics began to stress the quality of life, meaning that many damaged humans, young and old, don't qualify for personhood because their lives have lost value. The nonpersons should be allowed to die and in some cases be killed. This explains why so few bioethicists have protested what the state and her husband planned for Terri Schiavo, who is severely damaged, but not in pain or dying, not brain dead, and in no position to protest her own execution on grounds that other people consider it best for her.

Requiring clear evidence of consent is no longer required. In the Schiavo case, we have vaguely remembered consent from a party with a vested interest (the husband) some eight years after the patient was stricken. And though the medical and media people seem to agree that Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state, there is some doubt that this is so. She has never been given a PET scan, one of the most sophisticated tests used to diagnose PVS, apparently because her husband refused to allow it. The killing of Schiavo is a scandal successfully redefined as unexceptional and therefore moral. The culture of death is among us.

This has all been argued on the previous seven pages. She is now passed on and nothing I can say can convince you to help her…………

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Requiring clear evidence of consent is no longer required. In the Schiavo case, we have vaguely remembered consent from a party with a vested interest (the husband) some eight years after the patient was stricken.

Please inform yourself better before commenting:
* The standard of evidence was "clear and convincing evidence"
* Michael's testimony was specifically discounted due to bias, Greer based his decision on comparing the statements of Michael's brother and sister-in-law to those of the Schindlers. There was no indication that any of the recollections were "vaguely remembered."

There are links to most of the legal documents involved at abstractappeal.

[Bea-Arthurs Hip]

Thanks for clearing up the evidence Mr Wednesday. I was a little confused.

[chinaski]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Chinaksi –

Ok..So she will only (did) feel pain for the first few days.

“So far gone” that is a scientific term I have never heard of in all my years, I will
have to look that one up .

Again, show me medical facts based on her specific condition . Also explain to me why they gave her Ibuprofen for her menstal pains. Could it be because they noticed discomfort or possible pain in her during these times?

In the medical world , the term “art of science” is used often. . There is no such thing as perfect or sure science. Unless you can post a hyper link to it.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and takes shots at you as being scientifically uneducated. So answer me this: Why weren’t PET scans allowed on her? This would permit a view of her brain functioning as opposed to its structure(EEG). Why didn’t this happen?

Everything you say here is straight from the "Save Terri" playbook, and every bit of it has been discredited in court. Im sure youve heard of Dr. William Cheshire and Dr. William Hammesfahr..or Carla Sauer Iyer?

RE: PET scans. Reason 1, she has a thalamic implant in her brain that would have to be surgically removed before any MRI/PET scans can be done. She did have multiple CT scans that proved she was in a PVS. Reason 2, there is nothing more a MRI/PET scan would show over a CT scan.

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

The bioethics world has turned rigorously secular . Instead of the traditional emphasis on the sanctity of life, bioethics began to stress the quality of life, meaning that many damaged humans, young and old, don't qualify for personhood because their lives have lost value. The nonpersons should be allowed to die and in some cases be killed. This explains why so few bioethicists have protested what the state and her husband planned for Terri Schiavo, who is severely damaged, but not in pain or dying, not brain dead, and in no position to protest her own execution on grounds that other people consider it best for her.

Requiring clear evidence of consent is no longer required. In the Schiavo case, we have vaguely remembered consent from a party with a vested interest (the husband) some eight years after the patient was stricken. And though the medical and media people seem to agree that Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state, there is some doubt that this is so. She has never been given a PET scan, one of the most sophisticated tests used to diagnose PVS, apparently because her husband refused to allow it. The killing of Schiavo is a scandal successfully redefined as unexceptional and therefore moral. The culture of death is among us.

The medical and media people? huh? You mean to say the entire field of medicine has consistently been on Terri Schiavos' side and the media is reporting that, dont you? PET scans are not in fact the more sophisticated way to diagnose PVS, in reality PVS doesnt require a PET scan to be diagnosed, and CT scans are used primarily. A PET scan wil show nothing more than a CT scan.

The rest of your ramblings again overlook the single most important fact in this situation, Terri Schiavo did not want to live in a PVS, and that wish was confirmed by 3 people, not just one like you want to contend.

[Bea-Arthurs Hip]

The medical and media people? huh? You mean to say the entire field of medicine has consistently been on Terri Schiavos' side and the media is reporting that, dont you? PET scans are not in fact the more sophisticated way to diagnose PVS, in reality PVS doesnt require a PET scan to be diagnosed, and CT scans are used primarily. A PET scan wil show nothing more than a CT scan.

Everything you say here is straight from the "Save Terri" playbook, and every bit of it has been discredited in court. Im sure youve heard of Dr. William Cheshire and Dr. William Hammesfahr..or Carla Sauer Iyer?

Never heard of any of them. But I have heard of a PET scan.

RE: PET scans. Reason 1, she has a thalamic implant in her brain that would have to be surgically removed before any MRI/PET scans can be done. She did have multiple CT scans that proved she was in a PVS. Reason 2, there is nothing more a MRI/PET scan would show over a CT scan.

Really, since she is "so far gone"what would be the concern of removing the implant? I am aware of the CT scans , you can refer to the Save Terri playbooks for rebuttals on those.

The medical and media people? huh? You mean to say the entire field of medicine has consistently been on Terri Schiavos' side and the media is reporting that, dont you? PET scans are not in fact the more sophisticated way to diagnose PVS, in reality PVS doesnt require a PET scan to be diagnosed, and CT scans are used primarily. A PET scan wil show nothing more than a CT scan.

Dont know what your point is here. Are you in the medical field. I have seen PETS and CT's . They are not the same. Maybe someone has been tricking me in school.

The rest of your ramblings again overlook the single most important fact in this situation, Terri Schiavo did not want to live in a PVS, and that wish was confirmed by 3 people, not just one like you want to contend.

"My ramblings"..I will stop then. You have won. She is dead. You are far to scientific for me to argue with.

[Mr. Wednesday]

As I recall, the justification for not removing the implant was that it would be expensive, and the combined evidence of the CT scans and the flat EEGs suggested that it would be superfluous.

[Masked]

Originally Posted by Bea-Arthurs Hip

Never heard of any of them. But I have heard of a PET scan.

Dont know what your point is here. Are you in the medical field. I have seen PETS and CT's . They are not the same. Maybe someone has been tricking me in school.

I am not sure what a PET scan may have revealed that was not already known based an EEG that was performed on her. The EEG showed evidence of brainstem activity but not of cortical activity.