dharmagrl dharmagrl

Let her go....

▼

Let her go....

from JoeUser Forums

Teri Schiavo, the Florida woman who has been in what some physicians have described as a 'persistent vegetative state' since an illness 15 years ago has been granted a 48 hour reprieve whilst a Florida court determines whether her husband is 'fit' to be her legal guardian. Link

Her husband has been trying for years to have her feeding tube removed and to let her die.  Her parents have been fighting him.

This woman's life has been reduced to nothing.  She can't walk, talk, feed herself, dress herself...she appears to smile and react to her family, but no-one can be sure that's what she's doing because she cannot communicate with them.  She has the mental capacity of a newborn infant, and the physical strength to match.  She's not living, she's simply existing...and her existence has been reduced to a string of court cases, angry words and publicity stunts. 

Teri's been trying to die for years.  Her husband wanted to let her go, to give her a little dignity...but her folks and even Jeb Bush have fought to keep her alive, albeit artificially. Instead of letting nature take it's course, they've been using artifical measn to keep her alive for 15 years now.

Teri Schiavo is the reason I have advance medical directives attached to my will.  I've made my wishes very clear....if, for some reason, fate leads me to end up in a circumstance similar to Teri's, I want to die.  I don't want to be trapped in a body that has failed me, having someone change my diaper, feed, bathe and dress me.  I don't want to be fed artifically, I don't want to have to have someone wipe drool from my chin....I just want to be left to pass away as nature intended.

It occurred to me as I was reading the MSNBC article...we hear about what Teri's husband wants, and then we hear about what Teri's parent's want...but do we really know what Teri herself would have wanted?  If she could speak, what do you think she'd have to say? 

4,730 views 31 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
It seems to me that if she needs someone to uphold her right to a dignified death, she also needs someone to legally represent her plight regarding spousal abandonment.

The government laughs off marraiges like this in terms of immigration. If I were to "marry" a woman coming into the US, only for her to wander off and have two kids with someone else and reside with them, they'd call the marriage a sham and remove the legal rights granted by it.

Why then does this guy get to play house elsewhere and still pretend to be a "husband" for the the biggest decision of all?
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
What's the difference between a food tube and a nurse with a spoon?


I have said this before, and I'll say it again. If clear, cohesive communication abilities and ability to feed onesself are qualifications for being "alive", there is nothing to keep us from extending abortion well into the first year postpartum. We have to be VERY careful how we look at things here.
DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ok, so MSNBC are lying then? If I were you I'd call them and tell them that.


Frankly, yes, the media reports that say she is on life support ARE lying. She is on a feeding tube, that is it. The media has exaggerated because their is a strong pervasive belief among the media in the "right to die" (a right, by the way, which I SUPPORT, but on the terms that it be the will of the individual AND that it not be done in an inhumane fashion, such as starving to death for up to 2 weeks).
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
If we are going to base such decisions on how much help someone needs to live, Christopher Reeve wouldn't have been "viable" either. If we are basing it on mental "life", then untold numbers of of those residing in catatonic states and comas are fair game.

All this decision is based upon is the husband's belief that she is somehow living in a state of "wrongness". She isn't "suffering" in any apparent way, she isn't "dead", given her body doesn't need life support. He just has some motive for wanting her to pass away.

Some feel it is because he cares about her. I think someone who cared for her would have either devoted themselves to her care in hopes that she would recover, or would have accepted her loss, gotten a divorce and moved on. He's moved on, had kids with another woman, but for some reason he is fixated on remaining involved with the decisions.

There's something about this legal definition of "life" and "marriage" that is integral to this legal battle. I don't think it takes much imagination to put 2 and 2 together.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
I disagree with you. We don't know what Teri wants so because of this she should be allowed to live. Pulling her feeding tube is a terrible death, we treat murderers, war criminals, terrorists better than this. Teri's husband has a conflict of interest so I don't trust him, he needs to surrender his rights to her and I think he would have done this years ago if it weren't for the money he stands to gain after she has died.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
From what I have heard her husband, (if you can call him that while living with another woman,and having children etc. ) Thought he needed nearly two million dollars to rehabilitate her. After he got the moola,decides she can't be rehabilitated,and begins his efforts to have her murdered by starvation. Who gets the money then?
This sadistic judge appoints a bunch of quacks that with out the aid of the the latest medical resources determines she is in a vegetative state, and though she has never signed a living will, on the hearsay of her now very rich so called husband, they take the position of God and say she must die,and not only must she die she must not have even a piece of ice to cool her parched lips. This atrocity on a helpless woman will be forever a reminder of what a great nation we are, and what a bunch of gutless wonders we have consented to govern us. If I were governor or president I would use my executive powers to save her life whatever the cost. The ones who are so mentally demented that they think they are doing Teri a favor by starving her to death would be placed in prison and not given a bite to eat or drink until they began to starve, then we could have a meeting of the minds and debate a week or so as to whether they might like a drop of water or a piece of ice for their parched lips. I am an OUTRAGED AMERICAN AND SO ASHAMED OF OUR SO CALLED LEADERS.