 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / March 2005Terry Schiavo Madness
This whole thing has become totally absurd, and I don't think ANYONE or any system should be making decisions (outside the family). What they are doing with this feeding tube in and out is disgusting and cruel. I only hope that she really doesn't know what is going on. You can make compelling arguments on both sides, from the husband wants her dead to the parents can't let go of a "dead" child. I say this without passing any judgment on either side. The courts should ONLY DECIDE WHO has the authority or right to make the decision based on the laws we are all subject to. Then that party needs to make a decision and come to peace with that. But for God's sake, PLEASE stop this indignity! > This whole thing has become totally absurd, and I don't think ANYONE or > any system should be making decisions (outside the family). Shouldn't there be a system to handle situations where the family can't agree? And shouldn't the health care places (hospitals, nursing homes) have someone to turn to when there are questions about what the family wants to do? IMHO, the appropriate place for this is the state courts. And the state courts have spoken, and spoken well. > What they are doing with this feeding tube in and out is disgusting and > cruel. I only hope that she really doesn't know what is going on. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The courts should ONLY DECIDE WHO has the authority or right to make the > decision based on the laws we are all subject to. The Florida courts did. Read the opinions. http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/index.html IMHO, the federal gov't has no right to interfere. As you stated, this is a family matter. And if I infer your statements correctly, it should be up to the courts to determine who should be her guardian so that (s)he can carry out her wishes. The courts did that. IMHO, the federal court nailed the opinion exactly. It is not likely that the state court will be overturned on appeal, and the Termporary Restraining Order was denied. That was right on. Now, we should all back away from the nursing home and let the family spend whatever time is left with her, so that hopefully, they will find peace. > Then that party needs to make a decision and come to peace with that. > > But for God's sake, PLEASE stop this indignity! Funny, some are arguing that it is for God's sake that she should be kept alive. If it were me ... oops, this is not about what I would want, but what Mrs. Schiavo would want. Jeff > > The Florida courts did. Yes, but this appeals thing is bullshit. Once a court rules on WHO gets to decide that should be it, unless there is BONA FIDE grounds for an appeal, such as the couple was not legally married, for example. They should not hear appeals just because the party it went against wants to appeal. >> But for God's sake, PLEASE stop this indignity! > > Funny, some are arguing that it is for God's sake that she should be kept > alive. If it were me ... oops, this is not about what I would want, but > what Mrs. Schiavo would want. And there's the big problem. No one knows what SHE wants. So the person closest to her who has her best interests in mind should, regrettably, have to be put into the position of deciding for her. It's all so sad. Seems to me that this is almost like what happens to the kids in a messy custody battle. THEY end up suffering the most. I only hope that SHE isn't suffering. In article <HQ%%d.55401$NC6.43628@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net>, "tech27" >And there's the big problem. No one knows what SHE wants. So the person >closest to her who has her best interests in mind should, regrettably, have >to be put into the position of deciding for her. Of course the other side would say the person(s) closest to her with her best interests in mind HAVEN"T been put into a position of deciding for her. The most interesting thing (from both sides) is that almost all of the debate is structured around what makes THEM the most comfortable. >It's all so sad. Seems to me that this is almost like what happens to the >kids in a messy custody battle. THEY end up suffering the most. I only hope >that SHE isn't suffering. I came to that conclusion a couple of days ago after getting the time line and a couple of the earlier decisions. The husband and family actually lived together for awhile until he refused to share some of the money he got from the med mal settlement. Soon after that he kicked out and the battle of the tube started. EXACTLY like messy divorce. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH > In article > <HQ%%d.55401$NC6.43628@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net>, "tech27" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > of the debate is structured around what makes THEM the most > comfortable. Wrong the debate is about what she would have wanted. http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/index.html Read the actual court documents to see what I mean. Jeff (...) >Wrong the debate is about what she would have wanted. > >http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/index.html > >Read the actual court documents to see what I mean. See here is where you veered off the path (g). I said the debate, ie pretty much everything outside the court (in USENET fora, amongst the talking heads and editorial writers, etc), is pretty much based on what ever makes the writer most comfortable. Look at the posts, the editorial, etc. and see how often the personal pronouns show up. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH >>Wrong the debate is about what she would have wanted. > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > on what ever makes the writer most comfortable. Look at the posts, > the editorial, etc. and see how often the personal pronouns show up. My point is that the debate should be based on the facts, at least as far as the courts are concerned. And the facts are available over the internet, including the disenting opinion in the US appeals court. A pretty good and fair disenting opinion, if you ask me. I still agree with the majority opinion of hte appeals court, though. > -- > Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else > wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. Actually, a lot of native born americans wanted to be governor. The people of California voted to remove the old governor and voted for the present governor. If you wish to question the governor, you should do so based on his performance, not on the fact that he choose to come to the US and earn his citizenship. As a descendent of immigrants, I resent your comment. Jeff > SBH >Actually, a lot of native born americans wanted to be governor. The people >of California voted to remove the old governor and voted for the present >governor. If you wish to question the governor, you should do so based on >his performance, not on the fact that he choose to come to the US and earn >his citizenship. As a descendent of immigrants, I resent your comment. Actually the sig line was biting satire, too bad it whooshed right over your head. I actually like the gov. As a descendant of immigrants (like that narrows the field down in the US since even the Indians are immigrants) I resent your thin skinnedness and lack of sense of humor. I am thinking both of will proabably live the resentment. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH . > I came to that conclusion a couple of days ago after getting > the time line and a couple of the earlier decisions. The husband and > family actually lived together for awhile until he refused to share > some of the money he got from the med mal settlement. Soon after > that he kicked out and the battle of the tube started. EXACTLY like > messy divorce. I really don't want to get into this part of it, but it sure seems that it has become a battle of wills (no pun intended), as opposed to a simple disagreement on what is best for her. You'd have to know intimate details of the money involved. If HE was paying rent and her expenses the parents shouldn't get any of the settlement. Besides, why weren't they part of the settlement, or why didn't they make their own claim? It's not an insurance payoff (not in the sense of a policy on her), but a settlement of a malpractice action against the doctor(s) or hospital. If they weren't named in the suit they could have filed their own, as is normal when suits are filed on behalf of spouses, children, parents,siblings, etc. On the other hand, if they decided to go with on lawsuit for him only (stupid), he should have given them some of it, but we don't know how this all happened. Anyway, given this information which I wasn't previously aware of, I stand by my position that the parents need to f.ck off. >You'd have to know intimate details of the money involved. If HE was paying >rent and her expenses the parents shouldn't get any of the settlement. We do know the details since the settlement was public record. He got $300,000 and there was another $700,000 put into a trust for her. Doesn't really change anything except for some context of how this got started and part of the early dynamics before everything got set in emotional stone. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH >>You'd have to know intimate details of the money involved. If HE was paying >>rent and her expenses the parents shouldn't get any of the settlement. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >this got started and part of the early dynamics before everything >got set in emotional stone. Talking to myself. There are some reports from 2003 that where the husband said there was only about $50,00o left in the court-supervised part of her trust. I would be willing to bet that is pretty much gone now. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH >> > The Florida courts did. > > Yes, but this appeals thing is bullshit. Once a court rules on WHO gets to > decide that should be it, unless there is BONA FIDE grounds for an appeal, > such as the couple was not legally married, for example. They should not > hear appeals just because the party it went against wants to appeal. That is a reason why the governor and Congress shouldn't get involved. >>> But for God's sake, PLEASE stop this indignity! >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > closest to her who has her best interests in mind should, regrettably, > have to be put into the position of deciding for her. Wrong. Read the court opinions. it is clear that the court determined that she expressed her wish that she not be kept "alive" as she is. http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/index.html has links to the actual court documents. > It's all so sad. Seems to me that this is almost like what happens to the > kids in a messy custody battle. THEY end up suffering the most. I only > hope that SHE isn't suffering. She isn't. that part of her brain is no longer working. Like the rest of her cerebrum. Jeff >>> > The Florida courts did. >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Wrong. Read the court opinions. it is clear that the court determined that > she expressed her wish that she not be kept "alive" as she is. I didn't know that. If that is accepted as being the truth then yank the tube and tell the parents to f.ck off, and bar them from any further appeals or any other meddling. Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a "living will". You can download the forms--visit Google and type--"living will". > > This whole thing has become totally absurd, and I don't think ANYONE or > > any system should be making decisions (outside the family). [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Jeff  SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. In article <jason-2303050611040001@pm4-broad-30.snlo.dialup.fix.net>, >Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a >"living will". You can download the forms--visit Google and type--"living >will". And the prepare to have it declared invalid. There is no uniform living will law on the books and each state has essentially a different form that needs to be done and have many state-specific requirements for wording, etc. Get a living will form if you want to, but run it past a local attorney who actually has some experience in these things to make sure it is valid. BWT: While you are at it ask about pre-hospital ambulance "no-code" requirements. Yet another interesting kettle of fish. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH >>Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a >>"living will" > And then prepare to have it declared invalid. There is no uniform >living will law on the books and each state has essentially a >different form that needs to be done and have many state-specific >requirements for wording, etc. That's why it's much more important to have a durable healthcare power of attorney. >>>Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a >>>"living will" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >That's why it's much more important to have a durable healthcare power >of attorney. But the same state-specifity continues with that, too. -- Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. SBH >>>Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a >>>"living will" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That's why it's much more important to have a durable healthcare power > of attorney. The case of Terri Schiavo seemed to center around what she would have wanted. If she had written in a letter or email to her neighbor or cousin or friend in the proper context that if she were in persistant vegitative state, she would not want tube feedings, even though this is not a durable healthcare power of attorney or a living will, then this would have be taken as evidence of her wishes, and the courts would have been able to use this as evidence as to her feelings in the matter. As it was, the courts used her statements to her husband and friends, including the context of her statements, to determine that she would not want this treatment she is getting. On the other hand, if you have an advance directive that is legally correct, this will superceed any other statements. So it is worth it to get the legally correct form. But, as Steve pointed out, it is really important to have a durable healthcare power of attorney. Not only will this person be able to clarify things, there is a good chance that the advanced directive won't cover the situation you find yourself in (or, in Terri Schiavo's case, the situation that her family finds itself in - she is no longer with us in mind). Jeff > In article > <jason-2303050611040001@pm4-broad-30.snlo.dialup.fix.net>, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > BWT: While you are at it ask about pre-hospital ambulance > "no-code" requirements. Yet another interesting kettle of fish. Even if the form is not the correct one, I doubt there is a court in the US that would not consider what is on that form. The problem that Terri Schiavo is not that she used the wrong form to express her wishes in writing, but that she didn't express them in writing. And her family has been sufffering for this for 15 years. (IMHO, she isn't there anymore, so she hasn't been suffering from this.) However, you should definitely get the right one for the state and run it by your lawyer. And make sure the lawyer and your doctors have a copy of the form. Jeff > -- > Here in California, US immigrants do the really dirty jobs nobody else > wants to do. Cleaning toilets. Being governor. > > SBH > Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a > "living will". You can download the forms--visit Google and type--"living > will". And everyone should read this carefully: http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=6942 KM >And everyone should read this carefully: >http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=6942 Ahhh, yes, another objective unbiased report from MM. Wanna maybe read the straight story and make up your own mind? http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html >> Regardless of your feelings on this subject--you need to fill out a >> "living will". You can download the forms--visit Google and type--"living [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=6942 One thing the story got wrong is that Terri Schiavo was on life support. Sticking a tube through the stomach wall and through the abdominal wall is life support. Jeff > KM Regardless of how people feel about this case, they should fill out "right to die" forms so that this situation does NOT happen to them. Use google to find a site where you can download the "right to die" forms. Another option is to use a Video Camera to interview all of the members of your family. In the video--ask each family member if they would want the doctors to let them live or die if they were hooked up to feeding tubes or other medical equipment that were keeping them alive. > This whole thing has become totally absurd, and I don't think ANYONE or any > system should be making decisions (outside the family). [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > But for God's sake, PLEASE stop this indignity! SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. > Regardless of how people feel about this case, they should fill out "right > to die" forms so that this situation does NOT happen to them. Use google [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > doctors to let them live or die if they were hooked up to feeding tubes or > other medical equipment that were keeping them alive. Get that video and have made into a DVD. Then give that DVD to your doctor and lawyer. If something happens, your feelings will be heard loud and clear. Make sure a copy of your living will is in the hands of the lawyer and the doctor, just in case. (There reason for having the video made into a DVD is that DVD will fit into the legal or medical record much more easily than a video tape - but keep that video tape around, as well., just in case.) Jeff |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.