Right to Die Discussion

Hello All,

Ok, here we go... First and foremost let me say that I believe that her husband DOES have her best interests at heart and is doing his utmost to uphold her wishes.

After all, if he was not desirous of ensuring that her wishes and directives be followed he would have divorced her years ago allowing himself to be relieved of the financial and emotional burden of her continued care. The fact that he did not attempt to divorce her or to give over guardianship to her parents tells me that he is acting under the auspices of her desires.

I believe this situation brings up several important topics that should be dealt with. The need for everyone to have some sort of recording of their desires with regard to medical intervention, heroic measures and after death handling is just a part of what this case is about.

The Right To Die is at the crux of the case. Should we as free, competent, adult individuals be allowed to request the ending of our existence when all that is left of us is that we exist?

Most people would have no question to ask themselves about what they would or should do if they found that a pet they own is suffering from incurable pain or is so horrifically damaged that although survival might be possible, recovery (in the classic sense of the word) would be improbable.

They would simply, emotionally and compassionately "put the pet to sleep". Thus easing its suffering and sparing it from further pain. I think that people who are faced with a similar situation themselves should be given the ability to humanely make a similar choice.

Again, I agree that Terri should be allowed to go. However, I also think that she should be given the same courtesy that is extended to convicted felons when they are to be executed by lethal injection. First an anesthetic is administered, then the fatal cocktail is given and they are eased out of life. Not over a matter of days or weeks but within minutes.

I also find it significant that the only film that I have seen of her dates to 2001. Therefore, I can only conclude that were there more recent footage being made available she would not appear to be nearly so "with it" and it would weaken her parent's stance considerably.

Should Jeb, "W" and congress get involved here? Absolutely NOT! This case is neither the business of our government nor the responsibility of its leaders.

Instead of going to such great lengths to step into what is a moral, ethical, religious and above all PERSONAL decision perhaps our nation would be better served if they spent their time doing the business which they were placed in office to do.

As for the need to make your friends and family aware of your desires in some concrete way. I believe that this is one of the most important things that you can do for the people that you care about.

From the time that I was a very small child, my mother discussed her future death and her wishes with me. Was it fun? No. Was it easy for her to face? No. Was it scary for me? Yes. Was it the kindest thing she could do for me when the time came to put her wishes into practice? Definitely!

At age 57 my mother suffered a ruptured berry aneurysm. After the first hour or so in the emergency room she was under so much sedation to try to control her stratosphericaly high blood pressure that any meaningful conversation was impossible.

For several days while she lingered I was even precluded from speaking at all while I was in her presence as my voice would cause her pressure to shoot up and she would try to rouse from her medically induced coma.

The one saving grace that I had during all of this was that I did not have to make any decisions for her, rather I was able to just give voice to her desires. Having had all the many conversations in the past I was certain of what she wanted and determined to see that her wishes be carried out to the best of my ability.

I was lucky. Not only because she loved me enough to ensure that during what would be one of the hardest periods in my life I could take comfort in knowing what she really wanted. But also because unlike Terri's husband, I did not have my grief compounded by having to fight everyone tooth and nail, over and over, to do what I promised I would do.

I recently married and one of the first conversations that I had with my husband and stepson (he is 17 now) was about what each one of us wanted regarding the unthinkable.

Why have this conversation when we are all young, healthy and at the beginning of our lives together, or in the case of my stepson, at the beginning of a life period?

Because I love them and know from experience that if you truly love someone (be it human or animal) you want to spare them from pain.

I can't guarantee that we will never have to face the world without each other. I can guarantee that for my family at least, when the time comes, we will all know who wants what and that is the best comfort we can give each other.

Take care,

Tisza

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Widdletink\";p=\"75661)</div>

Tisza:

An excellent post and you raised many good points.

However, I personally feel it is the DUTY of the government to have in place a legally-strong method of dealing with issues like this. If you have a hodgepodge of contradictory court cases and feuding Power Of State Power Of Fed which turns into a p****** contest, it never ends.

The key point here is that, despite many folks being squeamish about the topic, the subject of catastrophic medical condition and what to do wrt treatment, and how to handle the eventual death, is critical. Most of the real problems are caused when there is a giant question mark involved.

If you haven't already done so, please visit the Province Of Manitoba Health Care web site. I do have to admit that after some gut-wrenching family situations, the Manitoba provincial government came to its senses and enacted legislation to provide a means for a competent individual to put everything in writing, and it would have to be followed.

The Official Living Will form is completed with the assistance of your family doctor and added to your file. So no matter where you are in Manitoba, any health care provider has immediate access to your wishes. There is also a card you carry if you are outside Manitoba.

The first part is the Official Living Will, the second part is the Legal Act:

http://www.gov.mb.ca/health/livingwill.html

http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/h027e.php

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Widdletink\";p=\"75661)</div>

Just to add to this, he has been living with another woman for years and has children with her. He could have divorced his wife so he could marry her, but he has not. He must know that if he did that he would have no way of carrying out her wishes. I honestly believe he is trying to do what's right.

 

Yeah what a can of worms. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco\";p=\"75638)</div>

The purpose of DNR is that if you die you are not to be brought back, not don't do things to keep me alive. DNR (Do Not Recussitate) means don't bring out the paddles if I flatline, not "If I'm seriously ill, don't do things to keep me alive."

That's the way I've always seen DNR.[/b][/quote]

And that's just the problem. DNR doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. What about cardiac medications if you arrest? What about glucose? What about oxygen? Those are all important individual issues that DNR does not adequately address.

Yes, we all have a general idea what it means, and everything is easy if the patient is flat line and has been down without CPR for 20 minutes. But what about the little old lady who's "DNR" but her heart rate is 30 and a pacemaker could be applied and extend her quality life another 10 years? Should we withhold treatment of her slow heart rate b/c of her DNR....it depends upon her previously detailed desires....and the DNR doesn't answer the question.[/b][/quote]

Sounds like it's about time for a new "DNR." This is kind of a paradox because I don't think people would all agree about what is to be done or not done to them. Maybe someday we'll all have those microchips like pets do now so when we get to the hospital they scan us and access a database where they can see what we want done or not done.

 

Tisza, you made some great points. I hate it when others try to tell someone what they are feeling. All of these people that try to reason that because Terri was Catholic she wouldn't want to die have absolutely NO WAY of knowing what Terri would have wanted. I can't believe that Terri's parents actually believe that after 15 years of vegatativeness, Terri will somehow recover from a neurological disaster that doctors say cannot be fixed.

 

I started looking through the living will on that ww.legalzoom.com site. They take you through step by step and ask you what you would like to happen in various scenarios, then it leaves room for you to add specific comments of your own.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"75716)</div>

I agree.

However, Florida DOES have a "legally strong" system and prior to the Bush Theocracy, the separation of state versus federal was pretty clear. The Florida legal system has been used 22 times as 22 separate State judges have consistently ruled in favor of the husband. Many of those judgements dealt with WHO should make the decision, HOW badly damaged this patient was, WHAT this patient would have wanted. ETC ETC ETC. This woman has had more tests and more evaluations and more temporay guardians appointed over the last 15 years than any other brain damaged person in history. And every time the courts came to the same conclusion. This is NOT a case that was rushed and it is not a case where this womans rights have been abridged.

And now in the Federal courts, you can add 7 or 8 MORE judges/courts that have ruled for the husband.

At this point, putting a feeding tube back into Shiavo should be prosecuted as criminal assault. There can be no other term for it.

PS. Albert Einstein's definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. As we pray for Terri Shiavo, lets not forget to pray for her parents and hope that their victimization at the hands of the religious right wing will end soon. And that they will find the peace that has eluded them for the last 15 years.

 

Then what it really sounds like is a bunch of lawyers slowly sucking the life out of her. Talk about a parasitic relationship, so they bill by the hour.

Once again: run, don't walk, to get your Living Will properly set up. Make sure your family doctor has a copy in your file.

 

imho... the inhumanity in all this is that if she is to die... if that is what has been decided was her wish... I'm quite sure that her wish wouldn't be to suffer starvation and thirst for 7 days while she did it. I know... there is disagreement between her exact mental state and ability to be aware on what we would consider a conscious level. But the theory that she doesn't really feel pain in her stage is little consolation when facing the possibility that she might.

As soon as the tube was removed, she should have been placed on sedatives and painkillers... and no where have I seen a report that she was. If it was her wish to die in a case like this, she should through every humane medical mean be allowed to do so without the possibility of awareness of it.

But lemme ask this question... does anyone think that if there was a piece of paper declaring her intention that there wouldn't still have been a court battle by the family over any little thing a lawyer could dream up to contest? This family wants her alive no matter what... they would have taken this to the court system. Granted... it may not have lasted this long... but who knows... a good lawyer may have been able to throw enough doubt over it to have it thrown out, and then we would be in the same position. As Tisza said... the important thing is to have the discussion... the paper is handy... but if you make sure that everyone knows your wishes clearly, hopefully you would skip the fighting.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"75808)</div>

Lawyers can only suck you dry if you've got money to spend or money to win. The husband wanted this to stop 7 years ago. It took him 8 years to come to terms with her fate, and then 7 more years to help her to realize what she wanted -- a dignified death.

A few right wing religious zealots have been funding the parent's case for the last 7 years.

Although I have no love for lawyers, lawyers are not to blame for this tragedy, or at most mildly so. Religious right wing zealots and politicians who need their votes in 2006 or 2008 are to blame for this going on now for 7 years.

And you are right, run, not walk to your lawyer to get a living will and you might add a paragraph about barring the congress, the governor or the president from saying or doing anything about your fate.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rumply\";p=\"75819)</div>

This assumes that starvation is painful. Ask ANY expert in the field of death, like a Hospice worker, and 90% agree that death from starvation is not only painless, some feel it is "euphoric". There has been research on this in Europe where the consensus is that death from starvation AND dehydration is one of the most comfortable ways to go. (I have no idea how this was studied. I read the studies over a decade ago.)

What MIGHT be painful, is getting IV fluids while getting zero nutrition. Studies on the painlessness under those circumstance is less clear.

Hunger can be described as painful but ask anyone who goes on "fasts" for a few days and they will tell you that pain simply does not exist.

Again, the religious right wing wants us to believe that Terri is being tortured to death. Please don't get your medical information from the media on this, ask someone who has a scientific background in this field.

Sedation during this stage is certainly a good idea in theory, but how do any of us know that Terri is not getting sedation?