NationStates Jolt Archive

Should she have been allowed to live? Should she have been taken off life support long ago?

I believe that she shouldn't have been sustained as she was. Lifeless, in pain...a vegetable. Her parents were behaving in an excessively selfish way. No quality of life? I'd prefer to be dead.

They should have shot her up with a combo of valium, phenobarbital and morphine as soon as it was determined that her brain was so extensively damaged.

Regardless of whether or not she should have been kept alive, that is no way to kill someone.

IF they planned on killing her, there should have been a more humane way to do so than starvation.

Regardless of whether or not she should have been kept alive, that is no way to kill someone.

IF they planned on killing her, there should have been a more humane way to do so than starvation.


They were just feeding and cleaning her.

Regardless of whether or not she should have been kept alive, that is no way to kill someone.

IF they planned on killing her, there should have been a more humane way to do so than starvation.


everything else had been outlawed by the religious rightwing nutjobs.

you're not allowed to make death happen faster, the most you can do is to stop working against death

I think what bothers me is that the husband was so intent on letting her die, and didn't even show up when she did.

another Schiavo thread?

theres 4 on the main page...about the same thing

Yes, that is true. That isn't fair, but, this whole thing would have been another family issue in the courts instead of a national political event that has been heavily politicised by congress and the media.

Regardless of who was there when she died, she should have been left in peace.

I think what bothers me is that the husband was so intent on letting her die, and didn't even show up when she did.
On the contrary...

John Centonze, the brother of Michael Schiavo's live-in girlfriend Jodi Centonze, said Michael Schiavo was with Terri Schiavo when she died.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/31/schiavo/index.html

Regardless of whether or not she should have been kept alive, that is no way to kill someone.

IF they planned on killing her, there should have been a more humane way to do so than starvation.

What exactly is a "humane death"? Death is one of the most undignified things a person has to go through, regardless of whether it was starvation or a quick injection. In either method, you get the same results, a body with no say as to whether it enjoyed the painkillers more than the lack of food.

i think it's a shame this whole thing got blown so out of proportion. she wanted to die if she ever got into such a permament vegetative state - whose business is it to deny her that?

What exactly is a "humane death"? Death is one of the most undignified things a person has to go through, regardless of whether it was starvation or a quick injection. In either method, you get the same results, a body with no say as to whether it enjoyed the painkillers more than the lack of food.

Treating death as if it is a disease, rather than a natural process, is a big part of the problem here.

Treating death as if it is a disease, rather than a natural process, is a big part of the problem here.

Just because it's natural doesn't mean anyone has to like it.

Regardless if you believe she should have been taken off of the feeding tube or not. Starvation should not have been an optoin. Look at it this way. Let's say you are on a respirator, and it has been deemed that you should be removed from the respirator and denied air. So if you start breathing on your own, then you must be denied air. I guess a pillow or plastic bag would do. Now if someone did that they would be brought up on murder charges. This is the same, because Terri was denied even the attempt to see if she was able to eat and drink on her own. That my friends is what I have a problem with.

Hey, now, Dementedus_Yammus, I am an evangelical pastor. If you met me, you would likely call me " one of those religious rightwing nutjobs." ;)

I just agree that what the religiocrats(*) are saying is absurd. I do not, for the record, support euthenasia, but if it is going to be done, make it short and painless. Criminals in the United States get such painless deaths, like lethal injection. Amazing.

See? And Christians wonder why nobody listens to us . . .

I apologize for those with whom I relate. I can fully see why someone would want to NOT believe anything we say.

Originally posted by Aquinion
What exactly is a "humane death"? Death is one of the most undignified things a person has to go through, regardless of whether it was starvation or a quick injection. In either method, you get the same results, a body with no say as to whether it enjoyed the painkillers more than the lack of food.

First I will elaborate (though I think I did above) on what I meant by humane death. If we are going to kill this person (by either neglect or action), why should we draw it out, so that the body which is not yet dead feels it for a longer period of time? Also, why should we not attempt to make it as painless as possible? If the human being is not dead yet, it are still sensate. If it is sensate, why cause it more trauma than necessary, just because it cannot communicate the pain.

Next, on what do you base your synopsis of death? Death does not have to be undignified, I don't think.

As the ends will be the same, would you say that the means are trivial? If you are laying on your death bed, am I allowed to come in and assault you with a billy club, since you will be dead either way?



* Religiocrats: i; groups with similar ideals that gather in an attempt to influence the government to fit their religious beliefs with sheer numbers, often without a proper understanding of the issue they are opposing; ignorant religious right-wing nutjobs with sometimes well-intentioned motives that seem to portray an ends-justify-means attitude (I'm calling Webster in the morning. ;) )

Regardless if you believe she should have been taken off of the feeding tube or not. Starvation should not have been an optoin. Look at it this way. Let's say you are on a respirator, and it has been deemed that you should be removed from the respirator and denied air. So if you start breathing on your own, then you must be denied air. I guess a pillow or plastic bag would do. Now if someone did that they would be brought up on murder charges. This is the same, because Terri was denied even the attempt to see if she was able to eat and drink on her own. That my friends is what I have a problem with.
you mean CHOKE her to death instead of starving her? now thats humane.

They shouldn't have put her on television in the first place.

Did anyone see the South park episode yesterday? I think Matt and Trey put it best:

"for the love of god, don't ever show [Kenny, ie Terri] in that condition on national television."

They shouldn't have put her on television in the first place.

Did anyone see the South park episode yesterday? I think Matt and Trey put it best:

"for the love of god, don't ever show [Kenny, ie Terri] in that condition on national television."

I LOVED that episode of South Park!!! I'm not very happy with some of the more recent episodes, but this season is looking very good :D.

They did an especially good job with this last one. Political commentary at 2nd best (With Lewis Black as 1st, of course).


-Neo Nuria
"Crap! God has a Keanu Reaves! Retreat!" - Satan

I believe people should be allowed to die in a painless way if they are terminally ill or severely disabled as long as it is clear that it is their personal decision. I however didn't agree with this case where her husband seemed to make the decision which resulted in her dying in the most horrendous way through starvation.

I think what bothers me is that the husband was so intent on letting her die, and didn't even show up when she did.

Tell me you're bothered by his actions when you find yourself in the same situation. I was lucky, and had some time to say goodbye to my own mother, after she quickly ( less than 3 months) succumbed to an inoperable brain tumour.

She looked just like Terri near the end, btw - this is something I don't want to remember, but the constant barrage of Schiavo coverage has thrust it back into my lap.

When I remember my mother, I remember her as she was before her sudden illness. I don't want to remember her as the gurgling, incontinent bag of flesh she became. I last saw her two days before she passed on. I had already been in mourning for the last three months.

And there's definitely a part of me that wishes I had not made that final visit. Too much of what I saw has lingered on. Beleieve me when I tell you that there's no joy in seeing a loved one in such a damnably feeble state, a state you know full well they would not want to see prolonged.

Then there's my brother-in-law, who persists in a PVS...

Look, all I'm saying is, don't judge. Don't get bothered. It's not your place to do so.

I 'happy' she's gone. No matter wich side you were in, now she doesn't suffer
anymore. If she ever did?

Look, all I'm saying is, don't judge. Don't get bothered. It's not your place to do so.

Yes, I admit, it isn't really my place. Still, I just can't shake the feeling that it seems somewhat strange.

Regardless of whether or not she should have been kept alive, that is no way to kill someone.

IF they planned on killing her, there should have been a more humane way to do so than starvation.

what does it matter if it's humane or not since life is just a series of chemical proscesses? it's not as big a deal as most people make it. one lives and dies, does someone really think it is moraly right to try and keep a flame going because if you don't it will stop the chemical reaction? that's very very similiar to life.

Yes, I admit, it isn't really my place. Still, I just can't shake the feeling that it seems somewhat strange.

Kinda like someone not showing outward emotion at his own trial for murder must be somehow guilty, or at least not normal or something?

Keep your preconceived notions of proper human responses to yourself. You find his absence strange? Well, whatever. I sure as Hell don't.

And anyway, why should Mike Schiavo be held to some higher standard of behaviour than anyone else? Why should he have to justify himself to you or to anybody?

Why not just leave the poor goddamned family the Hell alone for Goodness' sakes??

Why not just leave the poor goddamned family the Hell alone for Goodness' sakes??

You are right. I don't really want to talk about them. they've been through enough.

Keep your preconceived notions of proper human responses to yourself. You find his absence strange? Well, whatever. I sure as Hell don't.

Well, it's just my opinion and I don't expect anyone to agree with or emulate it. I'm sorry if I offended you somehow.

And anyway, why should Mike Schiavo be held to some higher standard of behaviour than anyone else? Why should he have to justify himself to you or to anybody?

He doesn't. I merely found it strange, nothing more. For all I know, he could have a plethora of good reasons, so I can't judge.

Originally posted by Yupaenu
what does it matter if it's humane or not since life is just a series of chemical proscesses?

That is an assumption that life is nothing more than a series of chemical processes. If that is the case, my other example still stands. If you are lying in your death bed, should I come in and slaughter you with a billy club since you are about to die anyway? If life is as you say it is, then life really has no value. Either way, that's not my point.

it's not as big a deal as most people make it.

Watch someone die like that and come back please. Being in the profession I am in, I have seen it. It is a big deal to those who care about other human beings.

one lives and dies,

Well, we certainly agree on that.

does someone really think it is moraly right to try and keep a flame going because if you don't it will stop the chemical reaction?

Wow, what a comparison. This means that if a fire is roaring (healthy), it is along the same lines as murder.

that's very very similiar to life.

This comparison has no connection other than they both have a beginning and end. The difference is in the fact that humans are alive and sentient.

The point I was making is not to treat the dead person different than any other dead person. I have no argument about the dead. My argument was about her as a living person (provided she was alive). Since it was ruled that she was from broadcast that she died after the tube was removed, I would assert that those who killed her did so in a 'cruel and unusual' way that our laws do not even allow criminals to undergo at the hand of the authorities.

This topic was discussed in one of my classes yesterday and i think she should have been let go

her parents watched her suffer, she wasn't "living" anyways, she was already dead, it was just her body left, and empty shell, there was no chance of a recovery, she was already gone, they should have been able to do something other than take her off life support, at least she is now free and doesn't have to live in that bed, immobilized, any longer

Should she have been allowed to live? Should she have been taken off life support long ago?

I believe that she shouldn't have been sustained as she was. Lifeless, in pain...a vegetable. Her parents were behaving in an excessively selfish way. No quality of life? I'd prefer to be dead.

No The woman should not have been living this long. It is only because her parents couldn't let go that this whole fiasco took place. My opinion, they didn't like her husband in the first place. So they did not want to let him make the decision to terminate her life.

The worst thing about this is it became political. It was nobody's business but the family's and the courts. Everybody else should have stayed out of it.

Bottom line...GET A LIVING WILL!!

This isn't a question of if she should live or die, why do you ignore every logical question like some kind of Ferraus Cranus?

WHY did she have to starve to death? For God's sakes SCOTT PETERSON is getting a lethal injection! You mean to tell me he deserves better then her?! And if even she couldn't feel ANY sort of pain (which i seriously doubt..) why not just give her medication for the pain if you MUST starve her so she won't feel it just incase? If not just to make her parents feel better.

WHAT kind of loving husband would not let his ex wife (Well not technichaly his ex but you know why i mean..) take the damn medication? I want to know one damn person out there who would want to starve to death under no medication. It's a sad fucking day when the doctor has to come up with a plan to stick a pill up her ass to give her any sortof relief.

WHAT business is it of Michal Shaivo if she lives or dies?! Her parents were paying for it.. It's thier problem..

WHY would he need to inject insulin into her if he was so damn sure of himself? He wanted her to die, he's a murderer.

He's a sick-sick man, and I know who's worse, him who I must say is comparible to Hitler, or you all as a society who's letting him getting away with it and acting as if he's an okay fella!!!

to tell you before this case "I" enjoyed toture, I laughed at the idea of Iraqui prisoners being raped and forced to pose in sex pyramids, I kicked puppies, made children cry, hell I STILL do that stuff..

And under no circumstance would I ever EVER do what he did to that poor woman. If I had any sortof love, nay.. any sortof SOUL I could not live with myself for doing what he did to Terry Shaivo. If i wanted someone to die that badly i'd just get a gun and shoot them in the head. But then that's illigetamate isn't it? To you damn liberals there is no right or wrong, morality is irrelevant as long as the goverment okay's what you're doing correct?

I'll be sure to remember that when I do see one of yous down a dark ally and shoot you in your God-damn cerebum. And I'll still be more of a man then that ass-spelunker Terry Shaivo cause dieing in two minutes from a bullet peircing to the brain is a whole lot more merciful then a two week wait of your body eating at itself. Infact I have a little poem in honor of Terry..

The pain you fealt was unjust.
A vegetable can't move or thrust.
You smiled at me, you gave moral chairty.
In God's hands your in now I trust.

That man was a monster, even demons hiss and howl.
What he did unto was wrong, wretched, and foul.
My heart burns with rage, for all the pain his kind brings.
I invoke the powers to send his soul to hell when he dies.
Satan laughing spreads his wings.

I really wish all these Schiavo threads would go in the appreciation thread...