Posted on 03/03/2005 2:44:21 PM PST by CHARLITE
I demand to know where the human rights and women’s rights groups are over the case of the Floridian woman Terri Schiavo. Where are her civil rights? Did she loose them the moment she could no longer audibly answer or respond for herself? Why do human rights organizations stand and give tirade after tirade to defend the war criminals at Guatanomo Bay, but where are they over a woman supposedly living in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) and her rights? Why haven’t the women’s rights groups spoken out against Terri’s “estranged” husband, Michael, who wants to pull the feeding tube and let his wife die a slow death of dehydration and starvation? Shouldn’t Michael’s desire to have his wife die be classified under- spousal abuse? Truly, if this case is a reflection of how Americans are moving forward in handling bio-ethics then we are all screwed.
This case, which should never have become a topic at America’s water coolers, has so many facets and layers to it. When it comes to the topic of bio-ethics, we’ve only begun to lift the lid off a deadly and dangerous box of medical morality.
In 1972, two neurologists stated they had identified a condition of "wakefulness without awareness." This state is caused when a patient, due to head injury, lack of oxygen, degenerative disease, or loss of all upper brain functions- becomes what has been termed Persistent Vegetative State or PVS. This wide-ranging term has delivered only uncertainty in diagnosis, treatment, and ethical decision-making regarding these types of patients. PVS has become one more thing out of the bio-ethics Pandora’s Box that shouldn’t have been opened.
A large portion of the danger in using such a general term is that many people who only hear sound bites of news and discussion over the condition of PVS are so deeply misguided and uninformed. Most of us when we hear the word “vegetative” immediately think of an individual who is nothing but brain dead. This is a misnomer. Patients who are unable to live without being hooked up to every tube, beeper, electronic regulator, and waste remover; and with no hope of ever recovering brain activity are classified brain dead. With the bio-ethics questions over PVS we’ve painted the manifestation that without bells and whistles this body is nothing but an inconvenience and a burden or a last will and testament needing to die so, darn it, I can obtain my inheritance! There are citizens, judges and lawyers who don’t even comprehend PVS and they are deciding if it’s okay to go ahead a murder someone…how does this make sense?
The term Persistent Vegetative State, has come to be applied to people who actually do show some signs of awareness (Terri Schiavo). PVS often is confused with "brain death," although the two are not the same. (Brain death is defined as the irreversible loss of all functions of the brain.) Appallingly, "right to die" advocates and Terri’s husband Michael- have used the PVS to unite people to their rationale. It has even tainted the positions in some states laws altering them to classify the basics of life (food and water) as medical treatment!
Imagine a cup of chocolate malted flavored protein drink…it has now become classified as medical treatment. I didn’t know feeding someone sustenance or giving him or her a cup of cold water was considered medical treatment. I thought it was just caring for those who can’t care for themselves due to their physical challenges or financial inabilities. I guess all the quadriplegics had better be watching out and so should third world nations. Human rights organizations may see you eating and drinking H2O and decide no, you’ve no right to medical treatment- give me that bowl of rice, NOW!
Persistent Vegetative State is not easily diagnosed. Although accepted signs of PVS include the absence of awareness of oneself or one's environment, we cannot measure thought or awareness -- only behavior and movement. Today's medical tests are not specific enough to make a certain diagnosis of PVS. As a result, the rate of misdiagnosis is high, approximately 40 percent in some studies. Physical disabilities experienced by many of these patients, such as blindness and paralysis, can stop them from exhibiting behaviors that could make their awareness known. Recent video footage shot of Terri Schiavo shows her smiling and responding to her surroundings, leading many to question whether she is actually in the state of PVS. If you really want to know the answer to this, ask her parents and friends.
Reality check… the 1972 definition and the recent attempts to define PVS are not clear enough to tell the true state of patients who’ve suffered serious brain injury. According to Cindy Province (who holds master’s degrees in medical surgical nursing and bioethics, and is a cofounder and associate director of the St. Louis Center for Bioethics and Culture), this is her reasoning we cannot let the death sentence of PVS fit all situations, “Part of the reason is that consciousness is a continuum, not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. In general, terms, human brains aren't like light bulbs that are either on or off. Instead, they are more like irons, which, while turned on, may be anywhere from warm to hot. Unfortunately, medical treatment and ethical decision-making have not always taken into account that there are many things that are still unknown about severe brain injury.”
Do we understand this? How can we make a judgment of life or death based on knowledge that is still incomplete? Neurosciences has barely touched the cusp of understanding the smallest part of our grey matter…we’ve a long ways to go before we can mark someone with a death sentence.
So what if someone is in the position of a Terri Schiavo or they were in a PVS state for seven years or more… is life not worth allowing the injured brain time to go from lukewarm to hot? Are those like Terri, who are alive, allowed the same pursuit of happiness, protection, and equality? Or do we want to give only preferential treatment to ourselves and to what we define as “living”? As I had jested over those who are quadriplegic or from a third world country, will we make the same applications to our elderly folk as we are to those who appear to be in a state of PVS? Your children- grandma- may decide you don’t deserve medical treatment (i.e. food and water) when you get too feeble to go to the kitchen and cook it. How cold hearted have we become?
Ms. Province relayed recently that on the, “medical horizon, a large amount of work with severely brain-injured patients is taking place.” This research is happening inside and outside the United States. Not long ago, at the Royal Hospital for Neurodisability in London, a diagnostic tool was developed to help medical professionals identify awareness in patients previously diagnosed as unaware. Some of these patients have begun to communicate, and to recapture some physical function, but more significantly -for ethical concerns- to express their wish to live. Shouldn’t we all be given the right to express our wishes?
Terri Schiavo and others like her deserve the right to live. Everyone deserves food and water. Sometimes it seems we treat our criminals sitting in today’s penitentiaries better than we treat those who cannot defend themselves. Whether its patients like Terri, our elderly or our unborn human children, ethics of who we are as a race must be brought up to the moral standards of love and compassion for humanity. None of us living in a nation so full of plenty should ever deny another human being nourishment. Food, water and the right to live cannot be decided by a textbook definition that is completely filled with the nuances of variables. There is still so much we don’t understand about the human brain and how it functions. We have barely scratched the surface of the brains amazing recuperative abilities. With our minimal knowledge of how this all works are we willing to starve another human to death because we were given guardianship rights over them?
Terri Schiavo, if the human rights advocates and the women’s right organizations don’t take a stand for you- I want you to know there are those who will fight for you, pray for you, and believe you’ve the right to live and Terri- I am one of those here for you. God Bless you.
Kerry L Marsala
Comments:cnuseeme@cox.net
Website: http://www.right2think.8m.com
Art Gallery:http://www.klmarsala.4t.com
Here is the rule that should be. After a month of intrense care, if they put food in front of you and you can't eat it to survive, sayanora.
Life is too precious to get stuck in bed with bedsores and grieving relatives around you. Either "function", or "leave".
So you won't be surviving a six-week recovery in a body cast.
HAH! You certainly don't mince words.
I assume you are being sarcastic. If not, by your standard, I would have been pushing up daisies thirty years ago.
As medical technology advances, these are questions that will have to be answered.
The big lesson here is: Make your wishes known, in writing, because you never know what can happen.
It is not out of the realm of possiblity to me that Terri indeed would NOT want to have her suffering dragged out as it has been. (I sure wouldn't) But we will never know, because there is no record.
Bones
That would kill all quadriplegics despite their obvious consciousness and mental abilities. You ignore all levels of "function" that don't involve the hand and arm and swallowing.
I demand to know why everyone thinks this is any of their business. Don’t any of these “Save Terri” groups ever stop to think that maybe the facts as presented in court and reviewed multiple times are correct and Terri would not want to live like this? Her family has said they would still fight on even if they knew for sure that Terri said she would not want to live like this. They also said even if she had to have all of her limbs amputated, they still would want to keep her on life support against her wishes. To me that is extremely cruel and heartless.
Okay, lets assume for arguments sake that you are correct...... why then would you think it humain to "put her out of her misery" by slow dehydration and starvation????????????????
Have you ever know of a dog who was put out of his misery by this method? Of course not! It's cruel and heartless, and totally unthinkable!
This case sucks big time. She is *not* coming back, but who calls the shots as to when her life is ended? The law says her husband does.
I am a supporter of the right to die with dignity, but she left no written instructions or anything like that. And if they do remove the feeding tube, it is going to be a slow death (with the assumption being that she is not cognitive...that assumption part scares me - what if she feels pain?).
The best case scenario to me would be they let her go and she feels nothing, not a bit. But, as it stands, unless the medical team produces something more definitive about her mental state, she should be kept alive.
You mean like Christopher Reeves?
I seriously believe that another judge needs to rule on a suit brought with this current judge as defendant. Sentence the guy to two weeks without food and water, and see if he survives. In fact, if this were attempted as a way to execute someone on death row, people would be calling it cruel and unusual punishment. And this woman has committed no crime!
Christopher Reeves would have been dead and buried within a month of his horseback riding accident.
Next target: Men/women/children who cannot feed themselves without help. After that, men/women/children who can feed themselves but cannot make a logical decision as to just why they have to feed themselves (mentally handi-capped); after that...? It's called the slippery slope..... One sign of humanity gone amock....the inability to even see humanity in some people....
Also, if you're thinking you might want to be starved to death, specify whether or not you want to allow food or water to be withheld by a consensus of surviving relatives, or whether you would wish to require that it be withheld. After all, it's one thing to say you would rather starve than sit unloved in an instution in a world where nobody cared whether you lived or died; it's quite another to say that you'd rather starve than be doted over by loving parents and kinfolk.
I got a few "reactions", that's for sure!
Please let me express a little more how I feel.
First of all, this messaage from Lauren BaRecall which was nothing but the link to the Terry page had the most profound effect on me. It is hard not to love what you see in her. It is very clear from these photos she is still "there" to some extent, and probably concious even though encased in the "tomb" of her body.
My concern is that we are being led step wise by lawyers and by the medicos (people who care a great deal about the money and/or the "fame" in these issues - greed and ego) into becoming a nation of "victims". If it doesn't stop we will lose everything improtant to us, our lives, our country, our health, our families, and our spirit.
If she cannot respond in a way that leaves no doubt that she is asking for more life then I would favor pulling the plug. Life isn't "over" when you die. It changes. She'll be back again. I know that, even if some of you reading this don't.
If she can "ask" in some way to stay with us then fine, pay whatever it costs, and let her continue to learn in whatever state she may be in. But if you cannot communicate well enough to ask her, and then get and clear answer that EVERYONE agrees is an answer, then let's not prolong her trial. She must be sufferring terribly if she can understand but in no way "respond" and "interact". How would YOU feel?
It would be cruel to keep her in such a prison of totally inflow, no outflow.
Wonderful idea! Let's cover your mouth with duct tape, tie your head, hands and feet to the bed rails, and ask if you want to live. If you say that you do, in a language clear enough for us to understand, then you get to live. If not, sayanora.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.