Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Patient wants to live, but old 'living will' mandates death
WorldNetDaily ^ | 10/20/05 | Diana Lynne

Posted on 10/20/2005 5:52:22 PM PDT by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-420 next last
To: Wampus SC

Turkey season, huh? Yesterday as I was posting, about twenty of the things walked through between the garden and the house, right past where I have been sighting in my, uh 8mm.

No clowns, just wild turkeys begging to be blasted.

8mm


101 posted on 10/25/2005 3:44:07 AM PDT by 8mmMauser (Jesu ufam tobie..Jesus I trust in Thee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: 8mmMauser

I'm not in the least surprised, and have always expected, the generation that embraced abortion would face euthanasia.


102 posted on 10/25/2005 3:48:11 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: IIntense
Like it or not, the laws of this country ARE based on the Ten Commandments.

Indeed they are. With limitations. Would you like to see the intended limitations?

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.--Federalist 45

How about a conservative judge's view of the current issue and where he believes the power lies?

that the point at which life becomes "worthless," and the point at which the means necessary to preserve it become "extraordinary" or "inappropriate," are neither set forth in the Constitution nor known to the nine Justices of this Court any better than they are known to nine people picked at random from the Kansas City telephone directory; and hence, that even when it is demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that a patient no longer wishes certain measures to be taken to preserve her life, it is up to the citizens of Missouri to decide, through their elected representatives, whether that wish will be honored. It is quite impossible (because the Constitution says nothing about the matter) that those citizens will decide upon a line less lawful than the one we would choose; and it is unlikely (because we know no more about "life-and-death" than they do) that they will decide upon a line less reasonable.--Scalia, Cruzan v Director, MDH

But don't let anything like facts or opinions by the man who wrote the Constitution or Constitutional lawyers stop your crusade...

103 posted on 10/25/2005 6:20:57 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Wampus SC
Involvement from all over is welcome, because sometimes court decisions result in something called a precedent.

Okay let's look at precedent shall we? Would Scalia's decision in Cruzan suffice? Who did he say should make this decision? If you are a South Carolinian, get to it and save this man's life. Allow your legislature to act as they see fit. Call officials you elected.

I realize some around here would federalize every moral decision under the sun if Republicans remain in charge, however Madison was quite clear. I also realize Republicans selectively forget the Framers when it stands in the way of their 'crusades', however conservatives don't.

104 posted on 10/25/2005 6:59:37 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

It's too bad that normally intelligent people don't understand that it could happen to them one day. I printed out 2 copies of "the will to live", and when the current bs is done, I'm going over it with an attorney. I also bookmarked an online power of attorney form for my state.


105 posted on 10/25/2005 7:56:18 AM PDT by TheSpottedOwl ("President Bush, start building that wall"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Who did he say should make this decision?

What decision? Are you referring to who gets to decide to kill another person? Should the spouse decide whether or not to kill them? Should a municipal judge decide whether or not to kill them? Should the Congress decide whether or not to kill them?

You ask the question as though somebody MUST decide, and it's just a matter of who should decide.

Is this a decision that must only be made about disabled people, or are others in need of this decision as well? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Jewish neighbor? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Mexican neighbor? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Baptist neighbor?

Or maybe you would prefer to base it on an individual's circumstances that affect the quality of their lives. Who should decide whether or not to kill a recently widowed man? Who should decide whether or not to kill a woman whose baby just died? Who should decide whether or not to kill a homeless man? Obviously all those people are suffering. Killing them would no doubt end their suffering.

Are those all private family matters? Should we accept that as long as they're able to speak on a certain level, they can make that decision themselves, but if not, the next of kin should decide? At what level should a person be required to speak in order to get to decide whether or not they should be killed? College level? High school level? And do they have to speak English, or will just any language suffice?

Or maybe we shouldn't single out any particular group of people. Maybe every individual should be subject to this decision. We can eliminate the taboo in killing, as long everybody follows the rules. Each of us will have a Designated Decision Maker (DDM) to decide our fate. The DDM will get to choose the hour and manner of our deaths. If you want to kill somebody for whom you are not the DDM, you'll need to petition the DDM for permission, and pay whatever surcharge the DDM deems appropriate. Parents will automatically be the DDM for their children. Upon marriage, the title of DDM automatically transfers to the spouse. Every one of us will have one person somewhere who gets to decide the time and method of our death. You've already established that the person for whom the decision is being made should have no say in the matter. (Or does your opinion on that only apply to Terri Schiavo Schindler, Scott Thomas, and Jimmy Chambers?) So, resisting your DDM's attempts to kill you will be a crime, punishable by a more turturous death than originally intended.

Or do you reserve this sacred practice of "deciding" solely for disabled people's decision makers?

106 posted on 10/25/2005 4:16:33 PM PDT by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb
What decision? Are you referring to who gets to decide to kill another person? Should the spouse decide whether or not to kill them? Should a municipal judge decide whether or not to kill them? Should the Congress decide whether or not to kill them?

Kill, disconnect the tube, I really don't care what you call it. Your first statement shows you're going to keep up the hyperbole. It's an end of life decsion. My question, which apparently went over your head (as if that's hard), was who did Scalia say should make the decision? Scalia, suprisingly a bit, supported the rights of the states, per the Constitution, to make the decision. It was a glaring aspect of his ruling in the Cruzan decision. One would assume that a majority within a commmunity, or state if you will, are going to have the same views that may be different from those in other states. Be those views on the death penalty, taxes, end of life decisions, etc. Which is why Scalia and Madison both said the decision on any issue not specifically covered in the Constitution should be handled by the states. Scalia ruled this decision should still be a state decision

Is this a decision that must only be made about disabled people, or are others in need of this decision as well? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Jewish neighbor? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Mexican neighbor? Who should decide whether or not to kill my Baptist neighbor?

And we make the loopy jump from end of life decisions to genocide. Maybe you could put up a picture of a death camp to complete the hyperbole. Each separate and sovereign state has laws against murder. But you already knew that didn't you? Unfortunately this fact doesn't help your hyperbolic jump much does it?

All situations that deal with end of life decisions should be left up to the family, unless the state has made a law otherwise. Even if a law has been made there will always be certain exemptions. Who do you believe should make such decisions. I can assure you without a shadow of a doubt, my family and I have reaffirmed with each other in writing at what point any tubes should be disconnected. So you ghoulish freaks that would have us keep anything and everything hooked to a tube won't be able to make one decision for me or mine

Or maybe we shouldn't single out any particular group of people. Maybe every individual should be subject to this decision. We can eliminate the taboo in killing, as long everybody follows the rules. Each of us will have a Designated Decision Maker (DDM) to decide our fate. The DDM will get to choose the hour and manner of our deaths. If you want to kill somebody for whom you are not the DDM, you'll need to petition the DDM for permission, and pay whatever surcharge the DDM deems appropriate. Parents will automatically be the DDM for their children. Upon marriage, the title of DDM automatically transfers to the spouse. Every one of us will have one person somewhere who gets to decide the time and method of our death. You've already established that the person for whom the decision is being made should have no say in the matter. (Or does your opinion on that only apply to Terri Schiavo Schindler, Scott Thomas, and Jimmy Chambers?) So, resisting your DDM's attempts to kill you will be a crime, punishable by a more turturous death than originally intended.

Again, your stupidity astounds. I have made no statement that would support your idiotic statement. I have simply stated per the Constitution of these United States, the issue of end of life and ensuing decisions can only lie with one group of people. The citizens of a respective state if they choose to address their legislature or the family member who has power of attorney in said situation.

Now I have a Supreme Court Justice and the author of the Constitution standing with me. Who've you got? A crackpot on a crusade at all costs (Randall Terry), a 'Nobel Prize nominee' who gets sued by his patients, and a Redd Foxx look alike who can't get anybody to vote for him.

107 posted on 10/25/2005 5:18:18 PM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: billbears

Again, you reveal your limitless stupidity. When you decide to kill somebody who isn't dying, that is not an end of life decision. That is a decision to end a life. All of my questions went over your head. That's not hard to do. You're obviously unaware of the fact that the 14th Amendment is part of the Constitution.

I see you learned a new word, and can't stop using it. Now if you'd just learn what hyperbole means, you could stop misusing it. Killing is killing. There is no hyperbole there. No matter which individual or group you single out for killing, it's still killing. That's not hyperbole. It's just the simple truth. Apparently not simple enough for you to understand, but still simple.


108 posted on 10/25/2005 5:51:39 PM PDT by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb
"If you happen to bag a cuckoo bird, send it to Howard. I've heard he likes them."

He's already got one 24/7. Think he needs another?
109 posted on 10/26/2005 9:31:22 PM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: billbears
You might be shocked at how many points of agreement we might have. I've used Deo Vindice as a tagline myself. I know you catch my drift. That said,

"Okay let's look at precedent shall we? Would Scalia's decision in Cruzan suffice? Who did he say should make this decision?"

How did the Cruzan case turn out? Was Cruzan able to communicate that she wanted to live, and do so? Chambers did. Think about that for a minute.

He said it should be up to the states, and it should. That's why we're trying to insure that state and local officials of the state of South Carolina do their job thoroughly, and decide on the side of life - which is Chamber's stated wish. If Chambers had said "I want to die", I doubt there would be be an issue here.

Outside help is encouraged for several reasons. 1). As we all know, public officials tend not to act properly - or at all - unless they know they're under public scrutiny. They'll be more likely to do their job when they know that the scrutiny is widespread. I doubt anyone would object to them actually doing their job. Do you? 2) Because the Cruzan precedent does not cover this situation well. Here, we have an injured man who is a rational being who says he wants to live. Then, he's drugged up so that he can no longer communicate, and the attempt to end his life begins. We don't want the court to set this new precedent that taking a life under these circumstances is acceptable. Do you? 3) Precedents from one state become the basis for decisions in other states. We want to stop it while it's just a state matter in South Carolina before it becomes a state matter in other states. Maybe all other states, potentially affecting everyone.

"If you are a South Carolinian, get to it and save this man's life. Allow your legislature to act as they see fit. Call officials you elected."

That's what the purpose of pasting the contact info was. Got it? Being worked on - and being worked on in many other states. If you are a non-South Carolinian, please use your influence to help us stop this potential precedent here - before you have to deal with it in your state.
110 posted on 10/26/2005 10:19:38 PM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: billbears
"Each separate and sovereign state has laws against murder."

Yes they do. The legalist (ie: the person who lets loopholes in the law justify his lack of moral conviction) might in some cases of killing, say, "That wasn't murder. The law didn't define it as such".

Consider this scenario. A person is injured. While rational and conscious, he says he wants to live. Someone orders him drugged into unconsciousness, removes all means of communication; and then is successful in ending his life. Is that murder? What do YOU think, billbears?

Would you, billbears, object if a sovereign state were to pass a law defining the ending of a life this way as murder?

Would you, billbears, object to a constitutional amendment properly ratified by sovereign states that defined ending a life this way as murder?

"All situations that deal with end of life decisions should be left up to the family, unless the state has made a law otherwise. Even if a law has been made there will always be certain exemptions."

I can go along with that. Lets say situations like the Chambers situation is one of those exemptions. The question then is, "should we honor the wishes of a rational, communicative individual who wants to live, or the wishes of a spouse who wants that individual dead." Billbears - which persons wishes do YOU think should be honored in a case like that?
111 posted on 10/26/2005 10:39:11 PM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: billbears
There's also a matter of honor. Your tagline, "Deo Vindice" indicates you understand the concept and it's important to you.

We're still waiting for you to either give *any* evidence that Jimmy Chambers was lying when he said he wanted to live -- or admit you have no such evidence. Or sidestep, or say nothing, and show you have no honor.

What'll it be?
112 posted on 10/26/2005 10:42:45 PM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: billbears
And while we're at it -- do you think a rational, communicative sovereign individual should have the right to revoke a living will?
113 posted on 10/26/2005 10:45:49 PM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Wampus SC
Wake me up if you get an answer to any of your questions.


Waiting

114 posted on 10/27/2005 12:21:11 AM PDT by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This man's obituary was in the Yuma Daily Sun today, 10/26/05.


115 posted on 10/27/2005 12:27:31 AM PDT by Umanbean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Umanbean; little jeremiah; Wampus SC; 8mmMauser

Jimmy Lloyd Chambers

Jimmy Lloyd Chambers, 79, a former resident of Yuma, died Oct. 24, 2005, in North Augusta, S.C.

He was born Nov. 15, 1925, in Cotesfield, Neb., and was a retired dispatcher for Holland Motor Express.

Memorial services will be held at a later date.

Platt's Funeral Home in Evans, Ga., is handling arrangements.

http://sun.yumasun.com/artman/publish/articles/story_20007.php




Could you ping to this announcement. I'm going to go throw up now.


116 posted on 10/27/2005 1:18:26 AM PDT by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

Is there possible a reason that a wife of 58 years might think her husband wants to die beside insurance money or she is a bitch? I am struck by the phrase "in that body". To me it speaks of other conversations where he might have said something about never wanting to live if machines did the work for him.

I don't know that any such conversation ever took place. I do know that a person who stays married for 58 years and has 10 children has some claim to know her husbands mind - when everyone agreed that it was clear. After 10 hours off morphine I hope Dr. Brookman is right in his supposition that Mr. Chambers was sufitionantly coherent to make such a decision.

I am not saying that Mrs. Chambers is not a greedy bitch who only wants to kill her husband so she can collect insurance money, however I am equally not comfortable saying she is. 58 years and 10 children with one man gives a woman insight into what that man thought during those 58 years. I only have one article written from a very specific viewpoint to go by.

Given the stated limitations of my knowledge I think it most likely that Mr. Chambers had made statements during his life that he didn't want to end up living like a vegetable, having machines live for him, something to that effect. I also think that when push came to shove he did not want to end his life - of whatever quality it was. His wife knew his stated views and could not reconcile them to his current view of wanting to live.

That is my read from this one article, and I fully admit I can be wrong.
117 posted on 10/27/2005 1:24:18 AM PDT by Talking_Mouse (Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just... Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Talking_Mouse

Her motives are unclear from the article. His wishes were very clear. The result was very definite. May he rest in peace.


118 posted on 10/27/2005 2:12:32 AM PDT by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb

I doubt they'll be answered here by bear, but they'll be answered. Sooner or later they'll have to be answered by everyone. Hopefully before the PTB's answer for us without consulting us first.


119 posted on 10/27/2005 2:25:19 AM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb

Wanted to live, drugged into a stupor, denied treatment for pneumonia for a while -- was it too late? Was that what did it? We may never know.

RIP


120 posted on 10/27/2005 2:31:09 AM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Talking_Mouse
Two statements you make focus right in on the heart of this issue. "After 10 hours off morphine I hope Dr. Brookman is right in his supposition that Mr. Chambers was sufitionantly coherent to make such a decision."

and

"I also think that when push came to shove he did not want to end his life - of whatever quality it was. His wife knew his stated views and could not reconcile them to his current view of wanting to live."

Yes, the issue at the bottom of this is -again - do we respect the wishes of a rational individual who wants to live, or the wishes of a spouse who wants that individual dead? We're all going to have to decide.

Thanks for reiterating it (and giving me a chance to reiterate it. :) )
121 posted on 10/27/2005 2:42:13 AM PDT by Wampus SC (Serf City here we come!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

This should be a non-issue if he is alert and oriented. The article is somewhat vague.

He is on a ventilator....does he have a trach or is he intubated? There is a difference. If he has a trach, there will still be mechanical ventilation until it is determined he can breathe on his own. That is a process which takes time. If he is intubated, an elderly patient especially may be kept sedated to keep him from trying to remove the tubes.

The feeding tube is also not an issue. If his injuries have afffected his ability to swallow, then of course he would have a tube.

Much depends on the documentation from the doctor. What did he document of the conversation reported? What has the nursing staff documented in their notes?

I will be interested in following this.


122 posted on 10/27/2005 3:20:32 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xJones

Why?

Early Dementia
Early Alzheimer's
Greed
A refusal to be overburdened with the care he will need
A sincere belief she is doing the right thing

This is what was wrong with the Schiavo case. There are times motives must examined closely in these cases. This is one of them.

Family dynamics are strange. There are alliances in families and usually each parent has a child as an ally in any major dispute. That all 10 children disagree with her decision and if no one is siding with her is telling.

I wonder what the family was like before the accident. What was the marriage like? Were they miserable? Is this her "out?"

Going to heaven to be with an in-law is a strange, inappropriate comment. Forget that!


123 posted on 10/27/2005 3:33:27 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb

Very, very sad. It is indeed a world gone mad. Thank you for sticking up for the truth and righteousness. It will be to your credit eternally.


124 posted on 10/27/2005 8:54:46 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Talking_Mouse
His wife knew his stated views and could not reconcile them to his current view of wanting to live.

Herein lies the danger of the 'living will'. If the patient is communicating the desire to live, by whatever method that might be, the ideal would be to allow that wish to stand, until it may be revoked by a different communication.

If a person has a living will, they are just as good as dead (IMHO), because there can be any number of legally argued reasons to suggest that the patient is no longer of sound mind.

It is my opinion that when push came to shove, Mr. Chambers no longer desired to be on the other side of the ground. He found that life was indeed a gift, even if it was one that was not his earlier ideal. One day each of us must come to terms with our own imperfections in life, and choose whether we view that life as one worth living.

I think his children attempted to discern from their father what he wanted, and would honor that wish either way. That they all sided against their mother on this shows me that his current wishes were not what Mrs. Chambers had in mind.

People who think that living wills are a panacea just don't get it. They can be used against you, too. This case just illustrates that sad and terrible reality.

125 posted on 10/27/2005 8:55:26 AM PDT by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan from Florida; BykrBayb

"He found that life was indeed a gift,
even if it was one that was not his earlier ideal."

bump


126 posted on 10/27/2005 11:20:00 AM PDT by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: cyn

Hi, friend! :-)


127 posted on 10/27/2005 12:58:15 PM PDT by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan from Florida

Hi, Ohioan -- good to see you, too! but I'm so sorry to read of this ending.


128 posted on 10/27/2005 7:25:02 PM PDT by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Umanbean
thanks for finding and posting that info.

here's local mention -- online 10/25 Grand Island Independent:

Jimmy Chambers, 79

NORTH AUGUSTA, S.C.- Jimmy Lloyd Chambers, 79, of North Augusta, S.C., died Monday, Oct. 24, 2005, at Anne Maria Rehabilitation and Nursing Center in North Augusta.

Services are planned for a later date in Cotesfield and Yuma, Ariz.

Platt's Funeral Home in Evans, Ga., is in charge of arrangements.

Mr. Chambers was born Nov. 15, 1925, at Cotesfield to Lloyd Oberlin and Blanche (Dorr) Chambers.

Survivors of his immediate family include his wife of 58 years, Viola (Cummings) Chambers of Yuma; two sons, Jimmy Chambers Jr. of Naples, Fla., and Randall Chambers of Evans; and three daughters, Sherry Kilgore of Lebanon, Penn., Deanna Potter of Naples, and Candace Chambers of Louisiana, Mo.

looks like some siblings aren't listed; one is local (Evans, Ga).

fwiw.

129 posted on 10/27/2005 8:25:20 PM PDT by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Talking_Mouse

Having the unpleasant experience of dealing with an Alzheimer's and dementia patient(my mom), His wife may have health issues. I've stated my opinion on this particular issue before.

Having said that, may Jimmy rest in peace in the arms of the Lord...


130 posted on 10/28/2005 12:24:13 PM PDT by TheSpottedOwl ("President Bush, start building that wall"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Umanbean

I'm sure you want, as I do, to find out
just how he did die.


131 posted on 10/29/2005 5:26:07 PM PDT by cycjec (doesn't teach or inspire or compel them to think things throughu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: cycjec

Keep an eye out for a follow-up article. He may have died from natural causes, but it sure seems unlikely.


132 posted on 11/01/2005 12:40:16 PM PST by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Wow. Unbelievable. I just went and tore up my living will/advanced directives until I figure out how to guarantee that I can stay in control of MY life.


133 posted on 11/01/2005 12:50:07 PM PST by LibSnubber (Liberal democrats are domestic terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyn

Thank you so much for following Dad's story. Diana Lynne told me about this thread and I have spent a bit of time reading, crying and laughing at your posts. I want you all to know that my Dad died under suspicious circumstances and we have demanded an investigation. I saw him 10 hours before he died and he was blowing me a kiss when I last laid eyes on him. He was anxious and ready for the hard work ahead.

This is not over. We strongly want justice for my Dad and we want to expose this culture of death for what it is. I know many of you have questions, and if I can give you any answers, I will. I have so few answers myself, though.

To answer a few that I have seen:
There is no big insurance policy or inheritance. My father was a humble, hard working American who saved what he could, but he was not wealthy by any means. I can only say that the idea of disconnecting my Dad's life support came to my Mother the day after his surgery. After that she was absolutely driven to accomplish that goal. I have no explanation other than to say that she is very, very sick.

There are only 5 surviving children. The other witnesses in the room were inlaws and grandchildren. There were actually 12 witnesses plus Dr. Bookman in that room. My mother and oldest sister did not submit an affidavit of what happened in that room.

The courts appeared to be moving in the direction of having Dad direct his own health care decisions and we were moving quickly to make sure that he would assign one of his pro life children as Medical POA. He was off of the heavy narcotics and was growing stronger and more alert every day. He suffocated to death between 4:30 and 5:00 am on October 24th.

God bless you all


134 posted on 11/02/2005 11:59:07 AM PST by DadsGirl ("Come to Me all who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest." Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: joegarrity

Joe, although no local news source published the story, several have heard it. Check with Kate Lewis at the Augusta Chronicle. Also, you might want to view the Channel 12 news clip of the SC Governor's bike outing on Sunday October 8th. The man standing behind the governor with a sign reading "Murder by Bureaucracy" is my oldest brother.


135 posted on 11/02/2005 1:11:00 PM PST by DadsGirl ("Come to Me all who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest." Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: DadsGirl

Hi, DadsGirl, welcome to FR. What a tough situation, for sure, one none of us would want to be in. I wish you well in finding out more about what happened, and ultimately, for peace for you and your family.


136 posted on 11/02/2005 1:36:07 PM PST by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: DadsGirl

Thank you, dadsgirl, you have done him justice here. I am a grandchild. A lowly peon with absolutely no rights in this case. All I have ever had is my love for my grandfather, Jimmy Chambers, and my respect for his authority. As a child his presence overruled even my own father. We all agreed that any decision that he made was to be upheld, because it was solely his choice. He was not insane or riddled with Alzheimers. He was a kind, strong, loving man whose life centered around his grandchildren, his children, and his wife. His relationship with his wife seemed fine. I realize many readers are astounded by these circumstances and it is hard to get by the initial facts of our story. It seems there must be something underneath. Here it is. I have been in the center of the situation for the last months in Augusta. He asked if rehab was an option, and it was. He needed to know if he would be vent dependent for life, he was told it was a possibility. He agreed that he wanted to attempt this. Why haven't people upheld his own will? We can't figure that out; there was never a need for anyone to speak for him. Why did his wife want to extinguish his life? We can't figure that out either, some have suggested possible mental disorders, some do not guess. We were a very close family. We are now divided and will forever remain that way. The law did not protect his rights, the law gave and continues to give me no rights at all, the law is a magnificently complex beast complete with inherent flaws and it failed this time. All we have been left with is a destroyed family, unanswered questions, and insurmountable grief. As far as living wills are concerned, I must say this: If I choose to end my life, for whatever reason, by jumping from a building I hope there is not someone there waiting to push me in case I change my mind. To all my family and those who have cared enough about the lives of others and progressing the law : All my love and thanks.


137 posted on 11/02/2005 1:40:41 PM PST by kalintabby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: billbears

billbears, I hardly know what to say to you. The fact that my Dad was in South Carolina somehow makes it none of your business? The reason I wanted Dad's story to be told is because it is everyone's business when an attempt is being made to take someone's life against their will and their wishes. You are your brother's keeper, whether you like it or not.

May God have mercy on you.


138 posted on 11/02/2005 1:41:46 PM PST by DadsGirl ("Come to Me all who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest." Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan from Florida; 8mmMauser; tutstar; floriduh voter; BykrBayb; TheSpottedOwl; cycjec

ping to above post


139 posted on 11/02/2005 1:45:12 PM PST by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: DadsGirl

Hi, DadsGirl -- check your freepmail (top of page).


140 posted on 11/02/2005 1:47:00 PM PST by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: DadsGirl; kalintabby

Thank you both for sharing this difficult experience with us. I'm sure we'll all have many questions for you, but right now, it's all I can do to soak in what you've told us. I'll continue to pray for God to bring you comfort and strength.


141 posted on 11/02/2005 1:56:45 PM PST by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: cyn

Thank you for the ping.


142 posted on 11/02/2005 1:58:57 PM PST by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: billbears

I completely agree that it is a state issue by the constitution, but where does one turn if the state fails in its responsibilities to protect its citizens? The contstitution guarentees state's rights only if they uphold the resposibilities that go hand and hand with those rights. We went through all the proper channels in SC law, each division passed the buck to another. None were much help. Furthermore, it is everyone's resposibility to ensure this entire country is something for us to be proud of. If we each say "Well its not happening to me so I won't worry about it" not only have we reared a generation of egocentric scapegoaters, but we have also set the stage for a disgraceful country.


143 posted on 11/02/2005 2:02:23 PM PST by kalintabby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: LibSnubber

Good for you (although I'm not sure there are ever any guarantees on anything)!


144 posted on 11/02/2005 2:04:43 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: cyn

Thanks, cyn!


145 posted on 11/02/2005 2:09:15 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: kalintabby; DadsGirl

Welcome to both of you, and thank you for sharing your story. You are right that we cannot be quiet about these injustices when they happen, and it seems that at least we have the internet to use as a resource when these things happen. Maybe no one will pay attention, but SOME OF US WILL!

I'm very sorry that you've had to go through this, but I pray that your family can be the close undivided family that you used to be. Please stay in touch and let us know if there is any way we can be of help.


146 posted on 11/02/2005 2:16:40 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan from Florida

This isn't necessarily for you but you were the last poster that came up. This has been a very powerful thread. I'm glad I read all the way through and wanted to bump it back up. Prayers for the Chambers family.


147 posted on 11/02/2005 2:23:17 PM PST by YoungCurmudgeon (I slept and dreamed that life was beauty. I woke to find that life is duty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: DadsGirl; kalintabby; joegarrity; Gondring

Hey, Joe and Gondring, be nice to these two ladies!


148 posted on 11/02/2005 2:25:36 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: YoungCurmudgeon

Well then, here's another bump! I'm glad you read all the way through!!


149 posted on 11/02/2005 2:26:33 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan from Florida; YoungCurmudgeon

My, this road's getting bumpy!


150 posted on 11/02/2005 2:28:51 PM PST by BykrBayb (Impeach Judge Greer - In memory of Terri <strike>Schiavo</strike> Schindler - www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 401-420 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson