Skip to comments.What's the Rush?
Posted on 07/01/2007 3:27:40 AM PDT by 8mmMauserEdited on 07/02/2007 4:50:59 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
That's the question Bobby Schindler asked in the case involving Jesse Ramirez, the Arizona man whose case paralleled that of Schindler's sister, Terri Schiavo, until Ramirez woke up. The Arizona Republic reports:
...Bobby Schindler of the Florida-based Terri Schindler Shiavo Foundation placed the blame on a medical establishment quick to dismiss patients with brain injuries.Why is Jesse alive? His family sought legal intervention with the help of the Alliance Defense Fund:
Schindler is the brother of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged Florida woman who died in 2005 after a decades-long court battle.
"What is the rush?" he asked. "This is not the first time we've heard of cases like this where doctors want to write off the chance of recovery, and the family, when they're told this, will make a decision to end a person's life.
"In the case of Mr. Ramirez, he'd be dead now."
His siblings and parents refused to give him up for dead, and today, Jesse Ramirez is alive and conscious.
Two weeks ago, he was the center of a family battling over of whether he should live or die.
Now, he can hug and kiss, nod his head, answer yes and no questions, give a thumbs-up sign and sit in a chair.
A Miracle for Jesse Ramirez and His Family
Jesse Ramirez Conscious, Moved To Rehab Facility
Accident victim awakens
CHANDLER, Arizona, June 28, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) Written off by doctors as a hopeless vegetable, an Arizona man would not now be on his way to recovery from an accident caused by a marital quarrel if not for his familys unrelenting struggle for his life.
The Arizona Republic reports that on Wednesday, Jesse Ramirez, awoke from his nearly month long persistent vegetative state (PVS) and now can hug and kiss, nod his head, answer yes and no questions, give a thumbs-up sign and sit in a chair.
If not for the past few weeks legal battles that ended Tuesday with a favorable settlement for him and his family, Jesse Ramirez, who depended on feeding tubes for food and water, would certainly have died in circumstances very similar to the tragic 2005 death of Terri Schindler-Schiavo.
It is an episode that some are already suggesting echoes the 2005 case of Terri Schiavo, a woman whose brain injury led to a persistent vegetative state. In her case, a protracted legal battle between her husband and Schiavo's family ended in the removal of her feeding tube and her subsequent death.
But ethicists debate the extent to which this comparison is valid.
Dont expect to find this miraculous story in the pages of the New York Times or featured on CNN, because it would undermine their pro-euthanasia political agenda. In Arizona, a woman had doctors remove food, water, and medicine life support from her husband, Jesse Ramirez, a few days after he entered a coma due to a car rollover accident on May 30. Ramirez, a Gulf War veteran, and his wife had been arguing in the car over a cell phone number of another man that Ramirez found in her cell phone when the rollover happened. Ramirez suffered a broken neck, fractured skull and face, punctured lung and broken ribs. Only 10 days after the accident, his wife instructed doctors to remove all life support from him. His family objected and the Alliance Defense Fund filed an emergency motion with the court on their behalf. Maricopa County Superior court Judge Paul Katz wisely ordered on June 13 that Ramirez be put back on life support and assigned a guardian ad litem as his advocate while the legal arguments were sorted out. Ramirezs wife responded by petitioning the court again asking to remove him from life support.
Here is the thread.
We just had something like this happen in our area. A young lady suffering from diabetes and in need of dialysis was being taken care of at home by her elderly parents...well the process of taking care of her was getting to be too much for the old couple so they decided to not feed or give her water and they stopped dialysis as well. This young lady (early 40’s) has a son and was not wanting to die. Someone in the caregivers loop turned them into the state...but unfortunately she passed away the day after they finally showed up. It made me sick...my husband wanted me to go to the funeral...but I have no sympathy for anyone who could just stand by and watch their own daughter starve and dehydrate to death.
Thanks. It is happening more often than we sometimes realize. That is why we keep watching and keep vigilant. Every once in awhile, we can prevent things like this with some attention.
Good info! bttt!
"We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will give you no rest."
Why in the world does the medical establishment let an adulterous spouse make the decision whether the other spouse lives or dies? Talk about a conflict of interest...particularly when there is a life insurance payment in the offing.
According to the law -- at least before the medical establishment started slip-sliding all over the place -- the ONLY window to "pull the plug" was the patient's informed choice to refuse treatment. Euthanasia is still illegal. Assisted suicide is still illegal. The patient must make the decision. If the patient is incapacitated, it goes to court and the guardian or relatives may be consulted as to the patient's wishes. (That's the stage where the heirs tell the judge that grandma couldn't wait to die and leave them her money.)
In Terri's case, the Greer Court helped Michael's lawyers fake Terri's wishes. The only testimony allowed -- and it was pathetically weak -- was from Michael, his brother, and his sister-in-law. Nothing from Terri's own family.
It is interesting that, after all the years of claiming that Terri wanted to die, Michael finally got his chance to report (under oath) what she had said about it. Which turned out to be -- nothing at all. All he could come up with was two vague sentences of a sort specifically banned as evidence in other courts.
God rest Terri’s soul, and prayers for Jesse’s full recovery.
If these people believe in God, I say prove it.
Life should be our most cherished of values.
The above post is about Terry.
Thanks for the ping, 8mm. If it wasn’t for FR, these people would be literally swept under the rug. Granted, there are a lot of things happening right now, but if they can do 24/7 coverage on Paris Hilton, they sure can discuss more important issues like Jesse Ramirez, and his condition. Glad to hear he’s doing better :)
In 1999, 10.4% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
In 2000, 11.0% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
In 2001, 11.4% of the severely cognitively impaired residents of the United States were starved and dehydrated to death.
I haven't found data yet for other years, but I think it's a fair guess that the killings continue to climb.
This doesn't represent a percentage of patients who died (which would be bad enough). It doesn't mean that 11.4% of the patients who died were starved and dehydrated. It means 11.4% of all the people living in the U.S.A. with severe cognitive impairments were killed this way. And it doesn't include the ones who were killed using other methods, such as denial of antibiotics for simple infections, cessation of kidney dialysis, removal of breathing assistance, etc. There are some very barbaric methods being used.
The standard used for determining severe cognitive impairment for the purpose of this study is a score of 5 or less on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Patients in a coma or PVS cannot possibly score 1, much less 5. You've probably seen people in the grocery store with a score of 5 or less. So these killings include a wide range of brain damaged people. I wonder how many thousands of people are living with a score of 5 or less. And for every 1,000 people living with a score of 5 or less in the year 2001, 114 of them were starved and dehydrated to death that year.
All I have before me are the percentages. I'd like to see the corresponding numbers. Or would I?
Following is the breakdown by state for 2001. Notice that Rhode Island tops the list, with just over a third of that population exterminated this way. That might have something to do with the fact that RI has appointed the pro-euthanasia group Choice in Dying the official State agency in charge of informing the public about end-of-life choices. They supply forms for living wills and assist the public in filling out those forms. This is what happens when you put the fox in charge of the henhouse.
Believe it or not, Florida and Texas are both below the national average. Every state is on the list. Georgia is at the bottom of the list, exterminating only 1.30% this way. But like I said, this doesn't include people who were exterminated using other methods.
RI - 33.80%
OR - 32.50%
MI - 28.30%
MT - 28.00%
WI - 27.20%
CA - 23.40%
UT - 23.40%
AZ - 20.90%
PA - 17.40%
MN - 17.20%
AK - 17.10%
CT - 15.40%
WY - 14.90%
MD - 14.60%
NM - 14.20%
SD - 14.10%
WA - 13.20%
OH - 12.90%
ID - 12.30%
IA - 12.10%
MO - 11.90%
National Average - 11.4%
VT - 11.20%
HI - 11.10%
DE - 10.80%
ND - 10.80%
MA - 9.90%
IN - 9.70%
ME - 9.20%
NH - 8.70%
NY - 8.50%
NE - 7.70%
CO - 7.20%
AL - 7.10%
TX - 7.10%
IL - 6.70%
WV - 6.70%
KY - 6.60%
SC - 6.50%
TN - 6.30%
FL - 6.20%
NV - 6.20%
AR - 5.70%
NC - 5.20%
KS - 4.80%
NJ - 4.80%
OK - 4.10%
LA - 3.70%
VA - 3.60%
DC - 3.10%
MS - 3.00%
GA - 1.30%
Facts On Dying ~ This study was funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, who adamantly opposes the rights of vulnerable people to continue living. So if any trolls show up, complaining that the data is skewed in favor of life, check the facts and get back to me.
Great new Terri Daily thread!
I wonder when the visitors will find it. There have been a few around while you were gone reposting Mikey’s talking points.
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.