Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: oldenuff2no; exDemMom
Mrs. Schiavo's alleged lack of capacity for responsive behavior was contested. I don't have my files at hand from 2005, but I know there were RN's and LPN's and other eyewitnesses, as well as her brother and her mom and dad, who reported and recorded her responsiveness. Furthermore, nobody disputes the fact that she had a severe brain injury and was very disabled; and nobody said she would "recover" if by "recover" you mean wake up and say to her brother, "Hi, Bobby, gee, what day is it? I'd like to go back to the Community College."

She was not, however, terminal. She was not dying. She was not in pain. And she was breathing on her own. She was also able to benefit from nutrition and hydration,using food and fluids successfully for the same thing you and I use them for: to keep on living.

That's why they had to MAKE her die by removing her nutrition and fluids. Nobody can survive that. Thereupon, this healthy but very disabled young woman died of starvation/dehydration: died the same --- if they had removed our food and water --- as you and I would have done.

It is not medically ethical to kill disabled men and women by intentionally starving them. Period.

And, PS, the New York Times was biased as hell. Does that surprise you?

30 posted on 12/24/2013 5:50:01 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o (Sanity is the adequate response of the mind to the real thing: adaequatio mentis ad rem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"Mrs. Schiavo's alleged lack of capacity for responsive behavior was contested."

IT was contested but several specialists reviewed her case and examined her over the several years this case was in the court system. They reached the same conclusion. That conclusion was that she was in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

This case, medical and court case, was reviewed repeatedly over several years. The medical facts in every case that definitive tests could be conducted supported the husband's contentions. The docs found this and so did the judges. The court case only stopped when her family ran out of appeals.

When her parents made totally unsupported claims of him attacking her and or poisoning her they lost all credibility. There was never anything to support this in the examinations before her death or the autopsy conducted after her death.

It was the husbands place to make this decision and his alone. This is what the courts at many ascending levels found as fact.

I believe that her parents and some care givers who had become attached to her saw what they wanted to see.

There is no decision in this that was right for everyone. Teri had made her position clear on this situation to her husband. He made the decision according to her wishes. If I am ever in her position I want my wife to have the courage to follow my wishes.

I argue this on facts and findings. Others approach this as purely a moral issue. We will never agree.

34 posted on 12/24/2013 7:18:43 PM PST by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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