And who knows? In this crazy world, I suppose anything is possible.
Most people's families are willing, with previous consent by the person whose life hangs in the balance, to follow their wishes: their wishes can even be put into a document other than something that hands the decision outright to the medical establishment via the "donor card," unless I'm mistaken. Why would there be such a thing as a "donor card" anyway? It seems to me it's just like the "motor voter" law -- a bum's rush approach that makes it convenient for the medical establishment to "grab" what they want when they want it. Granted (hopefully), most physicians will be sensitive to the family's wishes, but the donor card carries a lot of weight -- kind of like the weight Terri Schiavo's husband is wielding with his claim that Terri allegedly stated she "didn't want to `live like that'" -- interestingly, she is NOT vegetative as is being claimed, and probably she DID indicate that distinction -- haven't we all? -- but notice how the definition of "vegetative" has gotten twisted: who WOULDN'T want to NOT be kept alive in a true vegetative state? So we just change the definition of "vegetative" and -- with her "prior consent" -- we've got what we want. I don't know that this is what has happened in her case, but it sounds like it. The absolutely BIGGEST LIE in Terri's case may be how she came to be in that state, arguably (doubts have been case in her husband's direction); but, otherwise, without question the biggest lie is her state being described as "vegetative." Terri is no different than a lot of people with severe physical impairment (and sometimes mental) dating from birth injuries, who are subsequently managed and sometimes improve as Terri's parents wish to do with her over the course of a reasonable lifetime.
For myself, I will never sign a pre-condition donor card; I will put my wishes into the hands and control of my family (who have never stirred up any suspicions as to their character) verbally or via a document other than a donor card; they have an actual interest in me as an individual. Anything else is worse than naive, IMHO. I will certainly self-define "vegetative" so the medical establishment can't monkey with what I mean.
I wonder if Terri signed a donor card?
With the cover excuses of controlling quality and the ethics of organ donation, it is unconscionable that this person should be put on the cadaver list JUST for exploring other options, especially if he was unaware of the politics involved. This is "playing God" and is just one more version of playing God that I fault the medical establishment for. Candidly, I think there are more ethical attorneys, head for head, than ethical physicians/surgeons. Sorry, but that's my humble opinion, and I've been an inside observer of both callings/professions.
The person who has been put on the cadaver list needs to get a good attorney; that should be abundantly easier, in both senses of the word "good," than finding a good doctor.
Most people's families are willing, with previous consent by the person whose life hangs in the balance, to follow their wishes: their wishes can even be put into a document other than something that hands the decision outright to the medical establishment via the "donor card," unless I'm mistaken. Why would there be such a thing as a "donor card" anyway? It seems to me it's just like the "motor voter" law -- a bum's rush approach that makes it convenient for the medical establishment to "grab" what they want when they want it. Granted (hopefully), most physicians will be sensitive to the family's wishes, but the donor card carries a lot of weight -- kind of like the weight Terri Schiavo's husband is wielding with his claim that Terri allegedly stated she "didn't want to `live like that'" -- interestingly, she is NOT vegetative as is being claimed, and probably she DID indicate that distinction -- haven't we all? -- but notice how the definition of "vegetative" has gotten twisted: who WOULDN'T want to NOT be kept alive in a true vegetative state? So we just change the definition of "vegetative" and -- with her "prior consent" -- we've got what we want. I don't know that this is what has happened in her case, but it sounds like it. The absolutely BIGGEST LIE in Terri's case may be how she came to be in that state, arguably (doubts have been case in her husband's direction); but, otherwise, without question the biggest lie is her state being described as "vegetative." Terri is no different than a lot of people with severe physical impairment (and sometimes mental) dating from birth injuries, who are subsequently managed and sometimes improve as Terri's parents wish to do with her over the course of a reasonable lifetime.
For myself, I will never sign a pre-condition donor card; I will put my wishes into the hands and control of my family (who have never stirred up any suspicions as to their character) verbally or via a document other than a donor card; they have an actual interest in me as an individual. Anything else is worse than naive, IMHO. I will certainly self-define "vegetative" so the medical establishment can't monkey with what I mean.
I wonder if Terri signed a donor card?
With the cover excuses of controlling quality and the ethics of organ donation, it is unconscionable that this person should be put on the cadaver list JUST for exploring other options, especially if he was unaware of the politics involved. This is "playing God" and is just one more version of playing God that I fault the medical establishment for. Candidly, I think there are more ethical attorneys, head for head, than ethical physicians/surgeons. Sorry, but that's my humble opinion, and I've been an inside observer of both callings/professions.
The person who has been put on the cadaver list needs to get a good attorney; that should be abundantly easier, in both senses of the word "good," than finding a good doctor.