Posted on 03/26/2005 10:22:59 AM PST by wto8585
BUMP I am having a similar arguement on another thread using the same documents, but your post is excellent. I will cut and paste and credit you.
The case of Michael Martin, a 41-year-old Michigan man who suffered head injuries as a result of a 1987 car-train accident, is currently before the Michigan Court of Appeals. Oral arguments are scheduled for 5/6/93.
Mary Martin, his wife and legal guardian who has been in contact with the Hemlock Society, wants to have his food and fluids (provided by gastrostomy tube) withdrawn.
The fact that Michael currently expresses the wish to live was ruled irrelevant by the judge because of Michael's "impaired condition."
Yet Michael has been assessed as a level five on the Los Amigos Ranchos scale, a scale used by rehabilitation doctors to assess a patient's improvement. A level five means that the patient is interactive and ready for intensive rehabilitation. Court testimony also indicated that Michael has an I.Q. (after the accident) ranging from between 61-73 -- the range for someone mildly retarded.
Following the Court of Appeals' remand order, probate Court Judge George A. Grieg changed his original ruling and agreed to allow Mary to order the removal of her husband's feeding tube. That ruling was then affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Michael, who is alert, plays card games, watches TV, loves country-western music, and appears content in his current nursing home, recently spelled out "Afraid" on his alphabet board. When the speech therapist asked him, "Are you afraid of somebody?" Michael shook his head no. "Are you afraid for somebody?" asked the therapist. Michael nodded yes. The therapist queried whether Michael was afraid for the nurses, aides, or his roommate. Michael indicated no. Was he afraid that someone would remove him from the nursing home? Yes.
post 100, was=were
I believe you have misunderstood me. It is irrelevant to this thread IMHO, simply because of the comparisons to the Nazis. I was not calling into question the legitimacy of the diagnosis either way. I do believe that more visibility and study are required as there have certainly been cases where full or partial recovery of these kinds of maladies have been effected. But even so, a person may not wish to go through it all. In any case, those who, on this forum, have thrown up red herrings such as comparisons to Hitler and Jesus Christ are doing more damage than good to the causes they espouse.
Again, I do not question your references at all. They appear well founded.
Did not Mary lose this case?
It is a healthy response to find this to be frightening and alien.
It is my fervent hope that this country will not descend to the levels which Germany did. Attachment studies of Germans have shown they place a far greater emphasis on autonomy and have much higher rates of insecure attachments with their children than Americans and those of other cultures. I have long believed this was the reason they were able to enthusiastically support the euthanasia of their own children.
Yes, eventually she did. But the point remains that a court sentenced a man to die who was playing card games
and using a wheelchair.
Amen!!!
As do I. And this is a cause well worth continuing. It will be far more successful with bringing to light (especially Congress) the extent of this. And it will be far more successful by not attaching those red herrings I referred to earlier. I applaud your efforts.
I don't believe we can ever exclude the courts from probate or custody issues, nor should we. But in this case, the appelate reviews seem to have accomplished the right thing. I doubt that such "protection" would have existed in Nazi Germany.
I disagree that this is not a historical issue. It is proven that if man does not learn from past mistakes he will again make them. Our world is again being setup for mass extermination of those unwanted by society. Right now it's abortion, those in coma's, PVS, etc. But in hitler's time he made all those around him believe he was doing the world a favor by eliminating the unwanted.
Current activities in the world are pointing to the setup for christians to be next. It happens now in other countries, and it is starting here.
First, the attempts to remove us of our guns. Second, removing all reference to God anywhere in public. Third, money, Digital Angel, implanting people to keep track of them.
How many people would really be upset to see a few million christians permanetly shutup in this country? The hostility towards anyone who has values in this country is unbelievable.
You were doing fine up until this last one. Donning a tinfoil hat and claiming that the athiests are going to permanently shut up a few million Christians is a bit over the top.
Perhaps instead of using screwballs like Randall Terry as a spokesman, and comparing Schiavo's plight either to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and/or the rampage of the Nazi Wehrmacht, all of which has made the MSM nothing short of giddy, a plan to get laws passed distinguishing between life support systems and simple feeding systems, and requiring written documentation to justify end of life decisions might be a little more productive.
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.