[rdeyes]

i think the US goverment is putting its nose into something that it has no right to be invovled in, if this woman's husband wants to have to feeding tube removed what business does the goverment have in trying to keep this woman alive, then to make matters worse they want her to appear in from the senate at some hearings.

feel free to share your thoughts on this matter

[ninty]

For once I completely agree with you.

Edit:

Oh yeah, anyone heard of the "Texas Futile Care Law"? No? Well, Bush signed a law in Texas when he was governor that grants hospitals the right to remove life support if an ethics comittie agrees with the treatment team, regardless of the patient's family's wishes.

Double standard here, no?

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/health ... t_sto.html

[Sniper101]

Double standard, In all reality and technically by law A spouse or parent has ruling say in that matter in my opinion. If the spouse does not want to see their signifigant other in that condition and or doesnt want to see them suffer any more than they have all the right to have the plug pulled with their signed consent. As same for parents if the spouse does not want the responsibility or there is no spouse the parents or in some cases legal guardians have all the say. The government should shut theyre damn mouths and the doctors, or those qualified to carry out the orders should.
In new hampshire the motto is Live Free or Die, if you are gunna be on life support for the rest of your life you arent exactly living free are you?

[Colonel]

My initial reaction to this was shock that the government would stick their noses in this case. After seeing the family interviewed I'm not so sure how I feel about it.

I guess where I'm coming from is a sense of empathy for the mother and sister that were interviewed. I have two daughters. Do I want some future husband to make decisions about their lives? In most cases I would have to face the fact that he would have the legal authority and that I no longer had much authority. But what if one of them were in a vegetative state like this girl, but I knew that they had been having marital trouble before it happened? Or that I suspected the husband of causing this state? (the sister claims that the cause of the coma was never investigated - sounded like she was suspicious of the husband) Does that change things? For me it does. I would be fighting just like this family to get control back. And if I had exhausted all avenues through the courts (which it looks like they have) I would probably go to Congress begging for help, just like they have.

So even though my inital reaction is that the government needs to stay our private lives - I must admit that I would be doing the same thing.

I also started having a problem with this when I found out it was not a simple case of turning off an artificial respirator. I think they have already done that and she was able to start breathing on her own. Now, in order for her to die, they have to starve her to death. That's a tough one to accept.

[Sgt>Stackem]

it boils down to one thing and one thng only. Did she request not to live under these circumstances. IF she told her husband she didnt want to be kept artifically alive, then pull it. If she didnt, then let her veg away. I wouldnt want to live like that and I have told my wife that. I would hate for my family to get involved with that decision. I dont believe the dad at all. I saw an interview with the husband and I believe him

[Colonel]

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":7b56b]it boils down to one thing and one thng only. Did she request not to live under these circumstances. [/quote:7b56b]

That is what I'm struggling with. The sister says that the only people that she supposedly told was her husband and "members of his family". It seems to me that if she felt that way about it, she would have told her own family at some point in her life.

The first time I heard of this story - maybe a year ago? - I saw the husband and believed him. I'm not so sure anymore. I don't think I've seen the father - or at least not recently.

I wouldn't wanna live that way either - but I would want to be sure that there was no chance of coming back before the plug was pulled. The doctors who know this case have conflicting opinions on the diagnosis.

[ninty]

http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/978a1Schiavo.pdf

[Colonel]

Thanks for the article ninty9. At the end it says that under 60% of those polled were even following the case closely. Only 26% of young Americans. I had the same reaction as those polled until I saw the sister interviewed by Larry King. I wonder if these folks would feel differently if they could talk to the family. Or if they thought about her lying on a bed hungry as hell, with her stomach cramping, for two weeks, or longer.

I really do have a problem with the government getting involved in most cases like this. And I wouldn't have any problem at all pulling the tube in this case if either the girl had written her wishes down, or if both sides of her family were in agreement that she wanted the tube pulled. The problem in my mind is whether or not her husband, who knew her for a few years and is now ready to re-marry (he's engaged) should make that decision or whether her parents, who gave birth to her, should make that decision.

I'm not sure there is a good answer to that. If she felt strongly enough about it she should have told everyone instead of just mentioning it in passing at a party or something.

[Sgt>Stackem]

Originally Posted by Colonel

. If she felt strongly enough about it she should have told everyone instead of just mentioning it in passing at a party or something.

if this case didnt make the news Im not sure if I would have discussed it with my wife. This case is a no win situation. She is in a sad state of life. I hope her suffering is over soon. When you see someone you love suffer for so long there comes a time when you know it is better for them to go, I hope all works out for the best ( I know it wont)

[Coleman]

i wish there was assisted suicide for some cases like this. If they pull the feeding tube and she can still feel, it would suck taking a few weeks to boil down to nothing and starve to death.

[Colonel]

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":8dc4f]if this case didnt make the news Im not sure if I would have discussed it with my wife.[/quote:8dc4f]

I talked to my wife and family a long time ago. I guess it has to do with the fact that the Karen Ann Quinlan case was big news when I was in High School.

FYI - for the youngsters ....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 15, 1975, Karen Quinlan lapsed into a coma, apparently as a result of consuming alcohol and drugs. Karen was brought unconscious to a hospital emergency room. After her condition stabilized, feeding required a nasogastric tube (artificial nutrition and hydration) and breathing required a respirator. She was eventually diagnosed as being in a permanent coma, i.e., a permanent vegetative state in current terminology. Karen Quinlan’s father sought court appointment as guardian of her person for the express purpose of authorizing removal of her respirator, whether or not she died as a consequence. He was opposed not only by Karen’s physicians but by the local prosecutor and the state attorney general.

The New Jersey trial court denied Mr. Quinlan’s request to be appointed guardian and also his request to terminate the use of the respirator, holding in effect that the decision was solely that of the attending physicians acting in accordance with prevailing medical standards. It rejected the argument that there is a viable legal distinction between ordinary and extraordinary means to sustain life. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the decision and granted Mr. Quinlan’s request. Karen’s physicians gradually weaned her from the respirator during May of 1976. She continued to breathe on her own. Her father did not want artificial nutrition and hydration stopped, though the Supreme Court gave permission for all life-support to be withdrawn. Karen lived another ten years. In its considerations regarding this case, the New Jersey Supreme Court advocated giving decision-making authority to a hospital ethics committee (which were still largely non-existent at the time). As a result of this case, ethics committees grew in number and debate arose regarding their appropriate role and authority. Most experts now agree that any authority an ethics committee has is limited and must appropriately respect the decision-making authority that properly belongs to patients, surrogates, and care-providers. [Source: In Re Quinlan, 355 A.2d. (N.J. 1976).]

[Stammer]

What bothers me about this is the fact the family wants to keep her alive. Why? She has been in a vegetated state for the last 15 years. She has no chance of recovering, the video the entertainment media shows of her in the bed is four years old, since that time she has probably even regressed further.

On a side note I found it funny how they inedited her and marked her as a protected witness.

PS -
Veggy Woman, and Steriods in Fagball > Means for war. GG

[ninty]

Discuss it with a lawyer to put a clause in your will that states if you get into that state they can pull the plug. If it's in writing, your good to go.

I really don't like seeing this in the news. Its none of my business. It's not the governments business. The family should have enough competence to decide for themselves what they want to do instead of arguing through the courts and government.

[negative]

I heard the husband was abusive--is this true? If so then this may change the whole situation.

[Stammer]

Originally Posted by ninty9

I really don't like seeing this in the news. Its none of my business. It's not the governments business. The family should have enough competence to decide for themselves what they want to do instead of arguing through the courts and government.

beer: