Terri Schiavo: A Deadly Decision
TERRI SCHIAVO was in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) for the past 14 years.
She could breathe by herself. She was not 'plugged' into any machine or respirator.
Although severely brain damaged, she was not brain dead.
Although not in pain, she was capable of interaction. What level was a hotly debated topic between her husband and her parents.
Also bitterly contested was the possiblity of recovery.
What Terri clearly couldn't do was feed herself. A feeding tube was vital to her survival.
A Deadly Decision
Let her live or let her die?
Terri left no living will. Absent that, the patient-executed DNR order and the durable Attorney of Power, there are mechanism for decisions by second parties.
The deadly decison ultimately rested with her husband.
Now, American law does not permit actively causing death.
However, what is permitted, is 'passive euthanasia', that is, "allowing to die". The framework for 'passive euthanasia' comes from an impressive body of case law and state statutes developed since Quinlan (1976).
"Allowing to die" is the only legally protected alternative to maximal treatment in the US. It involves witholding and/or withdrawal of artificial nutrition or hydration from a person in a PVS state.
Mercy or Murder?
Contrary to misconception, the removal of Terri's feeding tube to "allow her to die" merely permits the natural process of dying. It is not considered "euthanasia or mercy killing as it is commonly known".
Euthanasia or mercy killing is not allowed in the US. It amounts to "assisted suicide". So for those who think the critical factor is that Terri is in a PVS or that "she would never have wanted to live that way", an active form of euthanasia is declared by the law to be murder irrespective of the wishes or the condition of the party who is sent to his/her death.
Before March 18, Terri Schiavo was clearly not dying. She was still alive and breathing.
After they pulled the feeding tube, she died of starvation and dehydration. She was starved to death over an exended period of 13 days.
Here's something to think about:
The one thing Terri couldn't do for her own survival was to feed herself.
If by common-law definition, starving oneself is suicide, isn't starving (by inaction) another homicide?
Do you think they treated Jesus better?
She could breathe by herself. She was not 'plugged' into any machine or respirator.
Although severely brain damaged, she was not brain dead.
Although not in pain, she was capable of interaction. What level was a hotly debated topic between her husband and her parents.
Also bitterly contested was the possiblity of recovery.
What Terri clearly couldn't do was feed herself. A feeding tube was vital to her survival.
A Deadly Decision
Let her live or let her die?
Terri left no living will. Absent that, the patient-executed DNR order and the durable Attorney of Power, there are mechanism for decisions by second parties.
The deadly decison ultimately rested with her husband.
Now, American law does not permit actively causing death.
However, what is permitted, is 'passive euthanasia', that is, "allowing to die". The framework for 'passive euthanasia' comes from an impressive body of case law and state statutes developed since Quinlan (1976).
"Allowing to die" is the only legally protected alternative to maximal treatment in the US. It involves witholding and/or withdrawal of artificial nutrition or hydration from a person in a PVS state.
Mercy or Murder?
Contrary to misconception, the removal of Terri's feeding tube to "allow her to die" merely permits the natural process of dying. It is not considered "euthanasia or mercy killing as it is commonly known".
Euthanasia or mercy killing is not allowed in the US. It amounts to "assisted suicide". So for those who think the critical factor is that Terri is in a PVS or that "she would never have wanted to live that way", an active form of euthanasia is declared by the law to be murder irrespective of the wishes or the condition of the party who is sent to his/her death.
Before March 18, Terri Schiavo was clearly not dying. She was still alive and breathing.
After they pulled the feeding tube, she died of starvation and dehydration. She was starved to death over an exended period of 13 days.
Here's something to think about:
The one thing Terri couldn't do for her own survival was to feed herself.
If by common-law definition, starving oneself is suicide, isn't starving (by inaction) another homicide?
Do you think they treated Jesus better?
posted by percolator | 1:12 PM
5 Comments:
"If by common-law definition, starving oneself is suicide, isn't starving (by inaction) another homicide?"
good point there. i will link this post of yours to mine.
thanks for dropping by my blog, percolator. (such a peculiar name. what does that mean?)
lucia,
Think about how a coffee percolator extracts oils and flavour. It works by taking coffee and reheating it and throwing it over the grounds over and over and over again.
Thank you for visiting this newborn blog, which is very much a work-in-progress.
Percolating, you might say. :)
I'm not a Christian but it has always been clear to me that the abolishing of the Ten Commandments monument and the removal of Roy Moore does not auger well. How could it when a rootless self agended leftist/liberal subversives set out to destroy Judeo-Christian roots and its moral anchor? Their greatest source of strength comes from an idiotarian and tyrannical Judiciary - that's why they would blindly support its dismal decision.
~wits0~
wits0,
A bit more on the sophistry of "letting her die" instead of "killing her".
It was contended that "the intelligent line does not fall between action and inaction, but rather between those forms of inaction that consist of abstaining from 'ordinary' care and those that consist of abstaining from 'excessive' or 'heroic' measures."
It is just so in Terri Schiavo's case: No respirator can be "unplugged" for a quick death caused by her body's inability to perform its basic functions. She was the recipient of no extraordinary measures beyond hydration, nutrition, and hygiene. Her death is being brought about by the failure to meet these ORDINARY STANDARDS OF CARE.
After all the praying is done, actions need be taken. Here's a good piece of good news:
http://www.theempirejournal.com/04020503_formal_complaint_filed.htm
and
http://www.terrisfight.org/
Technically and morally the action taken by the Florida Court at the insistence of Michael Schiavo are indefensible(refer to comments in Jogalong blog).
The rogue and idiot senator who first liken a feeding tube to a repirator in '98 is a real idiotarian.
A feeding tube ina hospital is as common as the common drinking straw. Worse is Judge Greer even specifically refused attempt to orally feed Terri despite reports that she was previously able to swallow and manage her own saliva(iow was needing no usage of suckers).
The impure motive and bias are so apparent. Activist Judge Greer with his personal conflict of interests should long have reclused himself from the case. There is Judicial arrogance and tyranny there.
Felos the lawyer lies like mad. He is also an unproven mystical occultist wannabe....something quite dangerous to be. No amount of MSM supported spinning will alter the existent facts.
~wits0~
Post a Comment
<< Home