I've changed my mind about Terri Schiavo

[ilya]

I was in the "let her die" camp from the beginning, and at this point that's clearly what's going to happen, but seeing the effect this has had on her parents makes me think that they should have kept the feeding tube in, if not on taxpayer money, then through some other private arrangement with her parents.
Terri is beyond having preferences, but her parents are not. And the psychological harm to her parents from letting her die seems to me much greater than the psychological benefit to her husband.

I'm taking for granted that Terri's not consious in some limited way. If she were, I think her preference would take precedence. If it could be established that her preference was death, then I think the most humane course of action would be to euthanize her in her sleep.

I still think that if they're gonna let her die, they should euthanize her, on the off chance that our science is wrong and she actually is capable of suffering right now.

[Edge34]

The "psychological harm" to her parents is what's dragged this ridiculous story on for FIFTEEN YEARS.

At some point, reality needs to set in. Her parents, in their minds if not their hearts, know their daughter died, for all intents and purposes, 15 years ago. They want to keep her body around for their own enjoyment, and that is incredibly selfish in my opinion. Its awful that they have to outlive their daughter, but unfortunately life doesn't always work out how you hope it does.

Not to mention, the "psychological harm" is immaterial in this subject. Its between her legal guardian (her husband) and her doctor. At least, it should have been...

Her family claims religious rights - they should know that there's a better place for her than the hell she must be in now, in whatever limited form of "life" she has left.

[daryn]

like most political issues, this one is pretty easy if you just use common sense and think it through.

basically, we don't know what she wants, because of her state. the only thing we can go on is the word of her legal guardian, in other words, her husband.

he says she would want to die. so let her die. clearly people have a right to die if they want to.

[siccjay]

She is basically dead, you are right. She doesn't have a clue what is going on. I think her parents are loving dragging this out.

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
Terri is beyond having preferences, but her parents are not. And the psychological harm to her parents from letting her die seems to me much greater than the psychological benefit to her husband.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just ridiculous. They've had forever to deal with this. Right now, they're living in their own little world. It's not like her death is coming as some great surprise to them.

Sure they might be disappointed now, but in the long run, it will be best for them because the sooner they start dealing with this, the sooner their lives will return to normal.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
She is basically dead, you are right. She doesn't have a clue what is going on. I think her parents are loving dragging this out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt they're loving it, but its pretty [censored] up that they look like they can't come to terms with reality after 15 years.

[daryn]

also, am i the only one who is pissed at the constant mispronunciation of her last name? it looks italian, and if it is, they are totally butchering it.

[The Yugoslavian]

Yeap, I'd do Terri Schiavo too.

Good call...

Yugoslav

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
also, am i the only one who is pissed at the constant mispronunciation of her last name? it looks italian, and if it is, they are totally butchering it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shy-vo?

Ski-ah-vo?

[Bluffoon]

[ QUOTE ]
I was in the "let her die" camp from the beginning, and at this point that's clearly what's going to happen, but seeing the effect this has had on her parents makes me think that they should have kept the feeding tube in, if not on taxpayer money, then through some other private arrangement with her parents.
Terri is beyond having preferences, but her parents are not. And the psychological harm to her parents from letting her die seems to me much greater than the psychological benefit to her husband.

I'm taking for granted that Terri's not consious in some limited way. If she were, I think her preference would take precedence. If it could be established that her preference was death, then I think the most humane course of action would be to euthanize her in her sleep.

I still think that if they're gonna let her die, they should euthanize her, on the off chance that our science is wrong and she actually is capable of suffering right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

She is not a "thing" to be kept around to make someone feel better. Her parents are idiots and they better be kept alive way past any semblence of a useful life and I hope they suffer plenty.

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
also, am i the only one who is pissed at the constant mispronunciation of her last name? it looks italian, and if it is, they are totally butchering it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shy-vo?

Ski-ah-vo?

[/ QUOTE ]

At this point, I'd say the best way to pronounce her is dead.

[xpander]

Non e un nome italiano. Pretty sure.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
Ski-ah-vo?

[/ QUOTE ]

[xpander]

[ QUOTE ]
Ski-ah-vo?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's italian, it's this one.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ski-ah-vo?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I thought the first time I read it...just kinda adapted to the way everybody on TV said it. Its already a useless argument, why make it worse by bringing how to say her name into it? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[daryn]

read my first post, i solved it.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
like most political issues, this one is pretty easy if you just use common sense and think it through.

basically, we don't know what she wants, because of her state. the only thing we can go on is the word of her legal guardian, in other words, her husband.

he says she would want to die. so let her die. clearly people have a right to die if they want to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I support the right to die, broadly speaking. And I would have made just the same arguement in this particular case until recently. However I'm no longer certain that Terri's past preferences are relevant to making a decision about her current fate. If we agree that she is currently incapable of having preferences, then honoring her past preference would be akin to honoring a dead person's will. In some cases, as for example in questions of inheritance, there are good, socially useful reasons to do this. Here however it's not clear what socially useful goals honoring the "dead" Terri's will would serve.

Moreover, even if we were to agree that the best thing to do would be to honor her past preference, that preference isn't as clear as you imply. She never made a living will, so the evidence for her preference is basically hearsay. "Hearsay from a single interested party" doesn't sound very legally compelling to me.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
like most political issues, this one is pretty easy if you just use common sense and think it through.

basically, we don't know what she wants, because of her state. the only thing we can go on is the word of her legal guardian, in other words, her husband.

he says she would want to die. so let her die. clearly people have a right to die if they want to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I support the right to die, broadly speaking. And I would have made just the same arguement in this particular case until recently. However I'm no longer certain that Terri's past preferences are relevant to making a decision about her current fate. If we agree that she is currently incapable of having preferences, then honoring her past preference would be akin to honoring a dead person's will. In some cases, as for example in questions of inheritance, there are good, socially useful reasons to do this. Here however it's not clear what socially useful goals honoring the "dead" Terri's will would serve.

Moreover, even if we were to agree that the best thing to do would be to honor her past preference, that preference isn't as clear as you imply. She never made a living will, so the evidence for her preference is basically hearsay. "Hearsay from a single interested party" doesn't sound very legally compelling to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the catch - it shouldn't HAVE to be "legally compelling".

This entire thing would be a lot easier if her parents would accept reality. Her guardian - Michael Schiavo - had control of the situation. Once the lawyers and everything got brought in, the entire situation got shot straight to hell.

And of course her past preferences are relevant to making the current call - its just about the only thing that's relevant. And in that regard, the proper thing to do (the only thing to do) was to have the choice made between her doctor and legal guardian (as much of a broken record as this sounds like).

[daryn]

i would say that her husband was in a pretty good position to know what she would have wanted, and as her legal guardian, he has the rights baby. end of story. we have laws for a reason, so there's not 2 parties bickering back and forth and a dumb judge has to decide.

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
also, am i the only one who is pissed at the constant mispronunciation of her last name?

[/ QUOTE ]
no.
[ QUOTE ]
it looks italian, and if it is, they are totally butchering it.

[/ QUOTE ]
yes. yes they are.

[ilya]

I really don't understand where this brusque hostility towards her parents is coming from. They may be wrong, but they are obviously suffering terribly. If I was a parent, I think I'd find it very hard to let a stranger decide my daughter's fate or speak for her preferences, even if that stranger was her husband. I realize that Terri has been out of it for many years, but I still think it's hard-hearted to heap contempt on her parents for refusing to give up hope. Even if they are wrong, I think they deserve pity and sympathy - not anger and contempt.

[daryn]

yeah being mad at the parents makes no sense.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand where this brusque hostility towards her parents is coming from. They may be wrong, but they are obviously suffering terribly. If I was a parent, I think I'd find it very hard to let a stranger decide my daughter's fate or speak for her preferences, even if that stranger was her husband. I realize that Terri has been out of it for many years, but I still think it's hard-hearted to heap contempt on her parents for refusing to give up hope. Even if they are wrong, I think they deserve pity and sympathy - not anger.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pity and sympathy ended at the decade mark.

Its clear that they're just to the point of being selfish and/or delusional, neither of which I have a lot of compassion for. Death is part of life, as any Catholic family understands. Yeah, it blows ass that their daughter had to have this happen to her, but that's just it - it happens. Tragic. But at some point, reality needs to set in.

[pshreck]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah being mad at the parents makes no sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that its stupid, but I can understand it. Some people think they want her alive according to some blind christian beliefs that say they will go to hell if they allow this to happen.

I dont think that is the case, but if it is, then I would hold some contempt for them.

[daryn]

you would hold some contempt for them solely due to their beliefs? that's even dumber.

[pshreck]

[ QUOTE ]
you would hold some contempt for them solely due to their beliefs? that's even dumber.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I was implying that I would hold contempt if they werent making the decision based on what they thought was right for her or her well being, but just a blind belief in what they think they have to do, in order to achieve personal salvation.

I have seen both my parents make the same argument, and they have no other reason than its what the priest tells them.

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand where this brusque hostility towards her parents is coming from. They may be wrong, but they are obviously suffering terribly. If I was a parent, I think I'd find it very hard to let a stranger decide my daughter's fate or speak for her preferences, even if that stranger was her husband. I realize that Terri has been out of it for many years, but I still think it's hard-hearted to heap contempt on her parents for refusing to give up hope. Even if they are wrong, I think they deserve pity and sympathy - not anger.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's like this.

Say you have a friend who has just been dumped by his girlfriend. After the breakup, your friend becomes very depressed and is always talking about how she just made a mistake and that they will eventually get back together. You doubt this is true, but don't have evidence to prove otherwise. You allow your friend time to grieve and don't try and talk him out of this belief.

However, as time passes it becomes clear that his girlfriend has left him forever, yet your friend continues to believe the contrary. He refuses to even consider dating anybody else because of the possibility that they might get back together.

You need to allow your friend time, but at some point, you need to start telling him that it's never gonna happen. He needs to move on with his life and stop dwelling on this past relationship. If you're truly his friend, you'll recognize that the best thing for him is some tough love.

I think that Shiavo's parents need to move on. They've been dwelling on the loss of their daughter for 15 years and haven't moved forward. It's not hostility, in fact, it's exactly the opposite. I think their daughter's death would be the best thing for them.

[pshreck]

Your analogy doesnt really apply.

Her parents think she is alive now. Its not like they think she is dead and may or may not come back to life.

[The Yugoslavian]

Dude....it's never gonna happen.

Seriously, let her go.

Yugoslav
PS I still agree with the overarching theme of this thread...I too would do Terri...it's clearly the only play given the situation...

[Bukwurm]

[ QUOTE ]
Moreover, even if we were to agree that the best thing to do would be to honor her past preference, that preference isn't as clear as you imply. She never made a living will, so the evidence for her preference is basically hearsay. "Hearsay from a single interested party" doesn't sound very legally compelling to me.

[/ QUOTE ]
This post might ramble. I apologize in advance. But, here goes:

Terri has been dead, almost literally, for 15 years. Her husband went to see her daily for years, even after hope died. If her parents had let her go when the doctors first said it was hopeless, he would have been long widowed, and long remarried. Instead, he has stayed legally married to Terri, so that he could try to grant her wishes. He gets lambasted because he is living with another woman, and has children. I personally see absolutely nothing wrong with that. He shouldn't be condemned to monkhood, because his inlaws refuse to acknowledge he is the person with the responsibility of deciding her fate. But, to legally avoid that, he would have to give up that legal responsibility, and keep Terri condemned to what I think is a living hell.

I said this on another board, and I repeat it. If I am ever in the same situation as Terri, I hope my family will love me enough to pull the tube out - if it was ever inserted in the first place. If one of my daughters is ever in Terri's shoes, I hope I am strong enough to do what she would want, no matter how much it hurt me.

True love, I believe, sometimes means making hard decisions. I think Terri's parents have become incapable of making the hardest one - when to let go. Is it right for a parent to outlive his/her children? It's certainly not the norm - and I can't imagine the pain of losing one of my children. But, it happens. Look at the picture of Queen Mother Mary at the funeral of her son George VI, if you want to see the anguish of a mother whose child has died first (it's the first photo that comes to mind, although there are many of them).

Legal guardianship is there for a reason - one of the main ones is being the "sincle interested party" that has to make the tough decisions. Her parents are trying to make a mockery of the law, because they cannot let go. It's an almost pathological attitude, in my opinion. They are throwing away their money, they are forcing Michael to throw away his, and they are depriving their other children/relatives of love and energy that should be devoted to the living.

Let her go in peace. She earned it, many years ago.

[Joe Pesci]

Just put her head in a [censored] vice.

[tolbiny]

"Hearsay from a single interested party" doesn't sound very legally compelling to me."

As i understand it, both Micheals sister and brother in law witnessed her statement that she would not want to be kept alive.

[Bukwurm]

[ QUOTE ]
If I was a parent, I think I'd find it very hard to let a stranger decide my daughter's fate or speak for her preferences, even if that stranger was her husband. ... Even if they are wrong, I think they deserve pity and sympathy - not anger and contempt.

[/ QUOTE ]
First, part of a marriage ceremony is the "who gives this woman in marriage?" A holdover from the days when ALL rights and responsibilities for a woman were passed, literally, to her husband. It's not quite as bad now, thank goodness. However, it is still the forming of a NEW family - the aquisition of a son-in-law - ie, by law, a new member of the family - not a stranger. That new member has first dibs, from then on, "til death (or divorce) do us part."

Her parents HAVE NO RIGHTS! None!

I would have had a lot more pity and sympathy 15 years ago, or 10, or even five. I would even have empathized at first. I think I still pity them, but mainly because they have lost touch with reality. I do feel a great deal of anger, as they have made a media circus of something private, and made a mockery of their daughter's life - and death.

What about the few seconds of video they so carefully edited out of hours of video?? That is the ONLY part of all videos ever taken that shows anything that looks at all like a response. In context, it's obvious how random it is. So, they cut it out, and went to the press, because they had finally realized they had no legal recourse. They hoped to get public opinion on their side, and use that as a tool to get what they wanted, despite judges having already said that it seemed clear TERRI never wanted to be a living vegetable. (In other words, it's not just "one interested party." Others also testified...)

Contempt? Well, if their behavior doesn't show "contempt of court," I don't know what does. I feel contempt for that, and for their inability to accept the truth.

So, I still have all of it, probably, except empathy, as I cannot "feel with" them at all - only FOR them..

[ilya]

Terri Schiavo is not in a "living hell." As far as I understand it, she's incapable of experiencing anything at all. She's not aware of her surroundings, she's not aware of her body, she's not aware that she's not aware of any of these things. It's not like she's lying there watching people come and go, but unable to communicate with them. If that was the case, and there was indeed no hope for recovery, then, yes, I think the right thing to do would be to let her die. However, that doesn't seem to be the case. I mean, nothing anyone can do will make her life the slightest bit better or worse. And that includes killing her. As you have said yourself, she has been essentially dead for 15 years.
Well, since it's absolutely the same to her (to the extent that anything can be "to her" right now) whether she lives or dies, who cares what she might once have wanted. It doesn't matter - she's just not around to want/not want it anymore. There's really no reason for Michael to get so worked up about it. It's as though his wife told him that she wanted to be cremated after she died, and now that she's dead he's getting upset because her parents want to bury her instead. She's not around to mind!
On the other hand, it's clearly very important to Terri's parents that her body continue to "live." Whether or not they have any rational basis for believing that she may one day recover (and surely they have *some* rational basis for believing this -- every decade, the advance of science makes things that previously seemed impossible seem routine), the fact is that the continued existence of Terri's body imposes no burden on anybody. Not on Terri herself, since she's dead. Not on other members of the Schindler family: while Terri is taking up a lot of their time recently, over the past 10 years there's been no reason to think that the Schindlers needed to neglect the living to attend to Terri. In fact, their devotion for Terri - or her memory, if you wish - suggests that they're loving people who take care of their family. Nor is Terri's care a burden to taxpayers, since the malpractice settlement pays for her care. If that were not sufficient, I don't doubt that Terri's parents would be able to raise the funds from private sources.

I certainly agree with you that there's no reason Michael Schiavo shouldn't take up with another woman and start another family. He's one person who could certainly benefit from your advice about focusing one's energies on the living. Why does he keep worrying about a woman he insists is brain-dead and unable to experience pain in any form (unable to experience anything whatsoever, in fact), instead of devoting all his time to his new female companion and children? After all they're very much capable of feeling pain and pleasure right now.

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
you would hold some contempt for them solely due to their beliefs? that's even dumber.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, I hold some contempt for her parents based on the fact that they can't even pronounce their own name correctly.

[jason_t]

Linky (http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/).

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
Linky (http://durrrrr.blogspot.com/).

[/ QUOTE ]

So wrong. And yet....so wonderful.

[Bukwurm]

[ QUOTE ]
Terri Schiavo is not in a "living hell." As far as I understand it, she's incapable of experiencing anything at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
And that's not a living hell? It fits my description. If I knew in advance something like this would happen to me and my family, I'd try suicide the night before.

In fact, as good Catholics, her parents are delaying her entrance to Purgatory, even though her soul probably no longer inhabits her body. It's unable to even START redemption til after Purgatory, and so they are, if they believe in the hereafter, delaying her entry to heaven. And, if you believe in souls, then maybe hers is still floating around that room - unable to reenter the body, but unable to move on.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, since it's absolutely the same to her (to the extent that anything can be "to her" right now) whether she lives or dies, who cares what she might once have wanted. It doesn't matter - she's just not around to want/not want it anymore. There's really no reason for Michael to get so worked up about it. It's as though his wife told him that she wanted to be cremated after she died, and now that she's dead he's getting upset because her parents want to bury her instead. She's not around to mind!

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, if she wants to be cremated, and the parents bury her, that a huge posthumous violation of her rights. Your next argument would be "Why pay attention to her will? After all, she isn't around to object any more!" Fallacious reasoning, my friend.
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, it's clearly very important to Terri's parents that her body continue to "live." Whether or not they have any rational basis for believing that she may one day recover (and surely they have *some* rational basis for believing this -- every decade, the advance of science makes things that previously seemed impossible seem routine), the fact is that the continued existence of Terri's body imposes no burden on anybody.

[/ QUOTE ]
First - I can't see future medicine ever returning electrical impulses to a brain that has lost them - not and have the impulses ever be the same again. No - I see absolutely NO rational basis for this belief - in any of the materials I've read.

Second, I disagree about "no burden." There is a huge burden on Michael, legally, ethically, and morally, and he is, and has been, doing his best to operate under that burden.

Third, the only reason her "living" could be "clearly very important to Terri's parents" is that they have something pathological in their make up. Otherwise, they would accept everything said by all physicians who have reviewed ALL the data, and let that poor tortured body go.

Are our medical resources so infinite they can be wasted like this? I don't think so. Give them to someone who needs them.
[ QUOTE ]
Nor is Terri's care a burden to taxpayers, since the malpractice settlement pays for her care. If that were not sufficient, I don't doubt that Terri's parents would be able to raise the funds from private sources.

[/ QUOTE ]
The malpractice money is GONE. G-O-N-E GONE. In fact, the legal battles started after Mr. Schindler demanded some of it (per Michael) or asked for some of it (per Mr. Schindler). Since then, it has disappeared into medical bills, and, of the "loss of consortium" portion - that went to Michael for losing his wife - into legal fees, that were used in order to try to keep Terri's wishes in the forefront. He's dipping into his own funds now, just as her parents are dipping into funds they would otherwise have available for their other children.

As far as Michael moving on. My own personal take is: as long as she is alive, there is no will for probate, ergo, all joint property is joint. If he divorces her, her parents get half of it (including anything he might have earned/bought/invested, etc, over the past 15 years), as guardianship devolves to them. Once she dies LEGALLY, then her will can be probated, and the legal separation of goods will be finalized - as it should have been. After seven years, a person who disappears is considered legally dead, so that wills can be probated, etc. Her parents have already delayed that step by eight years.

Michael seems to have truly loved her, and has done/is doing what she wanted.

Earlier, you said that was the most important thing - before you realized there were several people who vouched that this was what she wanted.

Now, you say it doesn't matter what she wanted? Again, that's like saying her will doesn't matter, any posthumous bequests she wanted, etc.

In the absence of a legal document, her legal guardian has the automatic final say. That is the law. That is the law her parents have been trying to violate. That is the law you say should be violated, because it matters to them... I'd love to see you use that in a court somewhere, for any violation of the law, not just this one.

Her parents have gone overboard, and are living in a fantasy world. They don't need someone saying that their world is important enough to them they can impose it on the rest of the world. They need to wake and smell the coffee.

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
There's really no reason for Michael to get so worked up about it. It's as though his wife told him that she wanted to be cremated after she died, and now that she's dead he's getting upset because her parents want to bury her instead. She's not around to mind!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd see this as adequate reason for him to be upset. (Note that I truly haven't paid much attention to this case, and don't care that much either way, but I'd say that if she told her husband what she wants done in such a situation it should be done.)

I will say I'm fairly disgusted by our Congress deciding to waste its time on demanding that this case be given further consideration. Even the people Delay et. al. think they're pandering to see through this one, from the numbers I've seen. And I guess I should apologize for posting something in OOT that should go in the Politics forum. I'm a sane person who believes that there's merit in arguments coming from both the liberal and conservative points of view, and reading that forum's convinced me that I'm not welcome there. I still manage to feel morally superior to the trolls who wander over here from that forum (BGC, I'm looking at you.)

On a side note, I'm also disgusted by the congressional hearings on steroids. I'd think their time could be better spent. But from what I gather, that conversation's already been had.

[Edge34]

Ilya,

The 2 main doctors not hired by either Michael or her parents have agreed that there is no hope for Terri's recovery. Thanks to the selfish, delusional actions of the Schindler family, as someone already mentioned, they have made a farce out of not only the legal system, but also their daughter and her life/death.

This matter should have been resolved 5, 10 years ago. The best thing for ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, as cold as this is going to sound, would be Terri's merciful death. Especially with her Christian faith, there's certainly a much better place waiting for her when this is all over. The parents have lost connection with reality, Michael's name is being slandered all over the country, and for what? For the death of someone who was loved by both the parents and her husband - something that happens numerous times every day in the United States and around the world.

You may ask what benefit comes from her death...I ask what benefit comes from her "life" such as it is. After 15 years of looking at her body in that bed, nothing's going to get better for the parents, and its only a matter of time until she gets some other kind of disease that her non-existent immune system won't be able to beat.

[ilya]

I think you misunderstood much of what I said. However it's 3:20 am here and I really don't feel like doing a point-by-point right now. I'll try to reply tomorrow.

[siccjay]

http://img203.exs.cx/img203/3784/bernies310lc.jpg

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
Your analogy doesnt really apply.

Her parents think she is alive now. Its not like they think she is dead and may or may not come back to life.

[/ QUOTE ]

My analogy is perfect. You realize that the relationship is dead. Your friend believes it is not. You are doing what needs to be done to help your friend understand that the relationship is dead and help him get on with his life.

The point of the analogy wasn't actually anything to do with life or death, it was that I don't feel hostility towards the parents, and that believe they would be better off if she was dead.

P.S. I was in the middle of posting this hours ago when my internet died.

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude....it's never gonna happen.

Seriously, let her go.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you think this needed to be said years ago Yugo? Some friend you are.