Terri Schiavo

I agree with Congress. Not giving her food and drink is a terrible way to solve the problem. Either kill her humanely or let her live!

can people talk to me?????

Are you needy Megan?

come on you havnt read my HI !!!!

What's the prob Megan?

i just need a friend ok ?

Megan went to Japan and she needs to talk about it. Tell us about Japan Megan? Did you meet any Japanese people?

yes i did , ha ha !!

It seems to me that 'life' is a technicality where she's concerned. Quality of life is the important thing. No quality = no life to me.

who me ? yes your right (if you are talking to me)

so what has you lot been upto if i may ask !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how are you all

I think the politicians are using this to further their own aims here and not so concerned about the outcome as they may claim. Preaching to the choir. Furthering their own agenda’s within the conservative side of the house, their argument is two-faced. The republicans in America preach big government staying out of the private lives of citizens, yet they turn and do an about-face on this issue and try to overstep their authority with attempts to pull the rug from the judicial branch. The State and Federal judges put an end to it. They give the parents of Terri false hope and play to a sympathetic ear, when in fact they should shut-the-fuck up and let the courts do what the law says to do. They have issues with “activist” judges, when in fact they are far more activist than any democratic judge in the Federal judiciary. Talking out of both sides of their mouth, politics as usual, only now they can’t hide from it. Her husband has been attacked by talking heads on television from every crack of the religious right and the only person protecting his rights and Terri’s rights against an activist Conservative-Congress is the Judiciary. I swear, I’ll vote to expel every incumbent Republican from public office in every election I vote in from now until the day I die. Fascist fuckers. (does that sound extreme enough)

extreme !!!

So, Megan...go over to your Hi forum and I'll talk to you about Japanese people, okay?

ok

My brother-in-law always said that quality of life was at lot more important than quantity. Just before he died, almost six months ago, he said to me "Everything I've ever said was a load of crap." Since he used to say much the same sort of rubbish as Missi about God and The Royal Family I just though 'clarity at last'. However he went on to elaborate saying that despite the constant terrible pain, his great difficulty in breathing and inability to do anything but lie on his back and fight for life - he just wanted to continue. I told him not to worry - that God wasn't going to let him off that easily. A few minutes later he just stopped breathing, no railing against the dying of the light, used up, empty, everything gone fighting the pain and the inevitable.

Your brother-in-law was right the first time round. EVERYONE has a change of heart when they see the grim reaper at the door, but that just clouds their good judgement at the last minute. It's part of human nature to fight for life but that is no help when considering life and death calmly and sensibly. God and the boil family have fuck all to do with this discussion, mykle, but if you want to bring old differences into every discussion, I don't mind. Your God doesn't exist in my world and the wanky windsors are just that to me. OK?

i hope he doesn't mention Iraq again.

FLASHY! This ISN'T Fawlty Towers. DON'T mention the war!

It seems to me that in this case, the doctors and the family are in agreement, it is the Christian Right that want to restore feeding. I'll tell you a story about doctors being right that might alter your view, George. I represented a kid, who was in care and slipped in a bathtub and injured his right eye. Nasty injury, negligence claim blah, blah. More significantly, the doctors told us that if his right eye was not removed, the damage would spread down the optic nerve and he would be completely blind in both eyes. The child did not want his eye removed and neither did his parents - he was utterly horrified at the idea, and the surgery was quite icky. We had to go to the High Court and got opinions from six doctors, all of whom said, we are 99.99% sure that his right eye needs to be removed or he will go blind in his left eye and the operation needs to be done immediately. The Court granted permission for the operation to be done. Four weeks later I saw the kid, who had two eyes. The doctors changed their mind. The sight in the left eye was fine. This story of course does not illustrate that doctors are always wrong, but that even top-class experts who are utterly certain can sometimes be wrong. If she expressed a DNR preference to her family, then that should be respected. If you are Christian right and you believe that what the doctors and the family are doing is wrong and sinful, then let God sort them out when they get to the gates of Heaven.

I don't buy allowing a Doctor making the final decision. That sounds sota creepy to me actually. This one is a battle between the parents and her husband. Her husband claims she didn't want to be kept on life support, her parents claim that she should continue to live as a vegetable. The courts here have long recognized a surviving spouse as having the primary authority in determining these matters. Husband/Wife trumps Mother/Father according to law. They've been fighting over it for 15 years. The point was that she expressed to her husband, prior to going into this vegative state, she didn't want to be kept on life support. Why somebody that loves you would keep you on tubes and in a bed for 15 years, against my wish, is beyond my comprehension. These parents are pathetic and sad, they can't let go. One of the top politicians Tom Delay, leading the charge to keep her alive made the decision to allow his own father to die under similar circumstances years ago.

Didn't I hear some controvery about $1 millon settlement? Something about hospital costs and most of the money having gone in legal fees.

Yea, there was an award some years ago. Wonder what that has to do with all of this... ?

But Emily - what if there is no God?

or...what if there was a God and he didn't give a shit.

So, RIG, instead of allowing her life to end, which is all our destiny, you would prolong her squalid existence by forcing food into a vegetable body, allowing her to to exist in our presence for the benefit of whom?

Here's a deep question.... Were you afraid to be born?

I'm surprised that the issue of 'playing God' hasn't surfaced on this subject. I always feel slightly queesy (How do you spell that? It's not in my dictionary) when I hear the debate about voluntary euthanasia, and people are playing God. Surely one is also playing God by keeping people artificially alive?

What about those that don't believe in GOD. I could never play GOD, he doesn't exist in my mind, only in others.

If you think about it Stix, most forms of medicine involve playing God to some extent - as always, it's how far do you go!

Which God are we talking about here?

I pray to the traffic light God every day, but somehow I don't see him taking an interest in this. Only my opinion though.

In this case I think it might be Shiva, Denver.

The Hindu's invented traffic signals? RITA, straighten us out on this.

>> ...The doctors changed their mind... << What, just on a whim? I suspect they had a very good reason to change their opinion. Possibly new evidence. Possibly the intervention of a better qualified doctor. Who knows, but I doubt that doctors base their decisions on flimsy medical evidence.

Oh, so it's the method of death that bothers you then RIG? I've seen people starve to death, there are worse ways to go, I've seen those too.

It's been in the news here daily for the past week. My personal view is that the will of both the husband and parents SHOULD be irellevant in cases such as this. Whether the 'plug' should be pulled should be a decision for the doctors. If they say there's no hope whatsoever, then there is no point in continuing medical support. Those closest to the victim are rarely the best ones to make such decisions. I have a friend who once had a dog that went blind in old age. The dog walked into things constantly, couldn't find it's food and was obviously traumatised by its condition. The owner refused to do the decent thing and have the dog put down. I regarded this refusal as a highly selfish act. Eventually the dog wandered out into the road and was cut in half by a passing lorry. OK, there is very little connecting the two cases EXCEPT the selfishness of those that profess to care about the respective victims. Politicians WILL get involved because it involves the law of the land. I don't believe Britain accepts living wills, as several times in recent years people have been charged with aiding deaths here. Some people go to Holland or Switzerland to die where the help is not frowned on.

There is a suitable case for aided demise over on the 'Casey' forum!

They do not recognise living wills, but they do recognise "advanced directives". If Terri penned instructions before her deterioration to this level that she was not to be kept alive, then the British medical establishment would respect this.

Hey Bo, I saw you play in Arkansas a couple of years ago with Jimmy Johnson. How ya doing?

>> ..I saw you play in Arkansas a couple of years ago with Jimmy Johnson.. << OMG! It's an epidemic!

You a Jimmy Johnson fan George?

I'm a fan of anyone who can play the blues, and he's played with Otis Rush among others. ( my remark was actually a ref to guys that play with each other, but I guess you got that)

Well there's "playing" and there is "playing". I got your reference, you got mine. I've swerved off into musician world for a moment. Sorry.. Jimmy cooks! Bo was a little wobbly. It was a nice summer night though.