This news is more than a week old, but family matters and work responsibilities prevented me from blogging at a more appropriate time on the subject of Terri Schiavo.
So, onwards ...
The whole affair surrounding Terri Schiavo concerned a Gestapo-like mindset: let's get rid of these vegetables so we can move on. They're not contributing to society, after all.
And this is someone who believes in the right to euthanasia talking! Surprised? You shouldn't be. For the level-headed among us, you have to admit that the Schiavo case brought in too many players - two factions of her family, the doctors, the governor, the president, the Supreme Court - and was very messy. This should never have been the test case for euthanasia. It's appalling that it was allowed to be.
Secondly, Schiavo died a horrible death. She starved to death for 13 days, for God's sake! We beat ourselves up for not being able to help starving Africans, but we let an American citizen starve to death.
If euthanasia is to be legal, we need to have doctor-patient confidentiality, something on the basis of a DNR order. There must be no doubt whatsoever that we will never recover if we do have an accident or disease that leads to terminal illness. And death must be through lethal injection, some means that will allow the patient to die in their sleep. Certainly not anything that will cause them to waste away over the course of nearly a week-and-a-half.
The whole Schiavo case was an insane circus. But not that the Right was much better than the Left. President Bush's heart was in the right place, but he overreached in what was essentially a state issue. (This government is poking around in areas where it shouldn’t be; Big Government Conservatism is an oxymoron.)
However, the squeakiest wheels always get the grease. I am, of course, talking about the left-wing, for whom death seems to be a fetish. The Right was dragged into this battle.
Again, I think humans should decide their own fates, even concerning their deaths. Why, after all, do we allow animals this release, but not ourselves? But this was not the way to establish that right.
The pro death-for-Schiavo crowd should be ashamed of itself. This was a dishonorable media frenzy, feeding off her case like vultures, disseminating disinformation to a hungry flock of pop-cultured morons (vis-a-vis the War in Iraq). This is what America is becoming. The Schiavo case may just have been the tip of the iceberg.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Temple Stark
How's that time travel thing Mark? It's warped something. What you're trying to describe is something I've heard nowhere, not even Terri Schiavo supporters.
You?
The right was dragged into this battle? WTF? Last I looked it wasn't the left that pushed and signed (coulda vetoed) "Terri's Law."
2 - gonzo marx
Mark sez..
*The Right was dragged into this battle.*
put the kool-aid down and back away slowly
i heartily agree that starvation was not the most humane Answer...however Florida Law would allow no other course of action as far as i am aware..
Mark sez..
*However, the squeakiest wheels always get the grease. I am, of course, talking about the left-wing*
again..i wonder exactly what medication you might be imbibing to make you quite so delusional whiel otherwise appearing rational..
i remember seeing DeLay speaking about this quite a bit..the President making comments on it...many others, both in and out of the political arena..mostly those that would be considered the "religious Right"....but the "Left" ??
sorry..did i miss them squeaking?..it seemed to me they were far too quiet on this whole thing...
obviously, your mileage may vary...
Excelsior!
3 - RJ
Great post, I agree with what you are saying.
If she was deemed by the courts to have "wanted to die," then she should have been quickly and peacefully euthanized by administering a powerful muscle relaxant (or some such) via an IV catheter.
But starving her to death was simply hideous. The fact that there were folks on the Leftist blogosphere mocking her (calling her a "human cucumber" if I recall, and other, worse, things) makes me worry about what policies these people will enact once they (inevitably) regain power...
4 - Gregg
Everyone needs to say 'something'! But if we need to speak-out about life, than let's get down to the Laws regarding Life; which are beyond man's right to decision. In the first place, we cannot understand the 'Quality of Life' that is experienced beyond what 'mere man' considers 'life' (his games, travelling, social-aspect, and so on); yet, here is where Life is Life at it's best. Someone once said (or at least a great number of human beings believe so): "Thou shalt not kill!". Clear! Only 'Life' decides when it will terminate the function of 'mere man' (vegetative state, death row, bar room brawl)! All that happens has a Reason beyond which 'our simple human minds can conceive', and maybe just maybe the reason that people in lifestate conditions which the 'pro death' groups are so anxious to eliminate are a 'real test' for those of us in society ... as to how we care for Life in any of Its visual and/or contemplative stages. Interesting how 'mere man' has deciced of his/her own to be greater than One Who created 'Life' Itself (Especially when man has only cme to understand and /or use about 20% of the human brain ... thus not knowing its future regeneration or reconstruction of assignment capabilities, and so on)! Carry-on with your games of left and right! They only exist here in this brief Trip of the human (or physical) experience; afterwards you will have Eternity to contemplate how you discarded the Life Who was not yours to discard!
5 - Temple Stark
Thing is Gregg, humans gets to decide.
Paragraphs are cool, too.
6 - RJ
"(Especially when man has only cme to understand and /or use about 20% of the human brain ... thus not knowing its future regeneration or reconstruction of assignment capabilities, and so on)!"
Hmm.
While we understand very little about the human brain, it is not true that we only "use" a small percentage of it.
It's not a fucking appendix; we use ALL of it. Just not all of it is involved with higher thought processes, and not all of it is fully understood.
7 - Kristen
At last! I share your view of the inhumanity of Schiavo's death. However, I believe the issues go deeper than that.
1. Terri Schiavo was disabled yet was placed in a hospice for over three years with no terminal illness which is strictly antithetical to hospice policy or purpose.
2. Terri Schiavo received a jury award ostensibly for treatment and therapy but was used to litigate her death.
3. Terri Schiavo never received treatment and therapy available to thousands of disabled in worse condition than she.
No only was her death a travesty but her life a poster list of denied rights.
8 - Andrew van Dyk
More humane ways to end Terri's life would have been:
Throw her under a train
Shoot her
Get a couple of Pit bulls
beat her to death with a baseball bat
What I don't understand is that a government that has the power to send thousands of people to their death in Iraq does not have the power to save the life of one innocent, helpless woman.
9 - Chris
The thing is, laws today- largely enacted by opponents of euthanasia- forbid so-called "active euthanasia," where one actually intervenes to kill the person. Starving was the only method available because the doctors involved could only withdraw care.
10 - Al Riney
Do you believe that Americans have the freedom to refuse a feeding tube? While a ham sandwich doesn't constitute medical treatment, in the case where a person can't swallow, a feeding tube implanted into the stomach wall is, indeed, medical treatment. Just like a respirator for a person who can't breathe, it's a tube inserted to provide what the body can't get with its own functions.
I believe in the right to refuse such implants. I would want anyone to have that right. If you agree with that right to refuse, then arguing that Terri Schiavo should have been kept alive rests only on this: do you believe Michael Schiavo and his witnesses that said she wouldn't want to linger in such a medically-dependant state? If you believe them, then agree that her wishes should be carried out. If you don't believe Michael and his witnesses, then keep in mind the rather large number of times that their testimony has been reviewed in court (19 times in Florida, alone). Judge Greer isn't the only decision maker. Not the first and not the last. It's ignorant to stand against testimony that's been examined so completely so many times.
Also, I believe that life is more than a beating heart and working lungs. Those things only sustain life, they don't constitute it. In the future, maybe we could keep a decapitated body alive, using machines to take the place of what the brain does autonomously. Would that be a life?
Al Riney
11 - peggy
Terri was conscious. Terri was not permitted to have swallowing tests. Terri was not a candidate for hospice care. Terri was in hospice for FIVE years. Terri, despite winning a $1.5 million medical judgment, was a Medicaid patient. Terri did NOT have a heart attack - no cardiac enzymes in her blood. Michael's testimony is contradictory: www.theempirejournal.com.
Terri never received an MRI. Terri never received a pet scan. Terri's "injuries" were never investigated by police. Terri's case was NOT a right to die case. Terri's case was a disability rights case that was mismanaged. Florida law protected Terri. She did not need Jeb or George to grandstand. Probate Judges preside over the property of DEAD people. Michael probably thought he would get her out of the way more quickly. Michael, shacked up with a new gal for 10 years now is NOT the kind of guardian I would want. Would not permit Terri to leave her 8 x 10 "cell" for five years. No pictures on wall. Blinds ordered to be kept closed. No dental care for Terri. She had 5 teeth extracted. Broken wheel chair. No physical therapy and so her limbs became contracted. What a guy! But, he underestimated the truth which kept seeping up out of the swamps in Pinellas County. Fast Mikey is hooked up nice and tight with the good olde boys in Pinellas - check it out. I hope he gets "murder one".
12 - RJ
"The thing is, laws today- largely enacted by opponents of euthanasia- forbid so-called "active euthanasia," where one actually intervenes to kill the person. Starving was the only method available because the doctors involved could only withdraw care."
Bingo!
Of course, legalizing euthanasia would create even more ethical dilemmas, but in this one case, it would have been a blessing compared to the actual result...
13 - Al E. Riney
"Terri was conscious. Terri was not permitted to have swallowing tests."
There have been billions of rumors flying about Terri. Don't believe them. If there were such smoking guns lying about, believe me, after more than twenty judicial reviews, someone would have said... "Shouldn't we take a close look at this?"
And they did. If you believe anything, believe that judges and attorneys have explored every possible avenue of her condition.
One of the independant doctors testified on MSNBC that Terri's cerebral cortex (the part of the brain that makes us individuals and not just warm meat) was liquified, that her brain had shrunk. I saw her CT scan that day, her brain looked like someone scooped out the largest part of its core with a melon baller. Sorry to be so vivid, but you should have seen her brain compared to a normal one. It was like looking at a hollow shell. Trust me, an MRI would have been redundant. In fact, 7 out of 8 doctors, all independant, testified in Florida's courts that her condition was irreversible.
You have to look more closely than the river of rumors before you. The court appeals process is in place to decide if all proper proceedures have been followed. If you believe that her case was mismanaged, then you have a lot of explaining to do. Why, after 19 rounds in Florida courts and several more in federal courts, did none of the judges acknowledge any of your above rumors? Because they simply are not true or are irrelevant.
If you believe that a person has the right to refuse medical treatment (an implanted feeding tube counts) even after her mind has been stolen by a tragic injury, then your only reasonable way to fight this is to say she did want to be kept alive this way. Did she? Ask the horde of judges who have reviewed this case again and again. Michael Schiavo said she didn't want it. He has witnesses that she voiced that opinion. Do you not believe him OR the other witnesses? That's your choice, but over twenty courts filled with people with advanced law degrees disagree with you.
And again, I say that a beating heart and breathing lungs do not alone constitute life. They only serve to sustain it. Life is something more, and Terri Schiavo tragically lost that "something more" fifteen years before her shell was allowed to expire.
14 - Al Riney
"No dental care for Terri. She had 5 teeth extracted. Broken wheel chair. No physical therapy and so her limbs became contracted. What a guy! But, he underestimated the truth which kept seeping up out of the swamps in Pinellas County. Fast Mikey is hooked up nice and tight with the good olde boys in Pinellas - check it out. I hope he gets "murder one"."
Oh! I almost forgot to respond to this one. I've heard rumors too that contradict this, and from common news sources, also. I've heard that the hospice sought a restraining order against Mikey. Why? Not because he was harmful to anyone. Because he was too demanding on the staff! He wouldn't leave them alone, constantly insisting on top-notch care for her. In 15 years, she did not have one bedsore. And what the heck would cause her to have teeth removed when she wasn't using her mouth for food?
I don't fault him for going on with his life, don't demonize him for it. Many others would do the same. In fact, Michael's brother said on MSNBC that Terri's father urged him to go find another companion and move on, that he needed it and deserved it.
Why would my rumors be any less credible than yours? Mine come from a grapevine, also! MSNBC flavored.
15 - Judicial Victim
If you believe the judges of the court care about the people -- you ain't been there. I'm not a bit surprised at what the judges did, especially the judges of the 11th Circuit --- it's a criminal enterprise and each and every one of them should be impeached -- it's not what our Founding Fathers had in mind.
Though judges have a non-discretionary duty to report criminal activity, they misrepresent the facts to conform to their will....
16 - Dave Nalle
JV, I don't WANT the judges to care about people. I want them to care about the law.
Dave
17 - Gregg
Comment 5 posted by Temple Stark on April 11, 2005 03:06 AM:
Thing is Gregg, humans gets to decide.
"Paragraphs are cool, too."
It is interesting how important paragraphs and big or small letters become ... over the issues.
On the decision part - Who has the right to decide 'murdering' the other?
18 - Gregg
"Comment 10 posted by Al Riney on April 11, 2005 11:42 AM:
Do you believe that Americans have the freedom to refuse a feeding tube?"
On your discussion of more than one judge (ETC) deciding on Terri's Fate: Have you researched their 'corruption links'?
19 - Gregg
"Comment 6 posted by RJ on April 11, 2005 03:35 AM:
"(Especially when man has only cme to understand and /or use about 20% of the human brain ... thus not knowing its future regeneration or reconstruction of assignment capabilities, and so on)!"
Hmm.
While we understand very little about the human brain, it is not true that we only "use" a small percentage of it.
It's not a fucking appendix; we use ALL of it. Just not all of it is involved with higher thought processes, and not all of it is fully understood."
And with this? Obviously, there are those who have a problem using the 20%- and following your POINT if you claim that man doesn't understand it - you can't claim that you know man uses it ALL. In most cases 'man' demonstrates to use a smaller percentage than 20... Keep up the good work!
20 - JR
RJ: The fact that there were folks on the Leftist blogosphere mocking her (calling her a "human cucumber" if I recall, and other, worse, things) makes me worry about what policies these people will enact once they (inevitably) regain power...
Yeah, I guess that's kind of tasteless (no pun intended). On a scale of one to ten, with ten being "giant thalidomide baby", I'd give it an eight.
21 - Al Riney
"...especially the judges of the 11th Circuit --- it's a criminal enterprise and each and every one of them should be impeached..."
I may be pursuaded to believe that one judge may be corrupt here or there. You might convince me to believe that the 11th circuit holds a more than a nominal share of shady judges. But to convince me that all 19 Florida court decisions plus the ones made by the higher federal courts are ALL corrupt TOGETHER on the SAME CONSPIRACY to kill a single woman in Florida? Your conspiracy has to run so deep and be so hidden as to be cumbersome.
Remember, judges don't act alone. Each judge decision is subject to overwatch and if corruption worked its way into a ruling, SOMEONE would spot it and blow the whistle. Maybe it happens in a communist country, but this is a democracy. These allegations of corruption, were they KNOWN to be more than rumors, would already have caused the judges to be thrown out and their decisions reversed.
But it didn't happen. Even the supreme court agreed that all proper proceedure had been followed. What more do you need?
Conspiracy theories are easy, but often full useless, unfounded rumors. It's just too convenient to say, "I disagree with the whole issue because the whole system is corrupt."
For instance, I believe that the parents of Jon Benet Ramsey (forgive me if I mispelled it, don't have time to check) killed thier little girl. Everyone "knows" they did it, right? Why are they not in jail? Because a grand jury looked at all the evidence and decided they'd lose the case (and they only get one shot at a guilty verdict) if they took it to court. Sure, everyone "knows" they're guilty, but there just isn't enough proof and until there is, I reserve a little place that says, "maybe they're not the ones."
But mostly, I still think they did it.
And again, back to Terri, I say that a beating heart and breathing lungs do not alone constitute life. They only serve to sustain it. Life is something more, and Terri Schiavo tragically lost that "something more" fifteen years before her shell was allowed to expire.
Al E. Riney
22 - Al Riney
"...JV, I don't WANT the judges to care about people. I want them to care about the law."
Here! Here! Dave, that's what I'm talking about. In court, the law is more important than any person. That is what the Founding Fathers said. "A government of laws, NOT men."
"...they misrepresent the facts to conform to their will...."
No, that's what lawyers do. It's up to a judge to hear both distortions of the truth from each attorney, consult the laws, and decide which to agree with and which to turn down.
And another thing, a judge's decision is supposed to be final once a higher court hears an appeal and checks that all proper proceedures were followed and nothing unethical took place. We threw all that out the window with that special session of congress.
Also, this wasn't a disability case. It would only be one if it were determined that Terri would want to be kept alive in that state (I hate the term 'vegitative', it's degrading).
Once more, I say that a beating heart and breathing lungs do not alone constitute life. They only serve to sustain it. Life is something more, and Terri Schiavo tragically lost that "something more" fifteen years before her shell was allowed to expire.
Al E. Riney
23 - swingingpuss
I'm having a strong sense of deja- vu. I've heard this conversation before. Kind of strange....its like seeing a decomposed horse being resurrected.
24 - Aaman
You bastards! You killed Kenny!
25 - Cathi
I honestly feel that in the case of Terry Schiavo it doesn't take a rocket scientist.......the facts are simple, you take away water and food from a person for 13 days, they die. Terry Schiavo did not decide she did not want to have food and water, so it was not her taking her life, someone else decided Terry Schiavo would not be allowed to have food and water and so she was murdered..........very simple, why make it so complicated!