Too bad Terri wasn't a buff, eh?

What'd I miss?

Canuck check out CNN a mans wife whom has been brain dead for a quite some time decided to take away the feeding tube and her perents, Congress and Senate, Federal courts and countless other wannabees jesse Jackson and others..Wanted to stick their noses in where they do not belong....She passed away this morning..

Mike

Will,
Terri Schiavo? May she RIP.

I know her "husband" never will, for many reasons, including the fact that he and the lawyers successfully sued for malpractice. Lawyers got their 30% of the award no doubt. The grounds? Failure to diagnose Terri's self induced "chemical imbalance" (from eating disorder, bulimia, gorging on goodies and self-induced vomiting) which resulted in her cardiac arrest and subsequent anoxic brain damage. This is a case of a jury with a hard-on for doctors, or tear jerking sympathy for the self-damaged victim.

Too bad the doctors brought her back to "life" then, aye, it is, but it is their duty in such a case.

A black day in the USA. RIP Terri.

quote:

Originally posted by retreever:
Canuck check out CNN

Thanks for clueing me in. Wasn't sure what the heck Will was talking about. Now if he'd spelt Terri right, my slow wits may have caught on... Thought maybe something had happened to Terry Carr or Blaukamp!!

Wasn't this thing about Terri finally having the right to die? I was under the impression that this was somehow her choice. Or maybe that was just the husband's argument?

We're pretty isolated up here, eh!

Cheers,
Canuck

Canuck, the husband stated she never wanted to live the live she was living in her present state and husband had to fight all to let his own wife die with dignity...May she rest in peace..
Everyone sticking their noses in never even knew Terri..Looking for free publicitity...

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:

Thanks for clueing me in. .. Thought maybe something had happened to Terry Carr or Blauwkamp!!
Canuck

I was a bit worried myself there for a minute.

Thought it was me.......

The biggest problem with this very sad death is that the MEDIA stuck its nose way too far into this. the last couple months have had eveyone and their brothers scrambling to get their 15 seconds of fame by having their opinion in a sound bite.

This will be in the media for months, and then all the talk show airheads (Oprah, Barbara Walters, etc) will try to get interviews with the husband, parents, brothers, sisters. There will be a made for TV movie. Several books.

They should have let her die in peace.

Just my opinion.

its still sad though.

Weeeell...not quite. There is no clear, compelling evidence that Mrs. Schiavo wanted this, her husband ONLY brought up this fact eight years after the money from the settlement was running out. If indeed those were her wishes, Mr. SChiavo would have said that shortly after she was diagnosed as unrecoverable and not wait 8 years.

The marriage was on the rocks. Just like Mr. Schiavo "said" that's what she wanted, TWO of her friends said the exact opposite. Further, there is credible testimony from two nurses that overheard Mr. Schiavo comment in a disparaging way towards his wife.

Moreover, there were many unexplained fractures of Mrs. Schiavo's bones, not attributed to life saving procedures ( ribs often-times tend to break during CPR for example).

All some of the politicians ( on both sides of the aisle I might add) wanted to do was err on the side of life so the ENTIRE process, not just the judicial pro-forma was investigated fully, to include the broken bones, statemetns from the nurses, friends, etc., not to mention an MRI which was never performed.

No, this poor lady was killed by a judiciary that is totally out of control,( the same judiciary where a few folks in robes defy the will of the people, such as in striking down myriad propositions against gay marriage, capital punishment, etc) and a coniving adultering husband.

The equal balance of the three branches of goverment is seriously askew. And for the record, I am NOT by any stretch of the imagination religious. jorge

A postscript: Fortunately, FLORIDA LAW requires an autopsy, something that Mr. Schiavo was DEAD SET against AND Catholic dogma allows it, but discourages cremation. It begs the question; why did Mr. Schiavo want her cremated W/o an autopsy?

Jorge,
You are dead right on this. At the end of the day - the vows of "for better or for worse" were not truly meant by the husband.

A convicted sex/rapist/murderer got a better hearing than Ms. Shaivo. Go figure.

As I understnad it, there is also doubt how she came to be in her original condition...a case of was she pushed or did she fall...Also one of the nurses at the nursing home made a statement to the effect she suspected the husband had tried to murder his wife by injecting with insulin..

My take on this is the same as jorge, Terri was in a very vunerable postion and the sytem did nothing to protect her...Still it looks like the family has won the right of an autopsie rather than the cremation her husband orginally wanted..

Some things are worse than death, especially living in a persistent vegetative state. I have seen countless patients with severe head injuries "survive" like this, and it is truely heart breaking. If it's me, pull the plug (and my wife will)

What I don't understand is why this particular case draws so much attention. Similar events occur regularly in hospitals all across the country.

Lack of a living will and total disagreement on the part of the two sets of "relatives". ie. the parents disagreed with the husband. If they all agreed, you are right, no problem, go ahead and pull the plug.
Peter.

I often think that we are a nation hooked on sticking our noses into other people's business, as in the Schiavo case, or the sensational or grossly perverse acts of the criminal and lunatic fringe, as with the Peterson and Jackson cases, etc., ad nauseam.

If there's one thing you can bet Terri Schiavo didn't want, it was to have her flaccid, open-mouthed, vacant-eyed likeness broadcast around the world over and over for weeks on end.

Talk about an undignified invasion of privacy and utter lack of decency! Can you imagine that happening to you, courtesy of your surviving "loved ones"?

The whole spectacle disgusted me and I tried to ignore it to the fullest extent possible.

But it was everywhere you looked and listened. And now, thanks to Will, even this forum is infected!

Now that this OUT-OF-CONTROL circus is over you should all march down to your lawyer of choice and get them to draw up a rock solid air tight Living Will. Maybe this will help your loved ones who are directly related be able to put into motion your wishes.

The husband was pursuing what he believed to be right. The media and everyone else was out for the almighty dollar.

Just my take.

I'm with Jorge on this one.

In a normal case, the spouse should have been the one to make the decision as to continuing feeding or not. However, when a spouse purposefully decides to take on another (what only can be called a common law) wife, his actions CAN NOT be asssumed to be acting in the best interest of his wife and he has forfited his right to choose for her. Any judge who thinks otherwise, is, in my small mind, a complete idiot. Or maybe the vows were "in sickness and in health, forsakeing all others (unless I get horney and want to zoom another broad and you can't do anything about it.)???

In other words, the decision to pull the plug(s) might have been the right one, but leaving it up to someone who could only benefit from it is like asking the fox to guard the hen house...

Can anyone believe that, if competent, Terri would have stayed married to the adultrous turd once he started diddling another woman. He could have easily divorced the woman when he wanted to "move on", but the financial considerations were apparently too compelling for him to do so.

The wants and needs of a woman (or man) your age, Ruby I understand..
Oh, Ruby.. don't take your love to town.

Honor is a foreign word, these days.

To me the Terri issue is purely economic. Please consider these facts:

1. She will not recover.

2. It will cost millions to maintain her for the next 20 or 30 years.

3. Her insurance long ago maxed out, so those millions are taxpayer dollars.

4. Those dollars could be put to better use, or left in the taxpayers' pockets.

Therefore...

Whether her husband is a rat or not doesn't matter at all to me.

While I feel for everyone involved, bottom line is that they should have pulled the plug 14 years ago. Not sure how accurate 500grains numbers are, but his thoughts are right on point. They are incredibly tough decisions (especially when it is your wife/father/mother, etc), but msut be made. The toughest thing I had to do was to ultimately call off the code on my father, but it was the right thing to do. Enough of this, lets get back to talking about Africa!!!!

I think Terry was murdered plain and simple.
If I were her brother or her father, Michael Schiavo would be "Hanging with Elvis" right now.

After 15 years what did he give a crap if her parents who birthed her and raised her from their own flesh and blood wanted to take care of their own daughter while they hoped for a miracle.

Imagine your own daughters husband deciding YOUR Childs fate.

I sincerely hope someone takes the dude out.

Actually, they reported on the news that the costs of her care were born by charitable contributions and the foundation her folks had set up.

Feeding someone isn't "life support" or an "extreme measure". We all need to be fed. Brian damage is sad, but it doesn't remove humanity. Neither does mental retardation. Where's this death for convenience movement going next?

I think the judicial branch is out of control. Mandating that somebody be starved to death, with guards placed to ensure nobody gives her water, that's ghoulish.

Brain injured/damaged people don't need to be killed. "Let go" is an awfully nice euphemism for starved to death.

I don't envy medical professionals who have to make those kinds of decisions daily: i.e. who needs to be treated "aggressively", and who doesn't.

But Jim Morrison's old roommate ought not be allowed to thumb his nose at elected officials in Congress and starve someone to death as a political statement.

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
Feeding someone isn't "life support" or an "extreme measure". We all need to be fed. Brian damage is sad, but it doesn't remove humanity. Neither does mental retardation. Where's this death for convenience movement going next?

I think the judicial branch is out of control. Mandating that somebody be starved to death, with guards placed to ensure nobody gives her water, that's ghoulish.

I wonder how many of us would survive if given no water or food for a couple weeks.

Sounds like a decision right out of Nazi Germany to me.

Guys,
I have been a regular visitor of this site for 5 years now and have enjoyed the content very much.

I saw this topic and had to take part in the conversation. First of all I have to say that congress, governor and the president have no business in anyone's bedroom. If the husband claims that she had made her wishes known then we have no reason to doubt him or other witnesses present at the time those statements were made.

I get sick to my stomach when I see media whores like Jesse Jackson, Rush Limbaugh and Pat Bucanon use a family's tragedy to their personal benefit. A decent society has no right to make someone's bedroom a battleground for political battles.

Do we have to write an iron clad will if we wish to die rather than living a life like hers? Just the thought of it sends shivers down my spine.

No body's business. This same thing probably happenned a dozen time within driving distance of me in nursing homes all around this week. The media circus just took off with it this time. Yes a living will is the way to go. I sure don't want to bankrupt the kids to be imprisoned in my own body and warehoused some where, that I can't get out and hunt and fish and be with my dog. No kind of life at all. Pull my plug if I get there. Getting old is just full of little indignities.

I think some of you blokes mus'nt have any idea what goes on in the real world ever day of the week-Wombat-a doctor

Too bad this came up here also.
I had hoped to be spared the varied opinions of everyone who knows no more actual fact about this than I do.

Mike

WHile this whole saga has created a lot of negative thought and reporting. I, being not a medical expert type, would have liked to have heard from medical experts concerning the truth behind this woman's condition. All we got was speculation and uninformed opinion from media and hollyweird hype.

I know I personally would not want to be kept alive in such a manor, not ever. Pull the plug and OD me on some really good Morphine, don't let a body suffer. I felt Terri's life and ending was cruel, all 15 years of it.

There is NO winners to this case and the whole thing just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

quote:

Originally posted by Harris:
Guys,
I have been a regular visitor of this site for 5 years now and have enjoyed the content very much.

I saw this topic and had to take part in the conversation. First of all I have to say that congress, governor and the president have no business in anyone's bedroom. If the husband claims that she had made her wishes known then we have no reason to doubt him or other witnesses present at the time those statements were made.

I get sick to my stomach when I see media whores like Jesse Jackson, Rush Limbaugh and Pat Bucanon use a family's tragedy to their personal benefit. A decent society has no right to make someone's bedroom a battleground for political battles.

Do we have to write an iron clad will if we wish to die rather than living a life like hers? Just the thought of it sends shivers down my spine.

I really appreciate your perspective, so please don't take this the wrong way. Respectfully, I disagree. There were witnesses who said the opposite. Why would we doubt them? We might doubt the husband because he "forgot" her wishes the first 8 years, or because he has a new family now.

In general, I think concern over "right to privacy" as justification for the taking of human life often makes decent folks miss the more important issue and more important violation of rights. I also think all of our distaste for the media circus surrounding the case can blur the true issue.

I also question whether any of us will really be anxious to go if we should ever find ourselves there (please let that never happen). I used to think I'd rather die than be alive if paralyzed. for instance, but a couple of times when I was in harm's way and thought I might die, I was surprised how much I wanted to live.

Our family has a young friend who's physical powers have been significantly reduced by a shaped charge in Afghanistan and bullet wounds in Iraq. He is obviously depressed, but he still wants to live. Where do you draw the line?

How about Christopher Reeves? He couldn't feed himself? I'd hate to have seen armed guards under court order preventing anyone from feeding him or giving him water.

I think when people are ready to die--when they want to die--they die. That's why "unplugging" artificial life support is a completely different issue than starving someone to death.

Once again, I don't envy medical professionals the duty of making tough decisions like this every day.

Steve

500Grains: The burden of cost is NOT on the taxpayers. It's a matter of record that the Shindler family was footing the bill for her care, 100%, so your tax dollars were not at risk. There are some of us in this world that are still guided by honor and what is right, regardless of personal sacrifice. jorge

500 grs., one of these days 'they' might just think that YOU are just too feeble, too expensive, too much of a bother, too much of a burden to keep alive. Then they'll pull the plug on YOU. If that situation ever comes to pass, maybe you'll look back and re-examine the cold-blooded position you've taken here -- basically Scrooge's position concerning what he called "the surplus population" from Dicken's 'A Christmas Carol'..........

From my perspective, this whole case is pure murder, and nothing else. This poor lady was too inconvenient to keep around, so she was done away with. She was the very sort of person that our legal system is supposed to go out of its way to protect, but instead of properly intervening, 'they' were allowed to pull her feeding tube and let her starve to death instead. You talk about savagery and injustice!

Yet, 'they' will turn some murderer or child molester loose next week or next month to commit their same old brand of degenerate behavior all over again. That murderer will have been too expensive to keep around as well, but for different reasons.............

The Supreme Court isn't the Most High Court, and I wouldn't want to be the former, answering to the later in the day of judgement -- not when an account has to be given of how the opportunity was there to save a this helpless lady, yet the opportunity was calously ignored.

Unreal.......



AD

I agree with Jorge, and thank him for outlining some issues here.

Terri's state was self induced.

The "husband" swore to take her home and care for her forever after, in order to get a settlement out of a cavalierly emotional and sympathetic jury.

Then when the money was squandered, he recalled that Terri had really wanted to die anyway.

He refused to divorce her and give guardianship to Terri's parents. Why? Not love.

The judges (and juries) have all been chimpanzees in this case: Hear No Evil, See No Evil, and Speak No Evil are the black robed judges. They bring new meaning to the idea of "blind justice."

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
500Grains: The burden of cost is NOT on the taxpayers. It's a matter of record that the Shindler family was footing the bill for her care, 100%, so your tax dollars were not at risk. There are some of us in this world that are still guided by honor and what is right, regardless of personal sacrifice. jorge

Jorge,
Not sure if this will please you to know or not, but on this topic you and I are in 100% agreement.

I don't want to seem insensitive or uncaring, but what does this topic have to do with African Hunting? There have been a lot of posts recently by moderators, administrators and members to try and stick to the subject matter of the individual forums. Isn't this a topic for the political or similar type of forum?

Topics like this one, boxers versus briefs, advertising US deer hunts, etc. dilute the purpose of this forum. I know this forum gets a lot of views and therefore is attractive for a post on any topic.

Some moderators and administrators appear to move a discussion to the appropriate forum but it doesn't always seem to be evenly enforced. It appears that some posts and posters get more latitude than others.

Let me end by giving my heartfelt thanks to Saeed,DRG, and the others who selflessly provide the basis for this wonderful forum. Just an observation and my two cents.

I believe that we should respect the topic and intent of each forum and keep the subject matter relevant.

Thank you.

RCG

^^It has the words "Sullivan" and "Buffalo" in the title. Just kidding. I think it's best in this forum because no one would see it in Walter's forum. So at least here we get many different perspectives rather than just having one reply and then the thread dying.

By the way Sullivan is crazy! I just watched the preview vid on his website, and I was sweating at the end of it. Mind you this was a grainy internet vid with terrible sound.

I rapidly skipped to the bottom of this thread only to read what RCG posted. Ditto to that.

Hopefully we can put this string away now.

Well said RCG!


Les

Put this string away? Heavens no!

You guys should really come on down to the political forum once in a while, you're much too polite up here!

friar

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
I often think that we are a nation hooked on sticking our noses into other people's business, as in the Schiavo case, or the sensational or grossly perverse acts of the criminal and lunatic fringe, as with the Peterson and Jackson cases, etc., ad nauseam.

If there's one thing you can bet Terri Schiavo didn't want, it was to have her flaccid, open-mouthed, vacant-eyed likeness broadcast around the world over and over for weeks on end.

Talk about an undignified invasion of privacy and utter lack of decency! Can you imagine that happening to you, courtesy of your surviving "loved ones"?

The whole spectacle disgusted me and I tried to ignore it to the fullest extent possible.

But it was everywhere you looked and listened. And now, thanks to Will, even this forum is infected!

That makes two of us.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
To me the Terri issue is purely economic. Please consider these facts:

1. She will not recover.

2. It will cost millions to maintain her for the next 20 or 30 years.

3. Her insurance long ago maxed out, so those millions are taxpayer dollars.

4. Those dollars could be put to better use, or left in the taxpayers' pockets.

Therefore...

Whether her husband is a rat or not doesn't matter at all to me.

We shall see when it becomes you turn.