Extremely sad story...I can understand her family's point of view, but at some point you have to realize that nothing can be done, and that it's better for her to be allowed to die.

it *may* be better for her to be allowed to die... that's a matter of personal opinion... but to me, to "allow her to die" by removing her feeding tube and starving to death is cruel. By that method, it will take several days or weeks for her to pass on and starvation is a horribly painful way to die for anyone . According to one thing I read, she can feel pain, evidenced by her groaning when she has a muscle cramp and needs more painkillers. I'm not one to judge whether someone's existence is worth prolonging or not... i hope I never am in a position to make that type of decision for a loved one. But I definitely don't agree that causing a prolonged, painful death is passive. If anything, why can't they just allow the machines that are keeping her heart going to be turned off?

I just read through this thread and I'm concerned that nature itself is now being judged on its ethics. We are so selfish. Why do we hang onto people who clearly cannot live with any good quality of life? It's tragic.

I agree with HederaNaturale. These people put her in this predicament, so to take away all of her life support and leave her in unnecessary pain is cruel. Allowing her heart to beat on its own while still giving her body the opportunity to fade away naturally, as it should, is the next best option IMO.

This is why (and I agree with those who have said it) members of my family and I have a living "will." My grandmother had one drawn up when she was diagnosed with Alzheimers. She died an uncomfortable death but was NEVER on life support. She lived for nearly 12 years...well past what her doctors expected. A few months later, my aunt died of cancer and she also never went on any kind of life support or had any surgeries (of course, she was going on 90.)

I've already made it very clear that I never want to be on life support unless it's just there to allow my body to recover after a horrible accident. If that's all that's keeping me alive, however, no thanks.

A few days ago, I saw the videos the Schindlers released, that supposedly show that their daughter is lucid and is capable of communication.

I NEVER WANT TO BE LIKE THAT. I don't know what they think an "existence" is, but at 40+ it's certainly not making monosyllabic grunts with your mouth wide open. They should understand that she's never going to recover, and that they're just denying the inevitable.

A 3 hour debate by Congress last night? When will this end? :confused:

2 Words:

LIVING WILL

my point exactly.

But with this case, there is some insurance money tied up in it somewhere. If the family wants to take care of her, great. Keep the politicians and courts out of it, though.

Hmmmmmmmmm, I wonder if he would be entitled to any of her money since it's clear that he has a new love at this point he's comitting adultery because he's still married to Terri.

To the Legal experts of GC how does something like that work....I guess my questions are

1. Since Terri is still alive and he has someone else isn't he comitting adultery??

2. Is he entitled to any of her insurance money or any other belongings since she is in a vegetative state and do they already considered him a widower???

In other cases the husband or child(ren) would be considered next of kin and acting in that capacity, make decisions of long term care and/or termination of heroic measures. What makes this case different.

He is stuck between a rock and a hard place, if he divorced her while she is in this vegetative state he is labeled as cold hearted and insensative.

Her parents should let her go, they are being selfish to keep her in this state.

I had wondered why Michael didn't divorce Terri, but I now see why -- he could look cold and heartless. There really are no winners in this, and the government just looks tacky, especially in view of rising gasoline prices and Iraq -- there are more serious, wide-ranging issues to deal with.

CLAP CLAP CLAP......You betta know it!

G Dumbbya comes off his vacation to see about this case, yet (not to say this isn't an important issue) there are far more serious issues that are going on around the nation at large that he and the government are overdue in looking at.

I do know that if my husband left me in a state like that of Terri I would come back and haunt the hell out of him and his new wife.

But I still want to know isn't he considered to be an adulterer???:confused:

McCoyred, I heard about this case some time ago. Apparently the husband has been fighting the parents about this for years so he has not waited 13 years. It just so happened that this is an opportune time for political agendas to play on this sort of thing, that's the reason (I believe) that we are hearing about it now.

SC

Would anyone happen to know what kind of harm this is causing Terri Schiavo's body to have the feeding tube removed, re-inserted, removed and then re-inserted again? I would think this would cause some kind of harm to her body. :(

They're going to remove the feeding tube completely and allow her to starve to death, which may take up to three weeks. I doubt if they care how much damage is already done to her body, if that is the hospital's "humane" method of "euthanasia."

At any rate, I find it interesting that this case is getting sooo much attention, yet the similar case involving the African American woman and her baby born with a terminal illness (i forget where... it was definitely in one of the news threads on the forum) has gotten absolutely none. Schiavo's is a sad situation, and one that gives me pause, but yet again I see the media ignoring Patisha to pay Paul.

The GOP is ignoring Patisha because Patisha isn't their voting bloc.

As stated, this has been going on for 15 years after the husband first stated that his wife would not want to live like this.

The docs are saying that she does NOT feel anything--pain, hunger or thirst. Although her eyes or open it is the same as if she was in a come or even dead.

That video is four years old. Notice they haven't produced a more recent one.

Compare her in that video to before she had the heart attack. She was a beautiful woman.

Don't know about the legality of the adultry and don't really care. IMO, he probably chose to not divorce her in order to continue to fight for what he said were her wishes. But the reality is, he was a 26 year old man when this happened--probably hoping for a family. His wife is not unable to function at any level, so he sought his family elsewhere. Now if the kids were 15 and 14 then I would be :rolleyes: