Euthanasia...UPDATE: Dr. K set for June Parole
 

Comatose Woman's Feeding Tube Removed

Wednesday, October 15, 2003



PINELLAS PARK, Fla. — The feeding tube keeping a severely brain-damaged woman alive was removed Wednesday, all but ending an epic, 10-year legal battle between her husband and her parents.

Terri Schiavo (search), 39, had the tube removed at the Tampa Bay-area hospice where she has lived for several years, said her father, Bob Schindler. Attorneys representing her husband, Michael Schiavo, said it will take between a week and 10 days for her to die.

The parents want Terri Schiavo to live, and her husband says she would rather die. She has been in a vegetative state since 1990, when her heart stopped because of what doctors said may have been a chemical imbalance.

Bob Schindler said he and his wife, Mary, went in to see their daughter shortly after the tube was removed and gave her a kiss and hugged her. He said his daughter was not as responsive as they claim she normally has been.

"She's OK for the next couple of days," said Suzanne Carr, Terri Schiavo's sister. "We are just going to try to work some magic."

"I have to believe that somebody is doing something, somewhere to stop this judicial homicide," she said.

Michael Schiavo and his attorney George Felos were not immediately available for comment after the removal of the tube.

Several right-to-die cases across the nation have been fought in the courts in recent years, but few, if any, have been this drawn-out and bitter. The tangled case has already been handled by 19 separate judges and the tube has been ordered removed three times. At one point 2001, the tube was removed for two days before a judge ordered feeding to be resumed based on new evidence.

About 100 protesters stood outside the hospice Wednesday in what has become a 24-hour vigil staged by advocates for the disabled and anti-abortion activists.

Wednesday's removal came just hours after Gov. Jeb Bush (search) told the Schindlers that he was instructing his legal staff to find some means to block a court order allowing Michael Schiavo to end his wife's life. But even the family's lawyer has said their legal remedies have been exhausted.

"I am not a doctor, I am not a lawyer. But I know that if a person can be able to sustain life without life support, that should be tried," the governor said, adding the "ultimate decision of this is in the courts."

Family members held out hope that they could save her life and were heartened by the governor's last-minute effort.

"The family has not given up hope on Terri," the woman's brother, Bob Schindler Jr., said following a meeting with Bush. "We have spoken to the governor, and he hasn't given up hope either."

Schiavo's family members believe she is capable of learning how to eat and drink on her own and say she has shown signs of trying to communicate and could be rehabilitated.

Michael Schiavo says he is carrying out his wife's wishes that she not be kept alive artificially.

Felos has said that the Schindlers were "still in denial" over Terri Schiavo's wishes not to be kept alive with the tube, an IV-like device that pumps food and water into her stomach.

Doctors have testified that the noises and facial expressions Terri Schiavo makes are reflexes and do not indicate that she has enough mental capabilities to communicate with others.

The Florida Supreme Court has twice refused to hear the case, and it also has been rejected for review by the U.S. Supreme Court. On Tuesday, a Florida appeals court again refused to block removal of the tube.

The Schindlers first sought to remove Michael Schiavo as his wife's guardian in 1993 after a falling out over her medical care. They say he now has a conflict of interest because he is engaged to another woman and they have a child together.

The family has also leveled allegations that Michael Schiavo has abused Terri Schiavo, although the accusations have not been substantiated.

Michael Schiavo has refused to divorce his wife, saying that he fears her parents would ignore her desire to die if they became her guardians.

Get things in order....
 

Jeb Bush did intervene and this lady was removed from her rehab hospital to another location. Yesterday or the day before, she was being fed liquids using the 'drip'.

Interesting case. Who has the final say so, the husband or the family? Very scary. I'm mad at Jeb (what kind of name is that?) for going OVER Florida's Supreme Court and ordering the feeding tube re-inserted. I'm angry at her parents for being selfish and wanting her to remain in a vegetative state. I applaud her husband for his efforts.. I dont know what I would do in this situation...

It's a VERY tough situation. I had to do a paper on this subject in Ethics class two semesters ago, and while doing my research, my view completely changed. Although you have the law in place for those people who don't have the patient's best interest at heart, at what point can you say enough suffering is enough?

I don't even really think it's euthanasia b/c her husband isn't trying to assist her in dying. W/o the feeding tube she will die anyway. She's artifically being kept alive. I feel so sorry for the family b/c it's a death of a family member, but I understand the husband's position. The women that they all knew & loved is gone already. Only her body still lives on.

Personally I would not want to be artifically kept alive if it meant I, as in my spirit was no longer there. I don't want to be killed but if machines are keeping me alive, I'd want live to take its course, which ends in death.

Well, in my research I learned that a case like this would still be considered euthanasia. There are two forms: active euthanasia (Dr. Kevorkian), and passive euthanasia. With passive euthanasia, it's kind of like pulling the plug on someone on life support, you take away all external interference and let nature take it's course.

I second that...what kind of life is she living...it's not a life, it's an existence.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 1savvydiva
[B]Well, in my research I learned that a case like this would still be considered euthanasia. There are two forms: active euthanasia (Dr. Kevorkian), and passive euthanasia. With passive euthanasia, it's kind of like pulling the plug on someone on life support, you take away all external interference and let nature take it's course.



Ohhh ok. Thanks for the education:)

There's more to the story than the above article. I read in our local paper last week that the family suspects foul play with the husband. Doctors (when the lady was admitted to the hospital) reported that she had ring marks around her neck. Also, doctors never understood why her heart stopped beating. The family suspects the husband was abusive. :confused: Still, should she remain on life support? :confused: If so, how long? :confused:

The moral of the story, in my opinion: have EVERYTHING outlined in case something happens. Do it NOW, before anything does.

Exactly! This case demonstrates the importance of a living will. Write down exactly what you want to happen in case you are ever in a position where someone else would have to decide for you.

Personally, I would not want to live in a vegetative state. Take me off life support and let the Lord take me home or keep me here.

Updated: 08:04 AM EST
'He Wants the Money'
Schiavo Rips Wife's Family in Right-to-Die Case
By VICKIE CHACHERE, AP

TAMPA, Fla. (Oct. 28) -- A man involved in a bitter dispute with his in-laws over whether his brain-damaged wife should be kept alive says money and the influence of conservative political causes motivates her parents to block his battle to let her die.

In his first interview since the latest round of legal fighting in the highly publicized case, Michael Schiavo said Monday on CNN's ''Larry King Live'' that he continues to fight to end his wife's life because her wishes were not to be kept alive artificially.

''This is Terri's wish,'' he said of the removal of her feeding tube. ''And I am going to follow that if this is the last thing I can do for Terri.''

Terri Schiavo, 39, has been in a persistent vegetative state since 1990 when a chemical imbalance, brought on by an eating disorder, caused her heart to stop and deprived her brain of oxygen.

Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, believe their daughter could be rehabilitated and dispute the husband's contention that she did not want to be kept alive artificially.


Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for six days earlier this month before the Florida Legislature and Gov. Jeb Bush enacted a special law to have it reinserted. The move touched off an international debate over the Schiavo case and right-to-die issues.

Terri Schiavo is being treated at a Pinellas Park hospice while her husband's attorney and the American Civil Liberties Union prepare to challenge to constitutionality of ''Terri's Law.'' The first filings in that legal fight are due Wednesday.

Appearing less than an hour later on Fox News' ''On the Record with Greta Van Sustern,'' the attorney for the Schindlers countered that Michael Schiavo knew his wife never had end-of-life wishes.

''It's hard to know what to believe with him because he says whatever the occasion demands or what is in his financial interests,'' said the attorney, Pat Anderson.

Michael Schiavo said his relationship with the Schindlers soured after he was awarded a 1993 medical malpractice claim of about $1 million. Schiavo says the settlement was awarded because doctors misdiagnosed Terri Schiavo's health problems.

He said after that, his father-in-law asked him for a share of the money, and he refused to give him any.

''He's always wanted the money,'' Schiavo said of Bob Schindler. ''He wants the money. He wants the control.''

Schiavo denied that he has withheld therapy from his wife, saying he once took her to California for an experimental therapy in which a stimulator was implanted in her brain. It didn't work, he said.

''Now, they (his in-laws) are being fed all this information by those right-to-life activists who are feeding their little flame,'' he said.

He also answered criticism that he has abandoned his wife for a longtime girlfriend with whom he has one child and another on the way. Schiavo said his girlfriend is supportive of his care for Terri Schiavo.

''I'm fortunate to have two women in my life that I love very much,'' he said. ''My girlfriend right now has done more for Terri than her own mother did. She shopped for her. She washed her clothes.''


10/28/03 0445EST

---------------------

Dag...I would hate to be the judge deciding this case, I wouldn't know who to believe! :( This is why one should make their wishes known...IN WRITING!

Okay, couple of questions and comments:

1) Instead of questioning whether she should live or die, I think the issue is to determine WHO makes the decision, the spouse or the parents?

2) How dare baby Bush override the state Supreme Court in matters of INTERPRETING the law! The Governor (executive) and legislature (legislative) branches should stay the heck out of it. As far as I see it, the issue is a constitutional one and falls under the purview of the courts.

3) I question the husband's motives any way because if he knew what her wishes were on this issue, why wait 13 YEARS to carry them out. He probably has moved on and wants closure, though I can't blame him for that.

4) AKA2D said it right, get it done so that there are no grounds for misinterpretation.

In this case, I would allow the parents to be the guardian over their daughter. The husband, IMHO, gave up that right when he starting living with another woman and having a 2nd baby with the other woman. I don't think he has her best interests.

Personally, I wouldn't want to live in a vegetative state. But I think her parents should make that decision. I'm very suspicious of the husband.

Her heart stopped beating due to a chemical imbalance (low potassium levels prob induced by an eating disorder). I didnt know about a trust fund and all that...hmmm. BUT I agree that she should be allowed to pass on.. no reason for someone to exist for 13 years with no hope of rehabilitation...

but husband is jive shady...how you gonna get another chick pregnant and stuff.. hmmmm...

I agree, but the simple fact that money is involved makes me wonder. In the back of his mind, I bet he is thinking he cannot marry his baby's momma until his wife dies and he cannot get the insurance money either. Some articles say that the government seized a portion of the money he got from the malpractice suit, but he was on Larry King the other night talking about how much money he has....that is a little suspect.

The saga continues... :confused:


CLEARWATER, Fla. (Reuters) - A Florida court ordered continued feeding for a severely brain-damaged woman on Tuesday, shortly after an appeals court said the feeding tube could be removed to let her die.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...hts_schiavo_dc

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:

As I am a second year law student I definitely would not call myself a "legal expert", but as I am currently taking family law I think I can tackle these questions.

1) Yes, Michael is an adulterer. But that pretty much matters NADA. He doesn't lose his rights as her next of kin because he has "relations" with another woman. If that were so, Bill could never sign anything for Hillary (you get my drift). The adultery would only be relevant if Michael wanted a divorce (which he does not). But even in the event of divorce that would only matter if Florida were a "fault" jurisdiction, which I don't know if Florida is or not, but I highly doubt. But again, the fault no-fault distinction pertains to divorce, alimony and property distribution so it’s not really at issue here anyway.

2) If Michael is the beneficiary on Terri's life insurance then yes, unless FL has some law saying the person requesting life support removal can't collect, then he is entitled to her life insurance. However, as far as I know that has nothing to do with him being her husband or not- just who she named as beneficiary. Also, I highly doubt Michael is motivated by money. The family and some right to life organization offered him $1 million dollars to relinquish all rights and sign over power of attorney and he rejected. He maintains that Terri asked him to let her die if she was ever brain dead/severely brain injured and that the only way he can protect her desire is to remain her husband (and therefore keep power of attorney). It could be an act, but I highly doubt that if he turned down $1 million dollars he is after her life insurance which is probably more like $250,000.

ETA: He is not a widower until she dies. Also, I did a little research and have discovered that Terri Schiavo does not have a life insurance policy. There is no financial reward for Michael in his current position regarding Terri's life/death. Years ago he won a malpractice award based on the poor care that Terri received after the auto accident which arguably caused her vegetative state, but the award to him was not large at all. He got $300,000 for loss of consortium (no longer being able to have sexual relations with his wife) and approx. $700,000 was awarded to a trust for Terri's medical care. Michael could not access this money, the mony was governed by a third party and was to only be used for Terri's medical care. That money has LONG since run out.

I thought Terri's condition was caused by a heart problem that was exacerbated by an eating disorder? I'm confused.

I thought it was a heart problem. I didn't know about the eating disorder. Reports have said that she just passed out one day. :confused:

Thank you Exquisite5 for the great explanation.

I was more curious than caring about the adultery because I wanted to understand why he was so passionate in having the tube removed. I was wondering if it was a monetary issue because of course it can be and has been sort of construed that way.

Hmmm, I wonder if LifeTime has picked this up yet for a made for television movie???

Thank you again Exquisite5, so do you take check, money order or credit cards???;)

P.S. to AKA 2D'91, if I remember correctly, I could have sworn I read somewhere where the heart condition was brought on by the eating disorder. I think.....:confused:

Eating disorder? That would explain the sudden heart attack at that age.

Oh then the irony of being kept alive on a feeding tube.:(

Eating disorder? That would explain the sudden heart attack at that age.

Apparently, she had bulimia and the binging and purging depleted her potassium, causing her heart to stop.

Hmmm, I wonder if LifeTime has picked this up yet for a made for television movie???

:D

Wouldn't be surprising—there's certainly enough drama for one. Don't know if it's been discussed here, but her parents are also insinuating that Michael Schiavo physically abused her before she collapsed:

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/034...f,48738,6.html

Parents Appeal Judge's Ruling on Feeding Tube
 

Parents Appeal Judge's Ruling on Feeding Tube

Updated: 11:00 AM EST




Reuters


Terri Schiavo, shown here in 2001 with her mother, is in a persistent vegetative state, according to some doctors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jump Below:
· Schiavo Timeline

Talk About It: Post | Chat


TAMPA, Fla. (March 22) - A federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, denying an emergency request from the brain-damaged woman's parents. The parents' lawyer quickly filed a notice of appeal.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge James Whittemore came after feverish action by President Bush and Congress on legislation allowing the contentious case to be reviewed by federal courts. The judge said the 41-year-old woman's parents had not established a ''substantial likelihood of success'' at trial on the merits of their arguments.

The notice of appeal was filed electronically hours later with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta by David Gibbs III, an attorney for Terri Schiavo's parents. The notice tells the court that the full appeal will follow. That court was already considering an appeal on whether Terri Schiavo's right to due process had been violated.

Whittemore wrote that Schiavo's ''life and liberty interests'' had been protected by Florida courts. Despite ''these difficult and time-strained circumstances,'' he wrote, ''this court is constrained to apply the law to the issues before it.''

The Bush administration ''would have preferred a different ruling,'' White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters in Albuquerque, N.M., where the president was visiting a senior center.

''We hope that they would be able to have relief through the appeals process,'' McClellan said.

While Rex Sparklin, another attorney for the parents, said the appeal was needed to ''save Terri's life,'' Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, praised the ruling.


The Schiavo Case



AP


Monday, 1:11AM: President Bush signs legislation that allows a federal court to hear the case.

Tuesday: Federal judge refuses to order reinsertion of Schiavo's feeding tube.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TIMELINE

1990: Oxygen fails to reach Schiavo's brain, causing permanent damage. Husband Michael is named legal guardian.

1998: Husband petitions for the removal of wife's feeding tube.

Her Story: See Schiavo Timeline

Sources: AP, cnn.com



''What this judge did is protect the freedom of people to make their own end-of-life decisions without the intrusion of politicians,'' Simon said.

Bobby Schindler, Terri Schiavo's brother, said his family was crushed. ''To have to see my parents go through this is absolutely barbaric,'' he told ABC's ''Good Morning America'' on Tuesday. ''I'd love for these judges to sit in a room and see this happening as well.''

Attempts to reach the woman's father, Bob Schindler, were unsuccessful early Tuesday. George Felos, the attorney for husband Michael Schiavo, hung up twice when reached by reporters from The Associated Press.

But Scott Schiavo, Michael Schiavo's brother, called the judge's decision ''a good thing,'' and said he did not believe Congress should have intervened.

''There's not a law that's made for this,'' Scott Schiavo said in a telephone interview. ''This is something that goes on 100 times a day in our country, that people, their wish to die with dignity is not a federal issue.''

The tube was disconnected Friday on the orders of a state judge, prompting an extraordinary weekend effort by congressional Republicans to push through unprecedented emergency legislation Monday aimed at keeping her alive.

Gov. Jeb Bush was described by a spokeswoman as ''extremely disappointed and saddened'' by the federal judge's decision not to order the tube reconnected. ''Gov. Bush will continue to do what he legally can within his powers to protect Terri Schiavo, a vulnerable person,'' said spokeswoman Alia Faraj.

Terri Schiavo did not have a living will. Her husband has fought in courts for years to have the tube removed because, he said, she would not want to be kept alive artificially and she has no hope for recovery. Her parents contend she responds to them and that her condition could improve.

Court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. Doctors have said she could survive one to two weeks without the feeding tube.

Gibbs argued at a Monday hearing in front of Whittemore that letting Terri Schiavo starve would be ''a mortal sin'' under her Roman Catholic beliefs and urged quick action: ''Terri may die as I speak.''

But Felos argued that keeping the woman alive also violated her rights and noted that the case has been aired thoroughly in state courts.

''Yes, life is sacred,'' Felos said. ''So is liberty, particularly in this country.''

Michael Schiavo said he was outraged that lawmakers and the president intervened in a private matter. ''When Terri's wishes are carried out, it will be her wish. She will be at peace. She will be with the Lord,'' he said on CNN's ''Larry King Live'' late Monday.

Terri Schiavo suffered brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped briefly. Her collapse was later linked to a potassium imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder. A successful malpractice lawsuit argued that doctors had failed to diagnose the eating disorder. She can breathe on her own, but has relied on the feeding tube to keep her alive.

According to a CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll of 909 adults taken over the weekend, nearly six in 10 people said they think the feeding tube should be removed and felt they would want to remove it for a child or spouse in the same condition.


03-22-05 1049EST

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.

What "life" is there to save? Her parents have SELFISHLY fought to have her kept alive via a feeding tube. Can she swallow on her own? Can she chew? She is merely existing, not living. Let her go...

This is my opinion.. :)

schiavo case
 

I had an uncle who was placed on life support two years ago and I must say that it is one of the hardest decisions a family will ever have to face! There was a great deal of arguing at the time because his children wanted to keep him alive, but the brothers and sisters felt that it was selfish to let him live in a comatose state. Ultimately, it was decided to take him off of life support and he died later that night! There is a part of you that wishes to keep the person alive by any means, but if that person will never regain full consciousness or capabilities without artificial means, then it is selfish to keep them in that state of suffering, lingering between life and death. The Schiavo case, as unfortunate as it is, has served as a wake up call to the majority of Americans and the need to specify their final wishes! Unfortunately, this occurs every day and not just with living wills but with organ donation as well (another show, another topic)! Please sit down and discuss the issue with your family and let them know of your intentions, for you and your family may not agree on the issue of artificial support! Yes it may seem morbid, but had Terri sat down for a few minutes and written a living will, this whole ordeal could have been prevented.

One thing I find particularly disturbing, how the Republicans are superceding the Supreme Court's decision on this issue! Despite one's political affiliation, every American should feel alarmed at the federal government's attempt to regulate one's last wishes! I am sorry, but this is one place where the federal government does not belong!

Sweete81

P.S. If Terri's money ran out, then how are the family paying for her care, because I was under the impression, especially when my uncle died, when your insurance money or means of payment ran out, then the hospital had the right to remove you from life support or any artifical means of life?

RIGHT ON!

The poor thing doesn't know anything going on around her and what kind of way is that to live??? Let her suffering end....:(