Schiavo Autopsy Shows Massive Brain Damage

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:23 am

Well if the so-called "moral majority" allowed euthanasia in this country, there would have been no need to starve her to death.

We'd do that for a beloved pet.

Badmojo · Post by **Badmojo** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:44 pm

Originally posted by FlyingPenguin
Well if the so-called "moral majority" allowed euthanasia in this country, there would have been no need to starve her to death.

We'd do that for a beloved pet.

OK so we treat our pets and mass murders better then our own kin.

rogue · Post by **rogue** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:56 pm

Originally posted by TheSovereign

and i find it odd that most of u think she didnt "feel" it

Hmm lets see...with half of her brain essentially missing, and the only thing keeping her alive being a feeding tube, I think its very logical to say that she felt nothing. That is, unless you've been brainwashed by the religious right into believing that she could somehow still recover and disregard all evidence and factual information pertaining to this case. This entire case was a load of bs and propaganda, and it never should have stayed in the spotlight the way it did.

UberNeuman · Post by **UberNeuman** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:03 pm

That wasn't my edit. And what I said still stands..... And what you can't fathom is that it was her wish to not be kept in the state she was in... It's not up to you or the goverment, as much as your type would like it...

What you can't also fathom is that a young person's brain is still growing and can rewire it self to replace the functions of the missing areas.... Terri's brain had decayed to the point the autopsy clearly shows...

How about some compassion for Sun Hudson, if everyone feels that badly for Terri - how about the child who's life support was removed, due to lack of funds...

And would you like to guess who signed that Texas Bill into law....

The same man who hiked up his dress and went running back to D.C. - just to help save Terri......

TheSovereign · Post by **TheSovereign** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:16 pm

well im against the baby thing too
and no one heard her say she wanted to die

it was hearsay

her husband said that she said..... <----- hearsay
doesnt stand up in court and shouldnt stand up for anything

he said she said is way too ez when you have your own agenda

also no i dont believe their was ever going to be progress but i dont think she was continously decaying

remember the 5 month previous report showed exactly the same thing meaning her condition wasnt going worse

UberNeuman · Post by **UberNeuman** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:29 pm

21 courts reviewed the case over the years. Members of Micheal's family testified that Terri did proclaim that she didn't wish to be in a state such as the one she fell into...

Abstract Appeal - simply the best website to read about the Schiavo case...

TheSovereign · Post by **TheSovereign** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:37 pm

hearsay is hearsay man
anyone can lie about that stuff if u mean it write it down

TruckStuff · Post by **TruckStuff** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:11 am

Originally posted by UberNeuman
And what you can't fathom is that it was her wish to not be kept in the state she was in... It's not up to you or the goverment, as much as your type would like it...

You miss the point. The Teri Shiavo thing isn't about what anyone wants or desires. Its about how a supposedly advanced and humane society and the courts thereof ordered action that would deliberately bring about the death of a weak and disabled individual while deliberately ignoring the pleas of that individual's family that they be allowed to provide the care that this society no longer wanted to provide. Frame it however you want. Apply your "religious right" label and right it off. You can try to ignore it, but *that* is the core of the arguement. God save us if one of us were ever injured/incapacitated in such a way.

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:11 pm

Sov are you married? If you are, then tell me the truth: who better would understand your wishes in such a matter? Your parents or your wife?

I've lived with my wife for 18 years. My parents don't have a clue what my wishes would be, and would likely go with the emotional response of keeping me alive as long as possible by any means.

I have a living will, but the fact is my wife is free to ignore it - there is NO REQUIREMENT for anyone to follow my wishes unless it's contested in the courts, I just hope she chooses to follow someone's wishes in a living will. The next of kin still has the final say. The living will is brought in to allow that person to support their position, or to contest it.

Hearsay or not, LEGALLY in this country the IMMEDIATE NEXT OF KIN (Terri's husband) has the right to decide her fate. Since the parents disagreed with his decision and they couldn't resolve it between them, they took the next proper step of going to the courts.

The courts affirmed the long standing right of the immediate next of kin to make the decision, and could find no evidence of foul play. Done deal, finished, 22 seperate court decisions agreed.

I feel for her parents, and I can understand their emotional pain, but it's his decision.

It was very inappropriate for the president and congress (controlled by party that supposedly claims it wants "less government" in our personal lives

) to even try to intervene in a family matter.

If congress wants to pass a law against removing feeding tubes IN GENERAL they certainly have the right and jurisdiction to try to do that (see how well THAT goes over with the public). But they do not have the right to meddle in one specific case. That's not the way the system is setup.

But then again this congress just loves to ignore the rules...

renovation · Post by **renovation** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:11 pm

i fully agree with FP to .me and my wife have a living will to ,and i have no second thoughts if the time should come . she will have life support turned off or even attemped if there is no way i would make it . she even has a pack with a fellow nurse .that if i cant get it approved lets say .or were both hurt or worst and one of us is unable to request to have the plug pulled . she will do it for us

i take the fifth here as i dont want anyone held responceable for these actions !

Post by **TonyH** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:48 pm

Originally posted by TruckStuff
God save us if one of us were ever injured/incapacitated in such a way.

If I'm ever incapacitated in a similar way somebody better start pulling the fscking plugs.

The only reason that I can see that they wanted her alive was because they didn't want to deal with the grief of losing her. They were told by countless experts in the field that her situation was hopeless but they sought out experts who would side with them to justify their actions. What that woman was going through was not life, she was not cognizant of herself or her surroundings nor would she have ever been. Her life was over and they just wouldn't let her go. The only thing her brain was capable of was keeping her organs functioning and even then the body had to be fed and hydrated by artificial means.

UberNeuman · Post by **UberNeuman** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:23 pm

Well, TruckStuff - you should be happy to know that the great moral crusader of our time, Jeb Bush, is still pushing for an investigation...

So, how about Sun Hudson - did he deserve the same concern as Terri, or wasn't he enough of a pawn for the Right to Lifers to get worked up over?

I still have yet to see any mention of Sun from their website or statement from their head, Randal Terry....