Staredit Network

I was wondering what you guys thought about this controversial topic.

I mean hasn't she been like that for 15 years. About 13 days ago they took the feeding tube away. And finally she died today.



Q : Do you think that the court, the spouse, or the parent have the right to what should happen to someone in that situation?

A : (What i think) Well in most cases i would think the parents have the biggest say in this situation. But, in this case i think it was terrible that they wanted their daughter to live like that. She was on morphine and stuff to make her passing as comfortable as possible. So, all those people saying whe was suffering was really dumb. Also, i guess she said that she wouldn't of wanted to live like that but that could just be a rumor or something.

for more info go to : http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/03/31/schiavo/index.html

Oh yeah she was on hospice so she was made very comfortable.

Terry Schiavo died 15 years ago, her body just didn't know it.

In answer to the question, I believe that the spouse and parent should be the ones who bicker over whether the vegetable-in-question lives or not, the court should not be involved in an intimate matter such as the Schiavo case.

I think it's a pity she didn't die all those years ago. Other than that, no one should have the life to make someone else exist in such a meaningless manner...

Its sad that people have really lost the right to die in this country, yet most people dont know it. Here parents were keeping here alive for selfish reasons, lawyers fighting for recognition and money, and news for well, news.

I personally think her life has to end now.


She's been half dead for like 15 years (i think?); she's not even in a comma. She does awake, as some people claim she did, but those were just muscle reflexes; there were no signs of any brain activity when she "awakes." So really she is dead. Her brain is at least. I don't see any reason for her to live. I mean, i dont think any of you guys would want to be somewhere inbetween death and life for over 15 years. Get her life over with, end this "torture," and let her see Jesus on judgement day.

EDIT: O, whoops. I just found out now that she died today

So she's dead now?
Southpark had a nice little episode about all this, combined with PSP, it was pretty damn funny.

If I was in the situation her husband was in, I'd probably wish to keep her alive though, but I guess it would be for selfish reasons. I would never make the decision to pull the plug, someone else would have to... I just couldn't live with myself if I did it.

Ahh yes, I saw that.

"if I'm put into a prevegetative state, then please never show this on national TV"

Everyone else:
"oh.... crap...."

Man nice



Ok regarding Terri. How the hell would you feel if your body was just a shell with no brain and was being kept alive so that the sick politician bitches could suck all the money out of you before you die.

Hmmm, actually i dunno really...

But hey it dont matter anymore. She's dead now

She even said that she would rather die than live by a feeding tube, so what is said is done. It just got delayed a bit...

I agree, Oregon is currently the only state that allows it. However, on a poll, only 54% physicians support the act and only 34% are willing to prescirbe a legal lethal prescription. Out of the willing 34%, it is reduced more by Catholic hospitals forbidding the doctors to prescribe lethal doses of medicine. In addition, something that was surprising is even though many people claim that they want to have control over their death, in a follow up of 7 years at Oregon Department of Human Services only 208 people took lethal prescriptions out of 64,706 people who suffered from the same diseases.





To ShadowBrood: You wouldn't feel anything, since Persistent Vegetative State (PVG state) meant that the patient is unaware of themselves and their surroundings. However, they are still able to pump their own blood and breathe through the control of the brain stem which is not damaged.

To MA: PVS, is different from brain dead, brain dead is when there is absolutely no activity in the brain, and in which the cerebrospinal fluid has replaced extremely large proportions of the neural tissue. This includes the brain stem which controls the simple life sustaining functions. Therefore being brain dead can often mean that the patient will die within days. PVS means the patient has a extremely low chance of recovery and is unaware of their surroundings but can still live for decades with life supporting equipment. Usually patients entering a PVSfrom physical head injury is more likely to recover from a PVS state but patients in a PVS triggered from prolonged lack of oxygen usually remains permanently PVS. In the case of Schiavo, it is the latter (she suffered from cardiac arrest which contributed by an eating disorder which caused potassium imbalance).


Yes, I do believe that Schiavo should have the right to die, I don't care who chooses, since she cannot make the decision herself, anyone can make it. However, a patient that does have some awareness should be able to choose when they want to die when they are in a ill uncurable stage. For example, (can't remember who it is), the person was so worried when she's going to die but after she received the lethal drug dose, she remained more calm, probably due to fact that she has more control over the end of her life. (think its a she).

Another key thing is, when a doctor prescribes a lethal dose to a patient, it is like saying "I do not value your life". However, this is different. Taking a nembutal prescription isn't suicide, suicide is a needless taking of life. This isn't needless, what people are doing is merely choosing the proper time they end their life. You won't want your close relatives to watch your starve to some bone structure and let a nurse shave your beard and insert a tube into your body. It just isn't necessary.

Uh.. forgot what else I was gona say too many ideas..

When I think of Terry, I think of a Zombie in Resident Evil. What was a happy/kind woman is gone, Terry is just a body. I geuss her 'soul' was gone, but a functioning body remained. Even if Terry could slightly still be in that body, all she could do was stare at the ceiling all day for 15 years. Thats NOT living. Its like the parents want to keep her around for eye candy pleasure almost.

I feel that it was right to let her die - which sounds callous, I know - but what kind of existence was she living?

She wasn't even conscious - 'living' in constant limbo for 15 years. Although it could be argued that people are simply being selfish over the whole issue - the question is: Which side is being selfish?

The parents and the Republicans in Congress who wanted her to remain alive despite her inability to function as a sentient being?

Or the husband and many others who wanted her to be put out of her 'misery,' despite her inability to tell them whether she was miserable or not?

I find this kind of question impossible to answer.

I say that her husband did the right job, because, when your heart stops beeping. Then your going to die without help. and without a heart beep most of your organs won't work(usually) and also. She was mostly suffering too. Would you want comrades to do the samething and you know that you aren't getting anymore improve? Would you want to suffer? I say that her husband did the right thing.

Yes it was right to let her die.

To all the Republicanhs here> You said you said she wa right to die, yet you SUPPORT the party that was fighting to the last man to keep the feeding tube in her? You SUPPORT the president that signed the bill to force her to stay alive? Think about it.

i think that as long as she is living without something pumping her heart, bringing her own blood all over the place, i think that she should stay alive. I have also heard "rumours" that she can still speak (wot dead people cant) she can still ackownledge people. All she was getting was food. U can feed a person but she still had a half more of her life left. So then it would have been nice if she would have lived because she would be suffering more if she was starving to death. Long time ago, i thought that people would die if their brain wasnt functioning. Since she still can groan and moan, i think that should be good enough to tell u that her brain is still there. even if the brain was still like half blown up.
in a Christian's point of view, only God can take away life. that means until her sickness is uncurable (heart stops beating, blood stops flowing, brain kills herslef) until those things happen, then she would be let go and die. We discussed this at Church with several passages, but it is still all opinion. She already died, no point on saving her. So then... ya.... (Hint: Job also had these problems.) <or maybe worse...>

The woman was dead. Just because you keep the tissue alive doesn't mean there's a human there. If you haven't read it, here's Maddox's April Fools Day page. Please note that the page is composed of everything that he hates, except the one comment. He makes a good point there, she's not coming back, that's just a bunch of organs. It's simply the parents wanting their daughter to be alive, when she isn't. Then again, when you are starving to death, there's a period of suferring, then you reach a point where it goes away, you fall into a deep sleep, then a coma, then you die. Why do you need that representation of a person? It's like a photograph, it doesn't have the depth of that actual person.

I say, big deal. There are thousands of people with diseases right now, that can't get help unless they get the money.

And don't give me that, "What if you were on the death bed?", bullshit

Cause let me ask YOU something, "What if YOU were the one with a disease, and didn't have the cash to be able to get well?"

And besides, even IF souls exists, and it was still trapped inside of her body, by them killing her...didn't it kinda like, i don't know, release it from it's prison? And possibly go to heaven? Just something to think about.

The whole Terry Schiavo thing reminded me of Ursula le Guin's book "city of illusions"
There seem to be some paralels between the shig's reverence for life, and Bush's "culture of life"

At first I thought, well all she needs is food, let her live. But then I started reading more about it and I learned that she is basically a vegetable. She had no chance of becoming concious all she was was a body with no real brain activity except for her vital functions. If she can't communicate then she really living a full life. She also can't contribute anything to society. Being in bed for 15 years practically brain dead is worthless. Sure you could feed them, but in the end what does that accomplish?

But really, it the decision should go to the relatives. Pfft if they want to let a brain dead person's body still "function" why not let them if they want to use the money, the person is really already dead. They would just be using their money up to keep the body alive with a false hope that one day they might wake up. When the person is dead, it doesn't matter what you do to the body, they can keep it alive if they want.

Exactly