Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 Well, they did it. They managed to convince a Federal Judge to hear their case. I'm not positive but doesn't this trample over boundries between legislative, executive and judicial concerns? Not that this has stopped them before you understand.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 Well, they did it. They managed to convince a Federal Judge to hear their case. I'm not positive but doesn't this trample over boundries between legislative, executive and judicial concerns?Not that this has stopped them before you understand. 281555[/snapback] Is this some sort of right-wing judicial-legislative/activism? They are too pious, they surely wouldn't engage in stuff like that?
Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 Is this some sort of right-wing judicial-legislative/activism? They are too pious, they surely wouldn't engage in stuff like that? 281575[/snapback] Carefull, I hear the emotional dogs and rhetorical midgets thundering in the distance.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 Carefull, I hear the emotional dogs and rhetorical midgets thundering in the distance. 281579[/snapback] Ya, a bit wacky. Bring 'em on! What is the best they can throw at me? A sled dog's bag of Iams and some Korean War slippers?
millbank Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 After an unusual and emotional Sunday night debate, the House passed legislation early Monday morning aimed at prolonging the life of Terri Schiavo, whose feeding tube was removed Friday under court order. The Senate unanimously passed its version of the legislation earlier Sunday. The bill ordered a federal court to review the case of the Florida woman, who doctors have said is brain-damaged. Congress has no authority to order the feeding tube re-inserted, but the federal court could choose to do so while it reviews the case. Bill Passed
Losman-McGahee-Evans Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 After an unusual and emotional Sunday night debate, the House passed legislation early Monday morning aimed at prolonging the life of Terri Schiavo, whose feeding tube was removed Friday under court order. The Senate unanimously passed its version of the legislation earlier Sunday. The bill ordered a federal court to review the case of the Florida woman, who doctors have said is brain-damaged. Congress has no authority to order the feeding tube re-inserted, but the federal court could choose to do so while it reviews the case. Bill Passed 281605[/snapback] The odd thing about this to me is that no one in the corporate media is bringing up that someone was allowed to die as recently as March 16th at the hands of a bill signed into law by George W. Bush. Most people are oblivious to the fact that he signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts just yesterday. Another thing that really strieks me as peculiar is how no one is bringing up that fact Republicans voted en masse to pull the plug on medicaid funding that pays for the kind of care that someone like Terry Schiavo and many others who are not so severely brain damaged need all across this country. Thank God their happened to be one REAL Republican (Like myself) that realized the insanity of that and fought it and beat the WH on it. People also do not understand that that the tort reform that is being contemplated by the Republican congress would preclude malpractice claims like that which has paid for Terry Schiavo's care thus far and would've had the plug pulled long ago since they're judgement would've been capped and they could've never affored this care for this long. Its also odd that people aren't aware that the bankruptcy bill will make it even more difficult for families who suffer a catastrophic illness like Terry Schiavo's because they will not be able to declare chapter 7 bankruptcy and get a fresh start when the gargantuan medical bills become overwhelming. People don't care that over 50% of all bankruptices are due to catastophic illness and resulting medical bills, not credit card debt. And those of us who are really Christians also know that this grandstanding by the congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative like myslef. As a real Republican who isn't a memeber of the current rapture-right movement which has a stranglehold on the party through faux-Christian Bush are witnessing a spectacle play out on television in which the news anchors repeatedly say that the congress is "stepping in to save Terry Schiavo" mimicking the unctuous words of the soon to be indicted by a Texas DA (who has taken down Democrats at a 4 to 1 ration over Republicans) Tom Delay as they grovel and leer at the family and nod sympathetically at the sanctimonious phonies who are using this issue for their political gain. This is why I always laugh when fellow Republicans utter the phrase "liberal media". Most people get their news from television. And television is presenting this issue as a round the clock one dimensional soap opera pitting the "family", the congress and the church against this woman's husband and the judicial system that upheld Terry Schiavo's right and explicit request that she be allowed to die if extraordinary means were required to keep her alive. The ghoulish infotainment industry is making a killing by acceding once again to trumped up right wing sensationalism by manipulating the rapture right once again since they'll fail to deliver on a single campaign promise made to their religious base but will keep dangling it as a carrot on a stick while they continue shift massive amounts of wealth, driving more and more Amercians below the poverty level while racking up huge deficits through war and of course the tax cuts which benefited exclsively the wealthiest Americans who are creating jobs but just not in this country. I can't wait until I'm not ashamed to be a Republican anymore. In other words I can't wait until Sen. McCain runs for President.
envirojeff Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 After an unusual and emotional Sunday night debate, the House passed legislation early Monday morning aimed at prolonging the life of Terri Schiavo, whose feeding tube was removed Friday under court order. The Senate unanimously passed its version of the legislation earlier Sunday. The bill ordered a federal court to review the case of the Florida woman, who doctors have said is brain-damaged. Congress has no authority to order the feeding tube re-inserted, but the federal court could choose to do so while it reviews the case. Bill Passed 281605[/snapback] I don't know of anyone that would want to live like this. IMHO this Federal judgment is only to keep another taxpayer and voter alive! But seriously, let her go! Jeff
Losman-McGahee-Evans Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 I don't know of anyone that would want to live like this. IMHO this Federal judgment is only to keep another taxpayer and voter alive! But seriously, let her go! Jeff 281622[/snapback] What bothers me most is that the President of the United States and the Republican Party is using this poor woman for political gain and manipulating her family in order to do it. This is the same George W. Bush who, while governor of Texas, signed a law allowing hospitals to terminate life-support for incapacitated patients, even against the wishes of the family. Especially if the patient cannot pay. Here's the Houston Chronicle's story referencing the state law signed by Bush: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3073295 Hospitals can end life support Decision hinges on patient's ability to pay, prognosis ..and another recent Chronicle story regarding the termination of life support of an infant against the mother's wishes: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3087387 Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care (This weekend Tom DeLay gave a press conference stating that (1) patients in this condition deserve due process [this family was not able to appeal once, let alone litigate for 15 years] and (2) doctors can be wrong about a prognosis [could have been true here also]). Where was Tom DeLay? This story was in the news for several weeks - in his own district. __________ And here's a copy of the state statute: Texas Health & Safety Code - Chapter 166 § 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR TREATMENT DECISION. (a) If an attending physician refuses to honor a patient's advance directive or a health care or treatment decision made by or on behalf of a patient, the physician's refusal shall be reviewed by an ethics[0] or medical committee. The attending physician may not be a member of that committee. The patient shall be given life[0]-sustaining treatment during the review. (b) The patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the individual who has made the decision regarding the directive or treatment decision: (1) may be given a written description of the ethics[0] or medical committee review process and any other policies and procedures related to this section adopted by the health care facility; (2) shall be informed of the committee review process not less than 48 hours before the meeting called to discuss the patient's directive, unless the time period is waived by mutual agreement; (3) at the time of being so informed, shall be provided: (A) a copy of the appropriate statement set forth in Section 166.052; and (B) a copy of the registry list of health care providers and referral groups that have volunteered their readiness to consider accepting transfer or to assist in locating a provider willing to accept transfer that is posted on the website maintained by the Texas Health Care Information Council under Section 166.053; and (4) is entitled to: (A) attend the meeting; and (B) receive a written explanation of the decision reached during the review process. © The written explanation required by Subsection (b)(2)(B) must be included in the patient's medical record. (d) If the attending physician, the patient, or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the individual does not agree with the decision reached during the review process under Subsection (b), the physician shall make a reasonable effort to transfer the patient to a physician who is willing to comply with the directive. If the patient is a patient in a health care facility, the facility's personnel shall assist the physician in arranging the patient's transfer to: (1) another physician; (2) an alternative care setting within that facility; or (3) another facility. (e) If the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient is requesting life[0]-sustaining treatment that the attending physician has decided and the review process has affirmed is inappropriate treatment, the patient shall be given available life[0]-sustaining treatment pending transfer under Subsection (d). The patient is responsible for any costs incurred in transferring the patient to another facility. The physician and the health care facility are not obligated to provide life[0]-sustaining treatment after the 10th day after the written decision required under Subsection (b) is provided to the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient unless ordered to do so under Subsection (g). (e-1) If during a previous admission to a facility a patient's attending physician and the review process under Subsection (b) have determined that life[0]-sustaining treatment is inappropriate, and the patient is readmitted to the same facility within six months from the date of the decision reached during the review process conducted upon the previous admission, Subsections (b) through (e) need not be followed if the patient's attending physician and a consulting physician who is a member of the ethics[0] or medical committee of the facility document on the patient's readmission that the patient's condition either has not improved or has deteriorated since the review process was conducted. (f) Life[0]-sustaining treatment under this section may not be entered in the patient's medical record as medically unnecessary treatment until the time period provided under Subsection (e) has expired. (g) At the request of the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient, the appropriate district or county court shall extend the time period provided under Subsection (e) only if the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there is a reasonable expectation that a physician or health care facility that will honor the patient's directive will be found if the time extension is granted. (h) This section may not be construed to impose an obligation on a facility or a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter 142 or similar organization that is beyond the scope of the services or resources of the facility or agency. This section does not apply to hospice services provided by a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter 142. Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 450, § 1.03, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1228, § 3, 4, eff. June 20, 2003
cåblelady Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 And those of us who are really Christians also know that this grandstanding by the congress is a purely political move designed to appease the religious right and that the legal maneuverings being employed would be anathema to any true small government conservative like myslef. As a real Republican who isn't a memeber of the current rapture-right movement which has a stranglehold on the party through faux-Christian Bush are witnessing a spectacle play out on television in which the news anchors repeatedly say that the congress is "stepping in to save Terry Schiavo" 281611[/snapback] ??? I'm glad Bush signed it.
envirojeff Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 What bothers me most is that the President of the United States and the Republican Party is using this poor woman for political gain and manipulating her family in order to do it. This is the same George W. Bush who, while governor of Texas, signed a law allowing hospitals to terminate life-support for incapacitated patients, even against the wishes of the family. Especially if the patient cannot pay. Here's the Houston Chronicle's story referencing the state law signed by Bush: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3073295 Hospitals can end life support Decision hinges on patient's ability to pay, prognosis ..and another recent Chronicle story regarding the termination of life support of an infant against the mother's wishes: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3087387 Baby dies after hospital removes breathing tube Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care (This weekend Tom DeLay gave a press conference stating that (1) patients in this condition deserve due process [this family was not able to appeal once, let alone litigate for 15 years] and (2) doctors can be wrong about a prognosis [could have been true here also]). Where was Tom DeLay? This story was in the news for several weeks - in his own district. __________ And here's a copy of the state statute: Texas Health & Safety Code - Chapter 166 § 166.046. PROCEDURE IF NOT EFFECTUATING A DIRECTIVE OR TREATMENT DECISION. (a) If an attending physician refuses to honor a patient's advance directive or a health care or treatment decision made by or on behalf of a patient, the physician's refusal shall be reviewed by an ethics[0] or medical committee. The attending physician may not be a member of that committee. The patient shall be given life[0]-sustaining treatment during the review. (b) The patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the individual who has made the decision regarding the directive or treatment decision: (1) may be given a written description of the ethics[0] or medical committee review process and any other policies and procedures related to this section adopted by the health care facility; (2) shall be informed of the committee review process not less than 48 hours before the meeting called to discuss the patient's directive, unless the time period is waived by mutual agreement; (3) at the time of being so informed, shall be provided: (A) a copy of the appropriate statement set forth in Section 166.052; and (B) a copy of the registry list of health care providers and referral groups that have volunteered their readiness to consider accepting transfer or to assist in locating a provider willing to accept transfer that is posted on the website maintained by the Texas Health Care Information Council under Section 166.053; and (4) is entitled to: (A) attend the meeting; and (B) receive a written explanation of the decision reached during the review process. © The written explanation required by Subsection (b)(2)(B) must be included in the patient's medical record. (d) If the attending physician, the patient, or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the individual does not agree with the decision reached during the review process under Subsection (b), the physician shall make a reasonable effort to transfer the patient to a physician who is willing to comply with the directive. If the patient is a patient in a health care facility, the facility's personnel shall assist the physician in arranging the patient's transfer to: (1) another physician; (2) an alternative care setting within that facility; or (3) another facility. (e) If the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient is requesting life[0]-sustaining treatment that the attending physician has decided and the review process has affirmed is inappropriate treatment, the patient shall be given available life[0]-sustaining treatment pending transfer under Subsection (d). The patient is responsible for any costs incurred in transferring the patient to another facility. The physician and the health care facility are not obligated to provide life[0]-sustaining treatment after the 10th day after the written decision required under Subsection (b) is provided to the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient unless ordered to do so under Subsection (g). (e-1) If during a previous admission to a facility a patient's attending physician and the review process under Subsection (b) have determined that life[0]-sustaining treatment is inappropriate, and the patient is readmitted to the same facility within six months from the date of the decision reached during the review process conducted upon the previous admission, Subsections (b) through (e) need not be followed if the patient's attending physician and a consulting physician who is a member of the ethics[0] or medical committee of the facility document on the patient's readmission that the patient's condition either has not improved or has deteriorated since the review process was conducted. (f) Life[0]-sustaining treatment under this section may not be entered in the patient's medical record as medically unnecessary treatment until the time period provided under Subsection (e) has expired. (g) At the request of the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient, the appropriate district or county court shall extend the time period provided under Subsection (e) only if the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there is a reasonable expectation that a physician or health care facility that will honor the patient's directive will be found if the time extension is granted. (h) This section may not be construed to impose an obligation on a facility or a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter 142 or similar organization that is beyond the scope of the services or resources of the facility or agency. This section does not apply to hospice services provided by a home and community support services agency licensed under Chapter 142. Added by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 450, § 1.03, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1228, § 3, 4, eff. June 20, 2003 281628[/snapback] It's safe to say that I have NEVER had such a detailed responce to anything that I have ever posted on this board! And your right, She is being used as a political football. Jeff
envirojeff Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 ??? I'm glad Bush signed it. 281631[/snapback] You would rather keep your sister/daughter/mother... excisting for 15 years to only breathe and eat? Sounds very selfish to me??? Jeff
cåblelady Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 You would rather keep your sister/daughter/mother... excisting for 15 years to only breathe and eat? Sounds very selfish to me??? Jeff 281637[/snapback] How do YOU know that's all Terri can do ? And how does ANYONE know what Terri wanted? I wouldn't believe a single word her scumbag "husband" says. Terri's family is from my area. If her parents and siblings want to care for her.....I say let them.
Losman-McGahee-Evans Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 ??? I'm glad Bush signed it. 281631[/snapback] Specifically, why are you glad he signed it? You are aware that her cerebral cortex has liquified which means there is no chance, zero, she can recover. She has been dead for over 15 years and is tragically been kept alive for purely selfish reasons on her family part. All the responses you see are responses to light, sound and sensation. It saddens me that people think so little of a person like Terry to support a radical religious group's (The current leadership of my Republicna party) use of her as a political tool. If this is the right thing to do where were they when this occured : http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3087387
Losman-McGahee-Evans Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 How do YOU know that's all Terri can do ? And how does ANYONE know what Terri wanted? I wouldn't believe a single word her scumbag "husband" says. Terri's family is from my area. If her parents and siblings want to care for her.....I say let them. 281640[/snapback] We know what she can do because this isn't something that has happened over night and has run its MEDICAL course to its logical conclusion. There is no possibilty of any "miracle" as her cerebral cortex has liquified. Again, she has been dead for 15 years now.
Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 You would rather keep your sister/daughter/mother... excisting for 15 years to only breathe and eat? Sounds very selfish to me??? Jeff 281637[/snapback] . It's extremely selfish, especially by her parents who appear to be a couple of zealots what with the freakshow they've brought in to "represent" them. Watching the usual suspects in congress stick their noses somewhere it doesn't belong is strictly politically motivated. I think they'll get their noses cut off over this one.
UConn James Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 What bothers me most is that the President of the United States and the Republican Party is using this poor woman for political gain and manipulating her family in order to do it. This is the same George W. Bush who, while governor of Texas, signed a law allowing hospitals to terminate life-support for incapacitated patients, even against the wishes of the family. Especially if the patient cannot pay. 281628[/snapback] When this happened during the debates w/ Cheney's daughter, they were up in arms for Kerry's using her for political gain. No such outcry when its them doing the same damn thing. And you know, that other legislation, doesn't surprise me one bit. The opportune words are: if they can't pay. It's all about keeping money, money, money in the pockets of big business. That is what they've become and they're not going back. What surprises me are the shmucks who keep voting for them b/c they get a couple hundred bucks back in a tax return rather than fixing the entire system and keeping the govt from taking thousands from them in the first place. Dude, I used to be a Republican. The party left me behind in about 1990, and I stupidly kept supporting them until 1998. Maybe it's time to re-evaluate who better represents your opinions. I agree w/ about 30 percent of the GOP agenda (economic, but it's eroding more every day), but about 75-80 percent of the Dem. It's not about the Ted Kennedys of the party anymore. There's a reason why McCain is called a RINO.
cåblelady Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 Specifically, why are you glad he signed it? 281641[/snapback] I believe in the Right to Life. I also believe in miracles. Before you criticize me, let me tell you a little story. My father had his 1st major heart attack at the age of 42. He had 2 quadruple by-pass surgeries that both failed. The doctors didn't give him much hope. Very small capillaries started growing in his heart, branching out and carrying his blood flow. The doctors had never seen such an occurance and said it had to be a miracle. These little capillaries sustained my Dad for 40 more years.
Bishop Hedd Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 I believe in the Right to Life. I also believe in miracles. Before you criticize me, let me tell you a little story. My father had his 1st major heart attack at the age of 42. He had 2 quadruple by-pass surgeries that both failed. The doctors didn't give him much hope. Very small capillaries started growing in his heart, branching out and carrying his blood flow. The doctors had never seen such an occurance and said it had to be a miracle. These little capillaries sustained my Dad for 40 more years. 281652[/snapback] ...and now you know the rest of the story. Are current events discussed on this board as well?
Losman-McGahee-Evans Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 When this happened during the debates w/ Cheney's daughter, they were up in arms for Kerry's using her for political gain. No such outcry when its them doing the same damn thing. And you know, that other legislation, doesn't surprise me one bit. The opportune words are: if they can't pay. It's all about keeping money in the pockets of big business. Dude, I used to be a Republican. The party left me behind in about 1990, and I stupidly kept supporting them until 1998. Maybe it's time to re-evaluate who better represents your opinions. I agree w/ about 30 percent of the GOP agenda, but about 75-80 percent of the Dem. It's not about the Ted Kennedys of the party anymore. 281645[/snapback] The reason Kerry brought it up was to show the hypocrisy of Bush to run a campaign based upon the hatred of a group of people. He wasn't successful because the rapture-right isn't concerned about following the message of Christ (Which is tolerance and care for the least among you). They are using what is called a "rapture index" and believe anything they do to accelerate the end of the earth is doing God's work. Delay has mentioned this index as has Bush. The party is so extreme at this point that I will indeed leave it if McCain is not the nominee in 2008 and I'll probably vote Democrat either way if Clarke (I believe he is a former Republican who became a Democrat because of the lunancy that is leading it now) is the nominee. After the listening to lie after lie leading up to the Iraq war and then lie after lie during all this SS "crisis" nonsense you understand why Bush won re-election by the narrowest margin in our country's history. Look at his approval raitngs now.
envirojeff Posted March 21, 2005 Posted March 21, 2005 How do YOU know that's all Terri can do ? And how does ANYONE know what Terri wanted? I wouldn't believe a single word her scumbag "husband" says. Terri's family is from my area. If her parents and siblings want to care for her.....I say let them. 281640[/snapback] Since Terri's family is from your area and I know nothing about any of this, please tell me what she can do. Let me know what her average day is like. What is her favorite TV show???? I would just like to have all the details that you do. Jeff
Recommended Posts