VABills Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Red herring. The Pope's brain is not goo and he is responding. Is TS making the sign of the cross? Get real if you think that her movements are anything but involuntary muscle movements produced by stimuli of some sorts. There are sleeping periods and wake periods. No more than your computer booting up to find the blinking cursor... Only to shut down again, and boot up to the blinking cursor. Sure you hit the keyboard and the sound goes beep, beep... But, that is it. The computer hard drive is shot and won't boot up. There is no hitting F1 here folks and working around? God, please stop me from making these STUPID analogies! 290617[/snapback] No you have been saying thoughout that if someone needs ouside tubes/assistance then it is more humane just to let them die.
RkFast Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 No you have been saying thoughout that if someone needs ouside tubes/assistance then it is more humane just to let them die. 290620[/snapback] Now youre being silly and you know it.
VABills Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Now youre being silly and you know it. 290623[/snapback] Not silly, consistant. I know that is something that is a novel concept around here, but I am consistant in my beliefs and my views. Unless something overriding with "real facts" sways me otherwise I will not change. I am not swayed by what the "majority" thinks in a skewed poll, not in what the talking heads on the news tell me. And before I forget, what level of awareness must one have before you pull the tubes? I guess I distrust the media so much I don't trust their analysis of the science here. And which doctors do you beleieve, some say she is okay, other say she has no brain. Yet she has all essential body function other then movement. She breathes, processes food, etc... She just can't chew and swallow.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 No you have been saying thoughout that if someone needs ouside tubes/assistance then it is more humane just to let them die. 290620[/snapback] No I haven't. Maybe others, not me. I have even said I might act as IRRATIONAL as the parents if that was my kid. I just would have reached the point of letting go and trusting science eventually. For me... There are many factors innvolved. I don't begin to know the facts of this case?... Yet, seem to be clear cut towards science? I let my mother go when she passed on with ovarian cancer BECAUSE that is what she said she wanted to my father. At the end I started to get queezy and thought that maybe she wanted to fight on?... Did I question my father? NO. I could have based the need for her to fight on IRRATIONAL fears, second doubts, and my FAITH. Did I? NO. To do so would have been to undermine my father and her choice that they pre-determined. I had to trust. Over time, I could have easily been manipulated by my faith and undermined the whole process that was pre-determined? Consistency? Stay the course?
bobblehead Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 God, please stop me from making these STUPID analogies! 290617[/snapback] Not as stupid as what I heard on the "Glenn Beck" show yesterday, he asked someone if he thought Steven Hawking should be put to death. Ah, no, I believe Steven Hawking has the ability to wheel over to your house and answer you himself. Glenn Beck is a sick little pud.
John Adams Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 I let my mother go when she passed on with ovarian cancer BECAUSE that is what she said she wanted to my father. At the end I started to get queezy and thought that maybe she wanted to fight on?... Did I question my father? NO. I could have based the need for her to fight on IRRATIONAL fears, second doubts, and my FAITH. Did I? NO. To do so would have been to undermine my father and her choice that they pre-determined. I had to trust. Over time, I could have easily been manipulated by my faith and undermined the whole process that was pre-determined? 290633[/snapback] See you in H-E-double hockey sticks. It's interesting that the Pope is on his last breaths, with a feeding tube, at the same time that Schiavo is on her last breaths without one. It's a contrasting belief system for sure: the Pope believes that you should fight on for life (and suffer) as much as possible. Others are at peace with a natural progression towards death.
BillsNYC Posted March 30, 2005 Author Posted March 30, 2005 See you in H-E-double hockey sticks. It's interesting that the Pope is on his last breaths, with a feeding tube, at the same time that Schiavo is on her last breaths without one. It's a contrasting belief system for sure: the Pope believes that you should fight on for life (and suffer) as much as possible. Others are at peace with a natural progression towards death. 290725[/snapback] UGH..the Pope is suffering from Parkinsons, which disables his BODY, not his mind. He's also in his 80's and has been slowly declining. His brain is still ticking in there, and he can feel and demosntrate pain and emotion. Schiavo has been a useless vegetable for 15 years! You're comparing apples and oranges here people.
John Adams Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 UGH..the Pope is suffering from Parkinsons, which disables his BODY, not his mind. He's also in his 80's and has been slowly declining. His brain is still ticking in there, and he can feel and demosntrate pain and emotion. Schiavo has been a useless vegetable for 15 years! You're comparing apples and oranges here people. 290767[/snapback] I quite agree about the differences between the situations. I was contrasting the belief systems.
UConn James Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Not as stupid as what I heard on the "Glenn Beck" show yesterday, he asked someone if he thought Steven Hawking should be put to death. Ah, no, I believe Steven Hawking has the ability to wheel over to your house and answer you himself. Glenn Beck is a sick little pud. 290674[/snapback] This was actually mentioned downthread. I don't want to mention any names but his initials are VABills. Some people grasp at red herrings when they're desperate to somehow 'prove' they're 'right.' All I know is what happens happens, and the legal determination is being made by the person who it is entrusted to by law and is following the wishes of the patient. That should have been the end of it. Believe it or not, there are opinions in this case b/w making Terri the Bionic (But Still Devoid CT-Scan (Except According to Hack Doctors Who 'Diagnose' By Video)) Woman and dancing on her grave.
Dan Gross Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 I guess I distrust the media so much I don't trust their analysis of the science here. And which doctors do you beleieve, some say she is okay, other say she has no brain. Yet she has all essential body function other then movement. She breathes, processes food, etc... She just can't chew and swallow. 290629[/snapback] I don't trust the media here, which is why I sought out official records. I read the 3rd GAL's report, did you? I've read a legal breakdown on a blog by an attorney in Florida, which also linkks to a ton of official documents, did you? Have you even read about how the nervous system works? You obviously do not understand the difference between the autonomic and somatic nervous systems. Different nerve cells, different purposes. Do you have to think to breathe? No. Do you have to think to get your heart to go? No. Do you have to think to digest? No. These are all parts of the autonomic nervous system. Her damage is to the cerebral cortex, which now is nothing more than spinal fluid. To over-simplify, the cerebral cortex is responsible for the somatic (voluntary) nervous system. Pain, hunger, etc are a part of that system. She can not feel pain. She can not feel hunger. Yeah, the following link is the "press" but it is the most succinct explanation I could find: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...28_schiavo.html The doctors who say she is okay and can be rehabilitated are greedy quacks who stand to gain much more financially than Michael Schiavo could ever dream if they got their way. All they are doing is preying on the hopes of the parents. In 15 years, under several therapies, not one doctor has been able to prove that she is able to perform any voluntary function, even after several carefully performed swallowing tests (swallowing is one of the basic voluntary functions, but it can be affected in several ways). For someone who is warning against being caught up in "media polls," you seem to be awfully susceptible to "un-founded rhetoric." I'm really disappointed in what little fact you are basing your arguments on. It seems so unlike you. My grandmother developed esophegeal cancer, had part of it removed, to the point where she could no longer eat. Could she chew? Yes. Could she swallow? Yes. But the food would not get to her stomach because her remaining esophogus was too small. So she had a *gasp* feeding tube. Did we ever petition to have it removed? No. Did she ask to have it removed? No. Was it frustrating for everyone? Yes. But she was a sentient human being. She was able to interact, play cards, tell stories, etc. Years later, when she was in the hospital with pneumonia, and her heart stopped, they let her die rather than hooking her up to machines, because that was her wish. Everything that makes a human considered "human," not just moving, not just swallowing, but thinking, awareness and feeling, are all not operating in Terri Schiavo. She is a physical shell that is being maintained by a very efficient autonomic system. If you believe in the human spirit that exists beyond the physical body, then this spirit is trapped in a useless shell. That is worlds different than treating an ailing Pope, an ailing grandmother, or, in the reverse, denying a sentient person food.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Aussiew- she doesn't have to die. 290344[/snapback] I'd think there's considerable question as to whether she's "alive" or "dead" to begin with. One could just as easily suggest that the feeding tube was keeping alive a dead woman as removing it is killing a live one.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 I don't trust the media here, which is why I sought out official records. I read the 3rd GAL's report, did you? I've read a legal breakdown on a blog by an attorney in Florida, which also linkks to a ton of official documents, did you? Have you even read about how the nervous system works? You obviously do not understand the difference between the autonomic and somatic nervous systems. Different nerve cells, different purposes. Do you have to think to breathe? No. Do you have to think to get your heart to go? No. Do you have to think to digest? No. These are all parts of the autonomic nervous system. Her damage is to the cerebral cortex, which now is nothing more than spinal fluid. To over-simplify, the cerebral cortex is responsible for the somatic (voluntary) nervous system. Pain, hunger, etc are a part of that system. She can not feel pain. She can not feel hunger. Yeah, the following link is the "press" but it is the most succinct explanation I could find: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...28_schiavo.html The doctors who say she is okay and can be rehabilitated are greedy quacks who stand to gain much more financially than Michael Schiavo could ever dream if they got their way. All they are doing is preying on the hopes of the parents. In 15 years, under several therapies, not one doctor has been able to prove that she is able to perform any voluntary function, even after several carefully performed swallowing tests (swallowing is one of the basic voluntary functions, but it can be affected in several ways). For someone who is warning against being caught up in "media polls," you seem to be awfully susceptible to "un-founded rhetoric." I'm really disappointed in what little fact you are basing your arguments on. It seems so unlike you. My grandmother developed esophegeal cancer, had part of it removed, to the point where she could no longer eat. Could she chew? Yes. Could she swallow? Yes. But the food would not get to her stomach because her remaining esophogus was too small. So she had a *gasp* feeding tube. Did we ever petition to have it removed? No. Did she ask to have it removed? No. Was it frustrating for everyone? Yes. But she was a sentient human being. She was able to interact, play cards, tell stories, etc. Years later, when she was in the hospital with pneumonia, and her heart stopped, they let her die rather than hooking her up to machines, because that was her wish. Everything that makes a human considered "human," not just moving, not just swallowing, but thinking, awareness and feeling, are all not operating in Terri Schiavo. She is a physical shell that is being maintained by a very efficient autonomic system. If you believe in the human spirit that exists beyond the physical body, then this spirit is trapped in a useless shell. That is worlds different than treating an ailing Pope, an ailing grandmother, or, in the reverse, denying a sentient person food. 290812[/snapback] Eloquent, but it avoids a question I've brought up numerous times. What about those with advanced alzheimer's? They're hardly sentient. And retards. No, not the short-bus window-licking kind, but REALLY retarded people? What about them? They're not sentient either, all they do is drool on themselves. Should we starve them to death as well?
Berg Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 What I'm saying is that the pro-death people are saying death by starvation is painless. People that could tell you it is not are survivors of Auschwitz and other Nazi Death camps. They came about as close to death by starvation as you can and still live. 290566[/snapback] Which simply proves you have no comprehension of the circumstances in the Nazi concentration camps. I challenege you to take your own advice and ask Auschwitz survivors if they think what they endured there is comparable to what Terry Schaivo is going through.
Berg Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Eloquent, but it avoids a question I've brought up numerous times. What about those with advanced alzheimer's? They're hardly sentient. And retards. No, not the short-bus window-licking kind, but REALLY retarded people? What about them? They're not sentient either, all they do is drool on themselves. Should we starve them to death as well? 290827[/snapback] I could relay a rather painful story about my late Grandmother and Alzheimer's, but don't really feel up to it right now. However, Alzheimer's is treatable at least in mild to moderate cases, and some promising research may help acute cases as well. At this point, there is (arguably) nothing to be done for people in TS's condition. This is a major difference ignored by many when attempting to make these types of comparisons.
Alaska Darin Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Ah, no, I believe Steven Hawking has the ability to wheel over to your house and answer you himself. 290674[/snapback] Not if it's snowing...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 I could relay a rather painful story about my late Grandmother and Alzheimer's, but don't really feel up to it right now. However, Alzheimer's is treatable at least in mild to moderate cases, and some promising research may help acute cases as well. At this point, there is (arguably) nothing to be done for people in TS's condition. This is a major difference ignored by many when attempting to make these types of comparisons. 290856[/snapback] I know Alzheimer's. Two of my grandparents died because of it, and a third will likely soon. It's a horrible thing. My grandmother is NOT the same person she was years ago, not by a long shot. She can only communicate through growling. She can't bathe herself, feed herself or control her bodily functions. Should we as her family be allowed to starve her to death?
Dan Gross Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Eloquent, but it avoids a question I've brought up numerous times. What about those with advanced alzheimer's? They're hardly sentient. And retards. No, not the short-bus window-licking kind, but REALLY retarded people? What about them? They're not sentient either, all they do is drool on themselves. Should we starve them to death as well? 290827[/snapback] If you actually read what I said, the answer is right there. They fall under my Pope/Grandmother example. If you pinch them, they feel it. If you feed them, they swallow it. If you deny them food, they hunger, and will let you know. BIG difference. They are sentient. Even if they seem "not there," they are conscious and aware of their environment and react to it. The brain is existent (the cerebral cortex has not atrophied and been replaced with spinal fluid, as in Terri's case), it's the nerve cells that are malfunctioning.
bobblehead Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Not if it's snowing... 290860[/snapback] He's got people, like Elvis did. Elvis's people.
nobody Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 Not if it's snowing... 290860[/snapback] He's too smart to go out when it's snowing.
Berg Posted March 30, 2005 Posted March 30, 2005 I know Alzheimer's. Two of my grandparents died because of it, and a third will likely soon. It's a horrible thing. My grandmother is NOT the same person she was years ago, not by a long shot. She can only communicate through growling. She can't bathe herself, feed herself or control her bodily functions. Should we as her family be allowed to starve her to death? 290865[/snapback] I believe there is a subjective point at which the human body should be allowed to fail if that is what it is inclined to do. As to whether you should starve your Grandmother to death or not, only you can answer that question. I am not a reliqious person. However, what has always confused me in situations like these is my perceived hypocrisy in the religious community: Is TS better off remaining in her current condition, or would she be better off in Heaven with God? Isn't her family's efforts to keep her alive a completely selfish act, preventing her from ascending to a better place?
Recommended Posts