Sign On
Create Account


multiple20-Mar-2005opinioncerealkiller by votes86861.4%


Should Terry Schiavo be kept alive or should she be allowed to die?

24She should be allowed to die
22She should be allowed to die but in a more humane manner
18She should be kept alive
11I don't know

posted 21-Mar-2005 1:40pm  
In this case I believe she should be kept alive. It's not like she has a degenerative illness that will result in an unholy choking episode at the end...
posted 21-Mar-2005 1:54pm  
She should be allowed to die in a humane way. Send her to The Netherlands! smile
(reply to CarolL) posted 21-Mar-2005 1:56pm  
She's a plant now. What kind of life is that?
posted 21-Mar-2005 2:23pm  
She should be kept alive (fed). In this situation, I think the wishes of her parents should come before the wishes of her husband. Her husband appears to be motivated by selfish concerns.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
posted 21-Mar-2005 2:37pm  
She should be allowed to die, but in a more humane manner. Arguably she can't choose to kill herself, so physician-assisted suicide or something like it is out of the question. But she's basically brain-dead, and it seems more humane to let her die than to keep her "living" this way indefinitely. I also think it's completely inappropriate that Congress is getting involved in this. Politicians should not be using this woman's life to further their own ends.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 21-Mar-2005 2:40pm  
I think it's exactly the opposite. Her parents are selfishly clinging to some false hope that she will ever get better. If her husband were selfishly motivated, wouldn't he just have divorced her by now?
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 21-Mar-2005 2:42pm  
She's in a persistent vegetative state. Various Florida courts have ruled (repeatedly) to remove the feeding tube. Would you want to be kept "alive" in such a state?
(reply to Maarten) posted 21-Mar-2005 2:48pm  
It's no kind of life, I agree. But starving to death is rather cruel, isn't it?
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 21-Mar-2005 2:49pm  
see posting to Maarten.
posted 21-Mar-2005 2:53pm  
My policy has always been to allow feeding tubes.

If respirators, and a heart machine is in use, then the plugs should pulled on those alone. A person should NEVER be denied food
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 21-Mar-2005 2:57pm  
I agree that it's a bad way to go, but I don't think that physically she would feel it. I think that part of her brain isn't functioning. It's too bad that they can't give her an injection or something instead.
posted 21-Mar-2005 3:00pm  
I hate to say it, bit that article does the case absolutely no justice. This is something that I've been following and forced to listen about for the past 15 years, as it is in my hometown. Here's today's article from the paper.
posted 21-Mar-2005 3:37pm  
If nothing else can be done now and there is nothing that can be done in the foreseeable future, then yes..she should be "allowed" to die. I am not a hard-hearted person. I believe that everything and everyone has a right to live. The question lies in the QUALITY of that life. If a baby is born with terrible deformities or medical conditions and will live only with heroic medical assistance, that baby should be loved as long as it lives, naturally, on its own, then allowed to die, naturally, on its own. As much as people hate to face it, there is a certain dignity in death..humans just don't like to let go when it's time to let go.
posted 21-Mar-2005 4:09pm  
I think the fact that our congress and President our coming in on Sunday in rush session to decide her destiny is just insane! I think that if she is a drain on the family, the government and is not even able to really respond they should let her die. Poor thing. Why do we go through so much trouble to keep people alive that drain everyone around them and cannot even function on their own. Imagine the cost to medicare to keep her alive! I think it is all just a political thing. Nobody wants to be the one that pulled the plug.
romkey Survey Central Gold Subscriber
posted 21-Mar-2005 4:30pm  
My understanding is that "Terry Shiavo" is already dead.
romkey Survey Central Gold Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 21-Mar-2005 4:33pm  
My understanding is that she's braindead - so there's nothing there to feel discomfort, pain. I'm not sure what better way there would be to let her body go. If my understanding of the situation is inaccurate then I'd certainly have a different opinion, but if it's true that she's flat-lined, braindead - then I think it's horrible to keep her body alive.

What I really don't understand is why this situation is so different from other people whose families have disagreements about whether to keep them alive, that the nation's legislature would get involved.
posted 21-Mar-2005 5:44pm  
She is wanted on this side. We should not mess with Divine Order. Without medical science, maybe she would had died, but the fact is, she is alive today. She has a future, we have no right to interfere, especially with her parents being there for her. Actually, it points out why a "living will" is so important. Her husband can move on, he doesn't have to kill her doing it.
(reply to patarnone) posted 21-Mar-2005 5:49pm  
divine order????
um....ok. this is probably the FARTHEST thing from divine order i can even think of.
her current future is, to be a headline in the daily news, and she is being used in a political manner....GREAT future, eh?
posted 21-Mar-2005 6:04pm  
From our point of view, her life is meaningless, is that it? Who speaks from inside HER head? How can we judge her quality of life without being there? Maybe she has a quality of peace and happiness we can only hope for? We have interfered with the natural order of things already... is this how society wants to correct the wrong, by starving her to death? I wish Psychic Detectives would take over and see what the real Terry wants.
posted 21-Mar-2005 8:33pm  
I really don't know.
posted 21-Mar-2005 9:23pm  
I think that she should be allowed to die. From what I've seen and read, tests have proved that she feels no pain, so I don't see removing the feeding tube as being inhumane.

I know that I would never want to live the way she is. I actually don't even see it as living, it's simply existing.

Furthermore, I believe that her parents are being selfish. They should let her go. It's been 15 years and she's shown no major improvement. Let her die.
southernyankee Happy Birthday to Me
posted 21-Mar-2005 10:26pm  
she should be allowd to die in a more humane way, but this is under the assumption that thats what she really wanted. Well, sort of her own fault for not signing a living will so she doesnt really have much of a say. Seems like her husband claims that she would prefer the plug to be pulled and her parents think otherwise. There is a good chance that one of these, if not both, are full of crap and want something out of it, so neither has that much credibility. Still, I think that the husband's wishes and opinions should supercede her parents.
southernyankee Happy Birthday to Me
(reply to Zang) posted 21-Mar-2005 10:32pm  
> She should be kept alive (fed). In this situation, I think the wishes
> of her parents should come before the wishes of her husband. Her husband
> appears to be motivated by selfish concerns.

I think both sides are motivated by some selfishness at least. Anyway, you say that their wishes should come before her husband's. YOu have got to be kidding right? Isnt that the whole point of turning 18 / growing up / getting married. And isnt that the whole point of marrage, so that the most important person in your life becomes your spouce?
jettles Survey Central Subscriber
posted 21-Mar-2005 10:38pm  
the decision about her life should not be debated or discussed by anyone but her husband and/or immediate family. this public debate is appalling and this being discussed and decisions made by congress and the president is even more appalling. in my opinion.
but it answer the question in terms of my own family, if my partner were in the same state of health, i would have withdrawn support earlier on and followed her wishes but if legally pushed to these limits i would have continued as her husband has done. my partner and i have living wills in place and they include not being fed or hydrated if we are vegetative or will not return to a functioning level.
it seems from all i have read and heard, for the first 5 years,her husband had her tested and rehab'ed and taken to many different specialists in order to help his wife but none of it helped (as he was told by doctors at the time that she would not return to her former self and remain vegetative). at that point, he started this fight to allow her to die with dignity and not live as she is.
jettles Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 21-Mar-2005 10:41pm  
everything i have read shows the opposite, he did everything he could for her for the first 5 years with all the physicians telling him it was in vain. this included specialists, testing, rehab, etc and no change. then he decided he had done all that he could and decided to let her die with dignity.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 21-Mar-2005 10:43pm  
My response was based more on something I saw on TV than on the linked article. I don't claim to know everything about this case, but the compelling arguments for feeding her are:

- She is still somewhat responsive.

- Her parents are for it.

- She isn't in pain.

- She never indicated otherwise, prior to her condition.

- It isn't like they are keeping her alive through strenuous means; they are simply feeding her through a tube.

- Her husband has already gone off and got himself a girlfriend.

I don't have a problem with this sort of thing if that is what someone has decided for themselves, or there isn't anyone close to them to object or they are quite clearly in a coma or in pain or whatever...
jettles Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to romkey) posted 21-Mar-2005 10:45pm  
she is not brain dead. just the fact that she is breathing and her heart is beating on it's own means she is not brain dead. she is in a vegetative state.
if she were brain dead, then she is considered dead and the hospital wouldn't need family consent to with draw support.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 21-Mar-2005 11:27pm  
-I have heard that she's not responsive. The parents like to think that random movements she makes are "responses" to them, but according to various doctors they are just random reflexes. Independent, court-appointed doctors have determined that she is in a "persistent vegetative state."

-According to her husband, she *did* indicate that it was what she would want.

-She has been in this condition for 15 years. Her husband hasn't "already" done anything. He helped care for her for the first few years, living at her parents' house with her. The courts got involved because he asked them to be the arbiter between himself and her parents, because they disagreed about what course of action to take. He did not specifically bring a suit against the parents; he has been abiding by the decisions of the court and the court-appointed doctors, which is that she is brain-dead and will not recover.
romkey Survey Central Gold Subscriber
(reply to jettles) posted 22-Mar-2005 12:07am  
Not being a doctor, it was my impression that some people who suffered brain death still breathed and had their hearts beat. This is really nowhere near my area of expertise, though.
posted 22-Mar-2005 4:45am  
She should be allowed to die.
(reply to CarolL) posted 22-Mar-2005 6:10am  
Absolutely, that why I said: send her to the Netherlands so she will be allowed to die in a humane way.
(reply to patarnone) posted 22-Mar-2005 7:28am  
i feel bad for her and her family....her brain is dead. (well, what "they" call to be dead anyhow). my personal thought on it, is just, if her brain is dead, then "naturally", (divine order if you will), her body would go next and she would slip away.
do i agree w/ starving her to death? no...not exactly. but i "feel" that she would go, before she actually starved.
also, maybe she is experiencing some harmonious light filled thing. and yeah, that would be horrible to take that away, but.....MAYBE she is inbetween and wants to go, but cannot because she is still attached to a body that is being kept alive by tubes....
tis hard to say....but i really do believe that she wants to go, and wants this 3-ring media circus to leave her and her family alone, for i believe that they ALL have been through thweir fair share of events.

(welcome to SC
(reply to romkey) posted 22-Mar-2005 8:09am  
I have seen video footage on the news and she is awake. An interview with a friend of the family this morning on Canada A.M. said he perceived some yes/no answers from her with her voice (one moan for yes, two for no). I'm not sure if that's considered brain dead or not. I would infer that being awake she will feel discomfort from starving to death. What about other people, like severely mentally retarded children for example, that can't feed themselves or communicate in a conventional manner? The far-reaching implications of this particular case are disturbing. It's quite a precedent.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 22-Mar-2005 9:19am  
Ah...sounds like I may have been taken in by a less than unbiased TV account. Just goes to show how silly these sort of questions can be. More often than not, I have no idea at all what it is about and have to rely on the links. With this one, I figured I "knew" something because of a TV spot I had just happened to catch recently. I'm never interested enough to thoroughly research the story...
posted 22-Mar-2005 9:22am  
I just changed my vote from "kept alive" to "I don't know".
jettles Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to romkey) posted 22-Mar-2005 10:04am  
no, if you can breath and your heart beats with out assistance from outside help(ventilator or pacemaker etc.)you are not brain dead. the lower portion of your brain that houses the centers for breathing and heart rate are still working. you may not have any cognitive brain activity but you still have brain stem function and thus you are not brain dead. terri shiavo was not connected to anything but the feeding tube and breathing on her own.
families can still remove any life sustaining interventions in this case but the patient is not considered dead. to determine brain death there are a number of tests that are performed on the patient and they essentially don't take any beaths on their own or react in the usual ways to the other tests performed.(for these exams the patient can't be sedated or have any medictions on board that would cause them not to react in appropriate ways). in the case of brain death, the hospital/doctors can remove the patient from ventilator and any other interventions without family consent because the patient is legally dead.
posted 22-Mar-2005 10:50am  
Without her express consent, no. She is not in a state to give consent so should not be left to die. I agree with euthanasia, when the person is able to clearly state their wishes.

Maybe there could be a kind of similar system to a donor card, where you could specify that if you were in a similar situation, what you would like to happen. Personally, any family member that switches off my life support is getting a good haunting.
posted 22-Mar-2005 10:51am  
I don't watch news and I did not click the link. I don't know what you are talking about.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 22-Mar-2005 12:08pm  
I'm sure there's plenty I don't know about it, as well. It's interesting, though, a poll released yesterday apparently showed that a huge majority of Americans think that Congress has overstepped its bounds in getting involved; most people think they're just being political while this is not a political issue. A big majority also support Schiavo's husband, and say they wouldn't want to be kept on life-support if it were them. The issue has nothing to do with partisan lines, either; Republicans and Democrats respond the same way in about the same proportions. I'm finding the whole thing fairly interesting for some reason. In part I like that it's really complicated, and that a lot of people seem to be acknowledging that fact.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 22-Mar-2005 12:18pm  
I think "awake" is a stretch. I saw a picture, and her eyes are open in it. Which honestly does add a dimension of complication to the issue, for me at least. It's odd how much more alive someone seems just because their eyes are open. But it doesn't mean she's awake, or conscious of what's going on around her in any way. It just means that her brain stem is keeping her eyes open. That's the only part of her brain that's working.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 22-Mar-2005 3:15pm  
Really? On the video footage she seemed to be able to follow the movements of the people around her.
Do you know if she will feel any discomfort or pain while starving to death? Does just the brain stem working mean she feels no pain?
they Survey Central Subscriber
posted 22-Mar-2005 3:29pm  
I don't really know. I've followed the case.. and watched the clips at

If she should be euthanized though, she should not be starved. This is 2005.. and we can't decide on a better form of euthansia? We treat sick pets better than this.
they Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 22-Mar-2005 3:39pm  
Watch the clips and decide for yourself..

It didn't help me decide though.
they Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 22-Mar-2005 3:40pm  
Watch the clips and decide for yourself..

It didn't help me decide though.
they Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Maarten) posted 22-Mar-2005 3:40pm  
How is it done in the Netherlands?

LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
posted 22-Mar-2005 4:23pm  
I watched all the clips, and I've seen disabled kids with less responsiveness than that. They don't let severely retarded kids die.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to CarolL) posted 22-Mar-2005 4:48pm  
I'm not sure what following movement might even mean, though. Does tracking movement mean that she knows what she's doing? From what I've read, she has no thoughts or emotions, and feels no pain. So tracking movement could just be because the eyes and brain are hardwired to do that. And honestly, I don't think that all those doctors would recommend removing the feeding tube if they believed that she would feel it or know what was going on.
posted 22-Mar-2005 9:52pm  
She should be allowed to die in a humane manner....... she is living what most call "The living death". That means that she is living, but she cannot do anything, so it is like she is dead. It is hard to explain, but I think most people who are reading this will understand the concept I am trying to portray.
(reply to jettles) posted 22-Mar-2005 10:26pm  
Here, in Mississippi, doctors cannot legally remove a patient from life support unless the patient's family consents, unless the patient has a living will.

For example, there is a 7 year old boy in PedICU (at the hospital where my sis-in-law is an RN) that has been on life support since he was less than a year old. The boy's parents refuse to allow him to die. So, for all these years, that little boy has been attached to tubes, laying in a bed, waiting to die.

The only thing hospital officials can do in cases like this is take it to court and let a judge decided what to do. But, most hospitals aren't going to do this, as it can end up taking years and costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
(reply to they) posted 23-Mar-2005 6:20am  
jettles Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Amanda) posted 23-Mar-2005 9:56am  
i am pretty sure if you asked her she would say that that little boy is not brain dead. we couldn't either if the patient isn't brain dead. with a patient who is brain dead it is different and also you wouldn't be able to keep a brain dead patient alive that long. ultimately the body would start to shut down.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 23-Mar-2005 10:22am  
I just heard something on the radio this morning. I don't remember what it was, I was still half asleep.
(reply to jettles) posted 23-Mar-2005 10:56am  
From what I'd gathered, he was brain dead. But, I could be wrong. I'll have to ask her about the details, as you've gotten me curious now. I think that, either way, it's a sad thing to keep that little boy alive like that.

However, I do know that, even if a person is brain dead, if they don't have a living will, doctors must have consent from the next of kin before life support is stopped. I don't really agree with this, though. If a person is brain dead, they should be allowed to die. I don't see the need to keep a person alive, knowing they'll never really LIVE again.
posted 23-Mar-2005 11:01am  
Allowed to die in a more humane manner....what they're doing to her is breaking my more ways than one.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 23-Mar-2005 12:19pm  
Well, that's helpful!
It might have had to do with the legal battle to have her tube reinserted. So far both the federal district and federal appeals courts have refused to order the tube reinserted. Her parents will try the Supreme Court next.
(reply to justjulie) posted 24-Mar-2005 6:55am  
thanks for letting a newbie join in! Watching all the media hype is really awful.. Ordinary I would say, just let her go, she should never have been kept alive... BUT... then you read the reports that family should TALK to the person in the coma, well, who's to say she isn't receiving the words, touches, and thoughts from her caregivers. And that's another thing, she HAS caregivers and people who love and want her... we will not mention her husband. It's terrible to say, but I will be relieved when she passes.
(reply to patarnone) posted 24-Mar-2005 7:33am  
i really couldn't agree w/ you more about being relieved once it is "over". yes, that sounds awful....but it really isn't. i just think the family needs to accept the fact that she will indeed be a "vegetable" for the rest of her exisitence, and that YES, miracles do indeed happen...but if a miracle was going to happen in this case, i do think it already would have.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 24-Mar-2005 8:49am  
This would seem to be a big story right now. Even here in Canada, it seems to be on the news all the time and people are talking about it.
(reply to justjulie) posted 24-Mar-2005 10:42am  
I just think it's tragic that we put criminals to death in a more civilized manner.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 24-Mar-2005 12:47pm  
It's something people seem to feel very strongly about, I guess. That poll I mentioned also said one in three people (in the US, presumably) have had to deal with a similar life-support type situation. So it's probably something that has affected a lot of people's lives. Although I haven't had to deal with it and I'm pretty interested in the case, too.
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to patarnone) posted 24-Mar-2005 12:49pm  
I was just thinking about that yesterday. I was reading an article about how Jeb Bush is trying to find *any* way he can to put the tube back in. And I just know there's no way he would be this concerned to make sure that a death-row criminal wasn't being wrongfully executed.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 24-Mar-2005 4:25pm  
He's sure learning from his brother how to say one thing and mean another... talking about Geo W's brother, Jeb.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 24-Mar-2005 5:11pm  
I'm not. raspberry
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 24-Mar-2005 5:28pm  
Then why do you keep replying to me, Mr. Smartypants?
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to patarnone) posted 24-Mar-2005 5:28pm  
It's a little thing I like to call hypocrisy.
posted 24-Mar-2005 6:23pm  
The administration wants to distract from the Jeff Gannon incident. They'll cut $15 billion in medicaid, an amount that means some thousands of poor will die, but they'll tie up Congress with this Shiavo question, demonstrating that they care nothing for family privacy and for due process of law. Despicable grandstanding.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 24-Mar-2005 9:47pm  
Because I like you. smile
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 24-Mar-2005 9:48pm  
Have I beguiled you?
(reply to patarnone) posted 25-Mar-2005 7:47am  
i do agree.
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 25-Mar-2005 1:00pm  
I don't know, what do you think?
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 25-Mar-2005 3:07pm  
Well, I'm very beguiling, so I think yes!
(reply to justjulie) posted 25-Mar-2005 6:15pm  
I think the whole family if F'ed... the only ones worth anything are the 2 wild daughters. Probably the most honest, too!
(reply to Enheduanna) posted 25-Mar-2005 11:58pm  
(reply to patarnone) posted 26-Mar-2005 7:15am  
are we still talking about the schiavo's? or are we now talking about the Bush's? wink
(reply to justjulie) posted 26-Mar-2005 7:41am  
the Bushes... survey said... ta DA... IMPEACH! hehe, Family Feud
(reply to patarnone) posted 26-Mar-2005 7:52am  
laughing out loud

i so loved family gramma was a big fan. smile
(reply to justjulie) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:00am  
Jeopardy is a favorite of mine... my mother liked quiz shows that were more smart than luck types. Both my folks were very smart and my father was a REAL trivia nut, so I grew up with great role models! All fk ups were totally my own!
(reply to patarnone) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:07am  
my dad is a bucket full of "useless" tidbits. i know whose team i want to be on if we play trivail pursuit. wink

and yeah....all f&@# up's are my own as well.
(reply to justjulie) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:11am  
my father was so good at "name that tune" they asked him to not play and be the moderator instead!
(reply to patarnone) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:14am  
that so we have the same dads? wink
(reply to justjulie) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:16am  
You mean we can have more than ONE!!!!!!
(reply to patarnone) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:19am  
laughing out loud

ok...lemme re-phrase...
"do we have the same DAD?"

(my coffeed mind was thinking of 2 different ways of saying essentially the same thing, and combined the 2 thoughts into one....hehe)
(reply to justjulie) posted 26-Mar-2005 8:32am  
I'm giving you a ration of shi*!!! I have both ICQ and Yahoo IM if we want to take this "on the side" as they say in CB radioland... means going to a sidebar channel, off the beaten track...
Enheduanna Survey Central Subscriber
(reply to Zang) posted 26-Mar-2005 1:24pm  
Now you're trying to beguile *me*!
posted 27-Mar-2005 6:22am  
This lady has been clinically dead for 15 years. Her manner of death is horrendous to we who are living because we can feel and think. Her body cannot do this. Her brain is flooded with spinal fluid. In 15 years of tests and scans there can be no mistake. I feel so dreadfully sorry for her husband and family.
posted 27-Mar-2005 12:11pm  
I am so ashamed of America, and our "Culture of Death" Society. We abort our babies, euthanise our elderly, and now we want to starve a woman to death, because she isn't perfect? Her parents are wanting to take care of her, did you ever think, maybe Michael doesn't want her to talk, he has avoided all therapy for her. So walk away and let her parents have her, and oh, by the way, she isn't dying of any disease, so what right does a Judge have to ask her to die, maybe we need to starve the Judge. There's too much evil in the world right now, let's get back to fighting it. Let's get back to loving each other, and caring for each other.
posted 27-Mar-2005 1:50pm  
She should be allowed to die in a more humane way if it is her choice to die? And if she chose to live then she should be kept alive? All this could be prevented if we all have a Living Will made out and make our own choices, otherwise this can and will happen to those of us without a Living Will. If it were me in her place I would choose not to have a feeding tube keeping me alive?
posted 27-Mar-2005 2:06pm  
And then who knows! but the Lord God, only he knows it all? And if she is a vegetable? For all we know her body is being kept alive and she is brain dead, and it is a dirty rotten shame to see congress get involved and then before you know it President Bush will get involved.
posted 27-Mar-2005 4:26pm  
And if she is to die, then she should die with more humane treatment and dignity and well respected and some sympathy here people? I want nobody telling me how I am going to die?
posted 27-Mar-2005 4:55pm  
Have you viewed the Videos? Terri dose smile when her mother talks to her.
I don't think that it's just her body *twitching*.
Her Parents want to take custody of her. they should be allowed.
Starving someone to death is *murder*..
There is no harm putting the Feeding Tube back in.
(reply to iwish40) posted 28-Mar-2005 2:13pm  
My heart just goes out to Terri Schiavo and the torment that she is going through right now! and all of the Political Garbage surrounding this case, and it has made me break down and cry!
posted 28-Mar-2005 5:59pm  
If she is truly in a "persistent vegetative state", as they call it, and has no chances of ever recovering, she should be allowed to die, but in a more humane matter. Starving would not be a very comfortable way to die in a state of consciousness, so it wouldn't be fair to do it to her.
posted 29-Mar-2005 10:17am  
Really, right now, I don't think it makes any difference. They done got her too far gone. God Bless her.
posted 29-Mar-2005 1:37pm  
I think that it is wrong to let her die, her mum and dad don't want her to die, but her husband wants her to die, because he is having an affair behind her back!!!!!!!!! She should be left alone, she is in no pain and is fine on her own!! leave her be!!
posted 29-Mar-2005 9:49pm  
She should be allowed to die when it's HER TIME TO DIE!
NOT starving to death just because she's inconvenient to her "husband."
You do this to a pet or an animal & see where you end up!
We can't do this to convicted murderers, so why an innocent woman?

Next thing we know, we'll be starving mentally retarded people to death.
(reply to perspicacious) posted 29-Mar-2005 10:00pm  
Take it from someone who works in a medical clinic. Medicaid NEEDS to be cut! It's severely abused! There are people on Medicaid that have no business being on it.
(reply to justjulie) posted 29-Mar-2005 10:10pm  
"YES, miracles do indeed happen...but if a miracle was going to happen in this case, i do think it already would have."

Not necessarily. There was a person who recently woke up after being in a coma for 20 years & asked his mom for a Coke.

"As extraordinary as our medical advancements have been, there is still so much more we don't know. Just a few weeks ago, a 38-year-old woman in Kansas emerged from a 20-year coma. Even though doctors believed she couldn't hear or see or process information, she awoke remembering not only her life before her accident, but a great deal of what happened around her during her 20-year respite."

Plus, there was a lady on the news during this whole Shaivo situation who said she was in a similar situation. Her feeding tube was removed as well & she said it felt like they were ripping her insides to shreds. She remembers everything during the time she was considered a "vegetable"

In the medical field, the brain is the most misunderstood organ.
(reply to peggysue) posted 29-Mar-2005 10:15pm  
"I am so ashamed of America, and our "Culture of Death" Society. We abort our babies, euthanise our elderly, and now we want to starve a woman to death, because she isn't perfect? "

AMEN SISTER!!! And we can thank the pro-abortion Democrats & Liberals for this.
They actually expect us to believe that starving to death is painless & euphoric. Well, if that's the case, why do we make such a big deal about anorexia.
Just let Mary-Kate Olson starve herself to death.

Take it from someone who's had a milder type of eating disorder. It's not fun & certainly isn't painless.
(reply to Glassa) posted 30-Mar-2005 7:51am  
that's nice for the info....and sorry to sound "un-caring" or harsh...but really...i don't really care one way or the other. yes i feel bad, but i REALLY don't care.
posted 31-Mar-2005 10:53am  
They shouldn't just starve her. Thats like murder if u think about it. i think she should be allowed to die but in a humane manner.
posted 31-Mar-2005 12:29pm  
Terry Schiavo is dead.
posted 2-Apr-2005 8:47am  
It was wrong what the husband did. He should have let her parents decide weather she lives or dies. I thought that maybe she should have been able to die, but I think I would have wanted to die knowing my parnents and husband were getting along and not fighting over me.
posted 2-Apr-2005 4:31pm  
A quicker death would have been more appropriate
posted 3-Apr-2005 9:18am  
Even though she has passed on.MAY SHE REST IN PEACE WITH HER MAKER!!! She should have had the chance to live. What in the world did she do for someone else to take her life away. Nothing !!!!! I know her husband thought he was doing what he thought was best. But he is the one who will go to hell for murder ON JUDGEMENT DAY...
posted 8-Apr-2005 3:04am  
i think husband should sign her over to family and let them pay to keep her alive, so he may move on with his distrutive life
posted 11-Apr-2005 1:31pm  
kill the stuped dog. im tired of hearing about her.

If you'd like to vote and/or comment on this survey, please Sign On

Link this survey:

Hits: 0 today (1 in the last 30 days)