Woman in Florida left to die in hospital

Dis · October 16, 2003, 00:52

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/15/coma.woman/index.html

Well the husband say the woman told him before she was injured that she wouldn't want to be a burden, and wouldn't want to be kept alive.

But her parents want her to be kept alive.

Her feeding tube has been removed.

She will die in a couple of weeks if she doesn't get food.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I suppore euthanasia, but looking at the video of her makes me think it shouldn't be used in her case.

Lorizael · October 16, 2003, 01:19

She's well over eighteen, so I don't think the parents really have a say anymore. Doctors in the case said that there was no chance that she could make a recovery. Yah it's sad to have to end a life this way, but I think it's the right thing to do.

Jon Miller · October 16, 2003, 04:26

people come out of coma's all the time

even when doctors don't expect them to

Jon Miller

TheStinger · October 16, 2003, 04:32

She is in PVS that is not the same as a normal coma.

She looks alive however that is merely reflex.

It is all very sad

The Mad Monk · October 16, 2003, 04:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Lorizael
She's well over eighteen, so I don't think the parents really have a say anymore. Doctors in the case said that there was no chance that she could make a recovery. Yah it's sad to have to end a life this way, but I think it's the right thing to do.

She's over eighteen, but we don't actually have her say -- just what her husband said.

I've heard enough bad things about him to really wonder.

Ben Kenobi · October 17, 2003, 13:41

I heard that while he is married to Terry, that he is living with another woman and has a kid by her as well.

Why should this man decide whether Terry lives or dies, if he does not love her enough to be faithful?

No one forced him to get married to her after all.

MichaeltheGreat · October 17, 2003, 13:48

IIRC, he hooked up with the "other woman" after six years, and numerous diagnoses that Terri Schiavo wouldn't recover.

One might wonder (I have) why he didn't file for divorce, but that's another issue.

The question should be whether there's any real evidence whatsoever (as opposed to ideologically motivated testimony from issue-friendly "doctors" on either side) as to whether she can recover even the slightest quality of life.

The agendas of the husband and parents and Randall Terry shouldn't be part of this medical issue.

MrFun · October 17, 2003, 15:33

this sucks

SlowwHand · October 17, 2003, 16:05

Very bad deal.
I vote yank the cord.
All the parents are doing is disrupting the master plan.

Ben Kenobi · October 17, 2003, 18:13

Quote:

The agendas of the husband and parents and Randall Terry shouldn't be part of this medical issue.

True, however both sides admit that Terry did not put anything in writing detailing her wishes should she be put on lifesupport. If this had been done, this would just be a medical issue, and the wishes of the parents and husband would not matter.

All we have is the word of her husband who stands to gain from the death of Terry Schiavo. That's why these agendas are coming into play.

Quote:

as to whether she can recover even the slightest quality of life.

We don't pull someone off life support because we feel their quality of life is bad. We can only do so at their request, or if they are brain dead. Terry Schiavo meets neither of these criteria. Quality of life is something that ought to be determined only by the person involved.

Frankly, I wonder if her husband even cares about her suffering, given his documented actions, and why he did not choose to divorce his wife given the tragedy that occurred to her.

SlowwHand · October 17, 2003, 18:20

Right, Ben. Divorce her. That's the honorable thing to do, isn't it?
umm,umm,umm. Rub that head.

Snotty · October 17, 2003, 18:30

Would this guys chances of getting the plug pulled be decreased if he got the divorce?

If he truly thinks it is the right thing to do to pull the plug, and he did love her, then he should stay married. This way he could have the best chance of getting what his wife wanted.

In the mean time I do not begrudge this guy getting on with his life.

I havent heard any of the smears against this guys character, but I can imagine they are just that, smears.

Snotty · October 17, 2003, 18:33

Re-reading, I think its a shame she has to die this way.

I should have voted 'I want to kill her myself' simply because I could make it quick for her.

Odin · October 17, 2003, 21:59

If I was in that situation I would rather die then be a vegetable for the rest of my life. The family is a victim of thier own wishful thinking, they were projecting emotions to here reflexes.

chequita guevara · October 17, 2003, 22:06

In order to avoid such things, you need to set up a living will and discuss it with your family. Now that I'm getting married, I will need to do this, because I know Bunnygrrl would never have the strength to make them take me off the machines, and she'd end up saddled with a horrible debt.

Drogue · October 17, 2003, 22:25

I know if that was me, I would want to be killed. Not starved to death, that's inhumane and painful, but killed, as quickly and painlessly as possible. Probably by given and overdose of pain medication. No only do I not want to be a burden (we have the NHS here, so it's a burden on the state not my family) I wouldn't want my family to be forced to see me contantly in that state. I cant't imagine how much it woul hurt to see the person I love like that, and I could never do that to her.

I am not sure of what should happen to her though. I know the husband hired his own doctors, and would not let others examine her, and that he has much to gain financially, if she dies he gets the $750,000 for her care, which is being withered away by this. That is why he didn't divorce her IMHO. I can imagine, after 13 years like that, he can hardly remember what it was like to be with her, so I don't blame him for pursuing another relationship. However it does give him a vested interest. What I would do would be to order a couple of doctors to examine her to say if there is any chance of recovery. If there isn't, then she should be killed, as painlessly and humanely as possible. If there is, which after this time seems unlikely, then she should be kept alive. I don't think simply removing her feeding tube should be an option. Either let her live or kill her humanely, not as slowly and painfully as possible

I voted for "I want to kill her myself" as that is what I would want in that position. I think she won't recover, after 13 years, and I think it is cruel to let her die slowly.

Bugs ****ing Bunny · October 18, 2003, 03:05

This exact situation was examined in Britain in the mid-90's when a Hillsborough survivor who had been in PVS for several years was allowed to die through removal of nutrition.

Ben Kenobi · October 18, 2003, 03:38

Quote:

Right, Ben. Divorce her. That's the honorable thing to do, isn't it?
umm,umm,umm. Rub that head.

The honorable thing would be to stick with your wife, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health.

Dis · October 21, 2003, 21:36

Well ole' Jeb Bush has now forced the feeding tube back into her mouth.

Anyone else think that is just a little too much power for a governor?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/21/coma.woman/index.html

Spiffor · October 21, 2003, 22:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The honorable thing would be to stick with your wife, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health.

YAY, have the sickness ruin both lives instead of one. Great idea !

And I think it was very noble of him not to file for divorce. It shows he still loves her, as he's still having the legal responsibility for her. Many people would have simply dropped the marriage and forgotten the whole deal

As to her euthanasia: if she hasn't expressed her will in any provable form, and if her coma prevents her from suffering (i.e if it is clear she doesn't feel anything), then I think she should live.

TCO · October 21, 2003, 22:59

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
IIRC, he hooked up with the "other woman" after six years, and numerous diagnoses that Terri Schiavo wouldn't recover.

One might wonder (I have) why he didn't file for divorce, but that's another issue.

It might have something to do with this:

"Michael Schiavo collected more than $1 million in malpractice settlements stemming from his wife's collapse, but only about $50,000 of that settlement remains. The money has been frozen by the court. "

Lemme see. He collects and spends 950K and doesn't get divorced. Now, he wants to pull the plug. Hmmmm.

Kuciwalker · October 21, 2003, 23:17

She's never going to come out of the coma, right? So how is she even really alive? She's just a lump of cells that are still alive because they are being fed from the outside. The "plug" got pulled when she went into the coma. She's dead already; her body just hasn't been convinced of the fact.

JohnT · October 21, 2003, 23:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Why should this man decide whether Terry lives or dies, if he does not love her enough to be faithful?

Because his wife is effectively dead, nothing more than a breathing corpse, and has been for 13 years?

JohnT · October 21, 2003, 23:25

The man has a "vested interest" because he won over a million dollars in malpractice suits over what happened to his wife, a million dollars that is not going to bring her back regardless of how it is spent.

Berzerker · October 21, 2003, 23:30

Quote:

All we have is the word of her husband who stands to gain from the death of Terry Schiavo.

According to the court, Terry told a number of people about her wishes. The judges aren't going just by what he claims.

TCO - The hubby isn't making money off this, whatever trust fund set up for her care is about depleted. But I don't see why the parents can't take care of her unless Terry made it clear she doesn't want to exist like this... Did you clear out your PM box?

Berzerker · October 21, 2003, 23:40

The desparation of the parents is understandable but they've gone so far as to insiniuate that the husband is guilty of foul play.

TCO · October 21, 2003, 23:40

I don't think what she said is sufficient. We need a higher standard to allow suicide. It needs to be documented.

Kuciwalker · October 21, 2003, 23:40

SHE'S ALREADY DEAD

Berzerker · October 21, 2003, 23:44

Quote:

I don't think what she said is sufficient. We need a higher standard to allow suicide. It needs to be documented.

I tend to agree, but the courts are apparently satisfied of her wishes.

self biased · October 22, 2003, 00:38

i dunno, guys... i've worked with some people who are pretty damn near vegatative in the group homes i used to work in. these people did, though, have their likes and dislikes, they were aware of their enviroment to a certain extent, and they sure as hell deserve a chance to live.

here's a question: how much of that million went to her treatment? it is entirely possible with therapy could have given some degree of recovery. i'm not talking about a complete turnaround, but perhaps she'd be more coherent.