Terry Schiavo

[MedFire]

I wouldnt know what to do until i was faced with this type of situation. I personaly dont want to be in her shoes. I feel for her and her family. I dont know much about what its going on i only have heard about this in small bits.

[paramedicmike]

The husband's position from day one of this was that his wife did not want to be maintained on such devices. He has not deviated from that. He has continued to insist that this is not for him but for her...carrying out her wishes.

The downside to all of this is that it's become his word against the insistence of the parents. Legally, it's his decision (as it should be). Do we really want to open this can of worms that would allow anyone to declare an interest in a similar case and stop the removal of life support from someone? Do we really want/need the government meddling in these type decisions like the Florida and Federal governments have been doing? Think long and hard about that before you answer. I don't believe it's their place to do so.

The lesson we should all learn from this is that we need to have this discussion with our loved ones (i.e. spouses, parents, siblings, partners). Make your wishes clear to them. THEN WRITE IT DOWN IN AN ADVANCE DIRECTIVE!!!!! I don't care if you're 25 and in prime health or 99 circling the drain. Write it down and make sure that those who could be in a position to make this decision are aware of your wishes and where they can find your paperwork.

Do it today!

Be safe.

[Guest]

i think that prolonging death is just not right...first of all she has been in a vegetative state for years, now that the time has come they make a big deal about it. I for one am against ventilators and advanced care to keep someone on this earth that can no longer function on their own. I think that it has a lot to do with the family and keeping her around and watch her just deteriorate right before their eyes. Some people need to realize that its natures way of saying ok enough is enough. If she is going to go, then let her do so peacefully and move on from it and let her rest in peace.

[THE_DITCH_DOCTOR]

First of all: No more Nazi comparisons....I'm writing a book on one of the planners of the Holocaust and you really don't want me pointing out the major flaws in your comparison. I will leave it at this (citing the most glaring flaw in your obviously knee jerk assessment) :This woman is not mentally handicapped, she has no functioning other than a few lower reflexes. That's mentally nonexistent.

Secondly.....no this woman isn't brain dead, but court appointed doctors stated she had no hope for recovery. That's practical brain death, basically a hypoxic lobotomy.

The family is deluding themselves and I suspect are motivated by the $1,000,000 they stand to gain if the can discredit the husband. His stand on her wishes has not changed (that I am aware of) since the day she coded and wound up like this.

I agree that it's not right to let someone starve or dehydrate to death, but there is no other choice (not legal choices anyhow) to give this woman the peace she deserves. She won't suffer because she's not aware of her surroundings, except perhaps in the same way a lower invertebrate is.

[Ztenec]

Just tossing my 2 cents in.

It's the guardian's voice who should be listened to, not the courts or the parents. She obviously trusted him to follow her wishes or the husband wouldn't be in that position.

Also about the 1 Million dollar judgement, 700,000 of that was set aside to pay for her medical expenses. Keeping in mind the length of time she's been in that "state" I highly doubt there is anyting left of it.

Finally I concur with usafmedic45 about the stupidity of emtizzle's post.

Ha gave you 3 cents instead of 2, where's my change?

[emsgirl]

Just to throw another stone in the pond. I am not saying whether this is the right decision in this case, but many patients who are on hospice CHOOSE to not eat or drink during what they know is their final days. Yes I know Terry can't choose weather or not too, but she was of legal age when she choose to get married and therefore legally make her husband the next of kin responsible for making such heart wrenching decisions.

And the lesson to be learned from all of this, and actually every code we go out on. Discussing things such as Full Code/DNR, and organ donation are yes very important, but you need to have the papers. What if you code when your spouse isn't around? make sure most immediate family knows your decision, if you are still close with your parents, fill them in on what you and your significant other have discussed. Maybe even let you r best friend who is not part of your family know. But most important write it out. Make a living will, get it notarized, have a POLST form (Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment). Just have it in writing too.

[Thursday]

if you were in her shoes, would you want to stay alive?

you cant talk, you cant eat, you cant drink, you cant move. all you do is lie in bed, all day long, all week, all year, every year.

I say, even if she isnt brain dead, then she has been living in HELL for the past 15 years. How would you like to be on your back, cant talk, cant eat, for 15 years?

[ed2brute]

Anyone remember Nancy Cruzan? Hers was the first "right to die" case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. Her parents (she was 23 and not married at the time of her car accident that left her in a persistent vegitative state) had petitioned to have the feeding tube removed. The state hospital had refused. Nancy had left no written direction of what she wished to happen if she was not able to speak for herself.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a persistently comatose person can be kept a live if there is not "clear and convincing" evidence that the person would not wish to live in that persistent vegitative state. They found that her parent's testimony was insufficient to be considered clear and convincing.

It went back to the state courts. This time Nancy's close friends also testified, along with her parents, that Nancy would not wish to live this way. The state court ruled the evidence met the threshold of "clear and convincing" and allowed the feeding tube to be removed. Nancy Cruzan expired the day after Christmas, 1990.

In Terri's case is there clear and convincing evidence that she'd not want to live this way?

[ed2brute]

Since active euthanasia is illegal in every state in the U.S., with the exception of the death penalty, you realize that the doctors simply cannot administer Terri a lethal dose of medication. Don't confuse it with assisted suicide, where the doctors provide the means, but the patient performs the act. In this case, Terri is unable to perform the act of suicide.

It is also perfectly legal to refuse care. We've all seen that first hand. Removing the feeding tube is exactly the same thing. Terri has the right to refuse care, even if it's against medical advise and will cause her death. Common law gives Terri's husband, Michael, the right to make those decisions in her place. Michael is saying, "Terri refuses care. Remove the feeding tube. She wants to go home."

Sure, dehydration/starving is an unpleasant death. So is cancer. You can refuse chemo and radiation. It is not the doctor's decision on whether you get treatment or supportive care. It is the patients, or the patient's guardian's, decision.

[Alcomedicism]

But is the gaurdian acting in the best interest of the patient?? She has not had a CAT scan, her husband refuses to allow her to have CAT scan. So w/o that tool, how do we get a clear diagnosis that Terri Schiavo is in fact not competent? I say they should have her go in for CAT scan and stimulate her brain. If it comes back positive that she is indeed understanding what is going on around her then she should be given the opportunity to speak for herself by any means possible before her family, husband, DR. and a Judge. If she communicates that she wishes to die then have her die a dignified death, not by starvation/dehydration, but by another means such as assissted suicide. (place her finger on the button, but SHE has to push the button).

If she communicates that she wishes to live then her husband is no longer her legal gaurdian, as she can speak for herself, and she decides what kind of care she wants.

I think the next step here would be to obtain a court-ordered CAT scan to determine her level of function and awareness.

-Dixie