i think they should just let her die naturally. her doctors say there's not even a miracle that could possibly happen to save her.

plus what the person 2 posts above me said.

Her parents were the ones paying for the tube! They should be the one deciding!

not if the woman told her husband she NEVER wanted to be on the tubes in the first place.

will debating about the iraq war change it? how about debating about gay marriage? of course this won't have any effect, but that's not always the point of debating.

onenonly101 and crazyjew basically laid out what i think.

vegetative. not vegetable.

i think that prolonging someone's life who will probably never get better is just stretching the hopes of everyone around them. if they're not meant to be kept on earth any longer, then why fight it? it will cause you misery to see someone you love suffer everyday, but if you let them go, you can move on. i'm sure the suffering person would want the rest of the family to enjoy their lives, and not have to spend extra time worrying about them.

yea you can definately say vegetable.

and she is not a vegetable. tell me how can a vegetable laugh cry or make any emotions she is progressing. she doesnt need a respirator she can breathe by herself. and she cant die peacefully. dying peacefully is like putting her to sleep... they are gunna kill her by unplugging her feeding tube.. that is the most slowest death in the world.. imagine you on a bed with out any food while everyone is waiting for you to die???? i mean come on think about it throughly put yourself in her shoes.

if you had a baby and the baby had down syndrome would you kill him or her...? i doubt it cause they can stil breathe show emotions they just dont think the same as everyone else.

the only way i would say "ok its alright for her to die" is if she dies by other means. like giving her pills or something but taking her feeding tube out is totally insane.

---------------

Hey guys, maybe we should stop thinking our beliefs, and more for the beliefs of Terri.

She specifically said to her husband on two separate occasions before her incident that if she ever fell upon such an unfortunate situation, she did not want to be on a tube for the rest of her life. She specifically said she didn't want it. SHE said she didn't want it! Euthanasia is legal. It's not morally wrong. It's wrong for the Christians; not wrong for America (by law).

I mean, you can't compare this to Terri wants to commit suicide. There's a difference between comatose and brain-dead. When you're brain dead, the only definition for life is your heart is beating. There is no mental life. She's gone. When we say, "He died." We mean it as in his heart stopped bleeding. We usually don't encounter the word 'death' with when your brain stops working. But the truth is that she's dead. Brain-dead. Dead. Respect her wishes, and let her R.I.P.

i think we should put her down (haha, that was almost funny but this is serious)... there's no real "use" for her.. i know it sounds mean but its true.. we are put here for a reason and forgot what they are.. can someone refresh me? i know one of them is "reproduce" and yeah..

well idk.. if i were her, i would have wanted to be put out of my misery a long time ago.

its kinda strange how she told her husband that she would never want to be on feeding tubes if she was ever brain-dead or in a veg state, then after that she "accidently" was brain damaged? dont you think the husband has something to do with that?

That's the problem. She never made a living will nor gave anyone power of attorney. I will have to say I am with taking the tube out.

This is what I have learned while in med school.

1. Mrs. Schiavo does not feel any sensations due to damages to her brain. Technically she can still live without the tube. She can recieve nutrients from an intravenous. The tube just gives her the feeling of nourishment. Now why would you need the feeling of nourishment if you cannot feel any sensation at all? Intravenous is actually cheaper than tube feedings.

2. Would you like to have life support machines connected to you or your loved one while in a casket during a wake? I think not, that is demoralizing. It would rather die naturally than being on a machine that eats for me.

3. Why would you force someone to live? The feeding tube forces nutrients and nourishment down her throat. Due to her brain damage she has aphagia(not being able to swallow). I mean I bet they have already tried putting her on a puree diet, but unfortunately she just cannot eat on her own will.

4. The husband should make the decision. No one is closer to her than her husband. Can you imagine heartbreak everyday for 15 years? Traditionally in a wedding ceremony, the father gives away his daughter to the husband. Therefore it should be the husband's choice of what should be done.

5. Can't think, Can't eat, Can't do anything. To me she is already dead.

6. Darwinism. We are animals (as stated in animal experimentation debates) so why should we help someone who is useless? No other animal will spend 15 years taking care of a another animal. Have you ever wondered why african americans are good athletes. (seriously) Slavery helped make them that way. The strong survived through slavery. Therefore the genes of strong africans carried over while the weak genes died.

7. Finances. I am not sure who handles it but it most probably the husband or the government. Why waste money on someone who will not become better. That money can be spent on people that can become better.

She should die peacefully and respectfully. Would you rather remember your daughter doing nothing and hooked up on machines or remember a daughter who has lived their life the way you know she wanted to live it. Why would you choose sad memories against happy ones?

I know most people want the tube to stay in just because that's what most of the opinions on TV are. Well to keep things straight, politicians don't want to take a chance on seeming immoral.

Just my two cents on things.

^ nice points.


that's COMPLETELY speculation. you have no facts to back that up. i have heard my parents have tell each other numerous times that if they ever reach a state where they will be bedridden for life that they want to die. i don't think that's an uncommon thing for married couples to discuss.

talking about ur future is never uncommon.. i know that if i get paralized or anything like that.. if im not back in 6 months.. im out. unless there's a very high 90% chance im going back but no speculating im coming back...

im leaving a will with things like this when i gro wup..

i'm going to draw a political cartoon.

it's going to have terri

at the pearly gates

and st. peters tells her

"you've been there for 15 years. what are you waiting for?"

and she'll respond

"for my body to die. i'm already at the gates of heaven, but those people on earth are keeping my body. "



isn't it kinda strange that

1. her husband, her legal guardian, has said remove the tube and there was a movement to over-ride this? that's like congress passing a law to require you to not wear pink or something. it's a personal choice the government has no say in.

2. the people who's opinions actually matter (her husband, her doctors) all say take out the tube. since when was the private life ruled by congress?

^ Political America (namely, the conservatives) are using this story to their advantage on the life & death morality status of America. More religious bs American citizens have to bathe in.

For once I agree and like what acid said. I love the cartoon

Okay, I watched a full damn documentary about this *chuckles* so I'll just say it.

Terri Schaivo was put into a vegetative state when her heart stopped beating 10 beats. The part of her brain that was damaged was the part that censors her feeling of pain. So, if she were put to death, she wouldn't feel pain at all. Even though she smiles, blinks, mumbles, etc etc it all means nothing. She is in a very, very unconscious state but there was a part of her brain that wasn't damaged and it helps her blink her eyes and smile. She doesn't have feelings, she doesn't have thoughts, all she has is a beating heart.

I now change my mind about my position *another John Kerry lol*. As the Vatican says, you shouldn't mess with death. If she was supposed to die, she is supposed to die. If she can't survive by her own, she simply wasn't meant to survive, feeding tubes and all. She'll probably be in a better place in heaven. But who knows? Maybe she does know what people are saying. Eh?

yea im starting to change my mind also... if i was in a veg state i wouldnt want to be kept alive either. no one really knows how terri schiavo is feeling, since obviously she cant talk, and she cant function. who knows, maybe she CAN feel pain, or maybe she wants to die, but no one will ever know since she cant express her feelings. now im thinking that they should just let the woman go. i sure wouldnt want to be in a veg state, but i wouldnt want to starve to death, or die a slow death. i think they should just put her down right there, and not make it so complicated.

she can't feel pain. she doesn't think. i'm pretty sure that's proven. so starving or dying a slow death wouldn't be bad at all.

i don't think they can legally "put her down right there". my mom is a gereatrician (sp), and all they can do is just give them pain meds and let them die nautrally. isn't it murder or assisted suicide if you just kill them off?

im sure it wouldnt be assisted suicide, or murder, since letting her starve to death wouldnt be any different. she would die anyway

^probably (thats to william)....

ps-i love how all the people who were soo rampidly against taking out the tubes now are changing their minds because they actually know what the case is about now.

yep.. but it wouldnt be a debate if everyone agreed

I just wasn't sure whether it was the right thing or not before I watched that documentary. =]

dying nautrally and "putting her down" are completely different things.


haha, that's what i was thinking too.


that response makes no sense if you actually read/understood what rachel was trying to get across.

yea, i understood what she was talking about. i didnt understand much about the case until now. but cant you agree that a debate has two opinions?

I think she should live. Even if she's suffering, she should stay alive. It's better to stay alive then die.