Please note that I was unable to post this email as a comment because of it's length; my post on the subject is found below.
For the record, although it wasn't mentioned in the piece, I was deeply annoyed by the political interference on this matter - both by the GOP who I do believe acted out of moral duty, and the Dems, who ran interference on strictly political grounds.
This should never have been a matter for Congress or the White House.
Any email comments will be posted on this site, provided the language is suitable for everyone. Please limit them to 2000 characters or less so I can post them in the comments section.
Danny-please post to your site...
First, let me begin by saying that anyone who does not have a Last Will and Testament, should see very clear that each person needs one. If you have not seen what happens to those who do not have a will, as in this case, then they are either blind or stupid. It is my humble opinion that we are far more humane to our animals that to our family members. If a horse has a broken leg that is in a section that will not heal very well, we put the horse to sleep. If a dog gets Parvo, we are told that it could be almost $3,000 and we will only get a 50% chance of survival. It is considered by most to be humane to put the animal to sleep. Why can't we euthanize our family members? To have a person starved to death is not humane at all. It is a horrible, painful death. It is not even something that occurs to POW's. To stay on subject, the Schiavo case has really shown all of us that we have a lot of opinions on the subject of death.
Here are my opinions on her case. 1st, There was no will and the husband is trying to act on the wishes that she had told him. I think the family is blind to the fact that she will not ever recover and she most likely does have brain damage that will not return. All of these medical cases that have been brought by her family are irrelevant because NONE have ever been comatose for over 15 years. I have seen recoveries, but all within a 2-5 year period leave the hospital and then go into rehab. She has been like this for well over 15 years. It is not going to happen, and we should be humane about this. The President has no authority on this matter (sorry Danny), and this should be handled by the state not the President. Another reason I feel that this should have been left alone by the President, and other Federal Judges, is because the medical interpretation is vital to this case. In fact it is Paramount. On CNN, Dr. Gupta stated "You can not interpret this from a video; you need to see the patient in person. Aside from the Judges, and Dr's in the state of Fla. who reviewed her file and saw her, no other judge or President has seen her in person. The tapes are impossible to review and interpret in this case. Because of those things, I feel that all of this political interference is not good for the person at all. If they do not see her in person, and know what the legal interpretation is in this case, for them to say that "she is not in a comatose state" is a premature statement and thus makes the person look like an idiot. I realize our President and the courts are trying to act on good faith, but in regard to the President, his interference on this issue does interfere with states rights. I am sorry but the legal system is working, the family may not like the outcome, but it is working. They are right it is not humane to starve a person, but in this case the family needs to let her go. Whenever emotion interferes with the law, there are problems. Too many Judges have seen her, neurologists have seen her, this is a grey area, but they need to let her go. If they think starvation is not humane, then let us have legislation that allows us to find a much quicker way to put them to death. Once again, weneed to learn from this and have a will for our family members. We all need to make sure that if we think starvation is not humane, then have the congress begin legislation for euthanasia. Once again, the family needs to let her go, and let her die. I would haunt my wife if she allowed me to stay comatose this long.
I am sure I will here from this one. Danny for the record: I think Bush (both of them) acted in good faith. I just think that since they have only seen videos, that they are opening themselves up to scrutiny, and opening themselves up to the states rights issue.
Let me hear what you think...
Michael
1 comment:
The underlying debate here is who has rights, the spouse or the parents? I'd stand up for the husbands right every time. The other debate that my brother touched on (you go bro!) is the fact that the same people that debate that we as a society are killing Terry in an inhumane way are the same people that will vote against legislation for more humane death, injection. I am all for ending ones misery, put limits on it, but lets get it enacted already. Also, lets remember another lesson from this chick....when you're 250 pounds as a teen and starve yourself to 115 pounds in your 20's...it may have much more lasting affects then you could ever imagine, for you husband, your parents and yourself. Starving yourself will do more then make you look cute in that bikini, it may damage your heart beyond repair and lead to this lifeless existence Terry is "living". As an obese person, I realize the heartache that can go with that, but dammit, it just aint worth that!
-Mrs. Slap
Post a Comment