Tuesday, March 22, 2005

Federal Court Rules Against 'Feeding Terri'

With all due respect, the veteran refuses to touch the base question of this quagmire with a ten-foot pole. A federal judge ruled today that Terri Schiavo's feeding tube would not be reinserted. The veteran does not officially have a stance to voice on whether Schiavo should be kept alive or not, as both sides make compelling arguments. What I don't agree with is the fact that Congress got into this mess in the first place. Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler (any relation to the subject of 'Schindler's List'?) have been waging a war against Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo, over whether Terri should live or die. According to Schiavo, Terri has suffered long enough and would not have wanted to live this way. Her parents claim that she is occasionally responsive and may improve with therapy. So far, several court-appointed doctors have reviewed Terri's case and examined her, and each have stated that she is in a 'persistent vegetative state', meaning, in a nutshell, that she's the next best thing to brain-dead. Some doctors hired by the Schindlers have rebutted this diagnosis. Who knows? The Schindlers have some video of Terri appearing to respond to outside stimuli, but the human body does respond to things reflexively, and video can be faked. Terri Schiavo, if a ruling is not made in the favor of her parents, will die within a week or two from starvation and/or dehydration. Her attending doctor believes that she does not possess the mental capacity to register any discomfort from this action. Michael Schiavo, on one hand, has had a steady relationship with another woman for several years, and has fathered two children by her. He claims that if Terri is allowed to die, any money left over from an earlier malpractice suit filed on Terri's behalf will go to charity. One must ponder a few questions based on what we know: Does Michael have Terri's best interests at heart? Even though he has 'moved on' with his love life, he could have simply obtained a divorce and left Terri to the care of her family, thus leaving behind the responsibility. This might suggest that he really feels she would want the plug pulled. He could want the leftover money, but if she does die and he reneges on his voluntary charitable donation, SOMEONE is going to lynch him. Are Terri's parents simply holding on to a hope, certain to be washed away? Pretty much all of the doctors not hired by the parents have stated that she'll never improve, which might suggest that they specifically sought doctors that would rule in their favor. A truly objective viewpoint is impossible in their case, so once again, who knows? Should the federal government step in against [repeated] rulings from Florida courts that she should be allowed to die? This is not an issue for Congress, any more than professional baseball and steroid use. Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia (Goooooooo VA!) has stated that he feels this 'political football' is a violation of 10th amendment responsibilities reserved to the states. He feels that it is "...unwise for the Congress to take from the state of Florida its constitutional responsibility to resolve the issues in this case." Mr. Warner, thank you for getting to the heart of this issue. Whatever happens to Mrs. Schiavo (Lord, have mercy on her soul), this is not an arena the federal government belongs in. This is a private matter and should have stayed a private matter.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Veteran is pretty much in the right ballpark on this one. The right to die/and or the right to live is one that has been before the courts in one form or another for the last 3 decades.
Congress has no business trying to decide who should live or die. This is not what we pay them for.
Mr. and Mrs. Shindler have been in a very bad position with the ethical issue they now face.
On the other hand, her husband should be by law able to make decisions for her seeing that she is in no position to care for herself. I do not agree with this in part. Mr. and Mrs. Shindler did give Terry away on the day she married, and basically gave up any rights to make decisions for her so this leaves her husband with the rights to make decisions for her.
We must in fact keep some facts in mind before Terry's husband or anyone eles wants to play God.
The medical reports that she is in a C.V.S. or Constant Vegitative State are just plain wrong. I have seen the video of her following a ballon and she responds with the actions of a little baby by moving her head and eyes in following it.There is brain activity that.
The doctors (which ones you decide to believe) have ordered therapy for her over the years and her loving husband doe's not want any of this. I guess he is afraid of Terry getting better.
Any Dr. who would order Phy. Therapy must know that there is some functions she can do. Rolling her eyes and moving her head are not signs of C.V.S. In order to meet this requirement there must be NO brain activity and with Terry this is not the case. She does have a functioning brain, albeit it can be compared with the brain of a newborn.
Either way you look at this case no one wins. The parties involved would proabaly do better off at drawing straws and the one with the longest would win.
This is a tough issue to decide and I feel that her husband should be the one to make the decision and if he can't, that right goes to the parents not the Congress. The people up in D.C. should get to work on what we pay them to do and keep their noses' out of the family's business

3/23/2005 4:45 AM  
Blogger Mad Mod said...

Update: If you're reading this, you may not know how it turned out. Terri had a small amount of liquefied goo at the top of her spinal column. This was all that was left of her brain. It's sufficient to say that she was quite absolutely brain-dead. I guess ol' Frist's medical opinion is pretty worthless.

12/19/2005 2:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home