Originally Posted by: DreamRyche2112I'm not fully aware of all the circumstances of this whole thing, maybe it was selfish of the family to keep her alive, if she didn't ant to be alive. Maybe she did want to live. Maybe her husband wanted to make a quick buck off her insurance claim. I really have no clue.

But they let her starve. They even give Murderers in prison the descensy to go peacefully through lethal injection.

They let this lady who did nothing wrong starve to death.

There was a man ( cannot remember the name), who used to do merciful hospital killings, letting his patients who did not want to live die. Is this any different? Well that man is in prison now. For all we know maybe she wanted to live.

I found this article the be really informative:

Source


The sad tale of Terri Schiavo, minus the three ring circus
3/25/2005 3:47:50 PM, by Jonathan Gitlin

In the proud tradition of Ars, we'd like to encourage some intelligent discussion on this matter by trying to do what so many in the media have failed to do, which is actually talk about the case, rather than the circus surrounding it. Now, this case clearly raises several important issues regarding the separation of powers and the relationship between not only the federal and state governments, but also the judiciary. Such are the symptoms of a complex conflict involving technological advances, the nature of scientific knowledge, and the very definition of life.

Unless you've been in a persistent vegetative state for the last two weeks, you cannot have escaped the furor surrounding the case of Terri Schaivo. To recap, 15 years ago Terri Schaivo suffered a heart attack caused by an eating disorder. This deprived her brain of oxygen for about 14 minutes, which caused significant brain damage. Of the different cells that make up our bodies, neurons are particularly sensitive to hypoxia, and will rapidly die off. They are also notorious for their inability to regrow. Following this event, Mrs Schiavo fell into a persistent vegetative state:

A persistent vegetative state (commonly, but incorrectly, referred to as "brain-death") sometimes follows a coma. Individuals in such a state have lost their thinking abilities and awareness of their surroundings, but retain non-cognitive function and normal sleep patterns. Even though those in a persistent vegetative state lose their higher brain functions, other key functions such as breathing and circulation remain relatively intact. Spontaneous movements may occur, and the eyes may open in response to external stimuli. They may even occasionally grimace, cry, or laugh. Although individuals in a persistent vegetative state may appear somewhat normal, they do not speak and they are unable to respond to commands. For more, see: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/coma/coma.htm

Over the next few years, her husband pursued aggressive treatments to try and help his wife recover, including an experimental treatment involving the implantation of electrodes in her brain to stimulate neuronal growth. Despite these treatments, there has never been any improvement in her condition and she remains unaware, non-sentient and dependent on a feeding tube. Her husband, Michael Schaivo was close to the Schindlers, her parents, to the point where they encouraged him to begin dating, and they lived in the same house for several years.



CAT scan of a normal brain


The controversy begins in 1998. Once he realized there was no hope of a recovery, Mr Schaivo petitioned the Florida courts to remove her feeding tube, claiming that Terri would not have wanted to be kept alive in a PVS. Although her parents protested this, the court found in favor of Terri's wishes, and so began several years of legal battles, all of which were decided in favor of Terri Schaivo's right to withdraw treatment. Her parents have presented arguments to the court claiming spousal abuse, false diagnosis and that Terri's wishes had been misinterpreted. Each time, the courts in Florida have rejected these claims as lacking credibility, but backed by religious conservative right-to-life campaigners, the Schindlers have kept appealing.

In 2003, having been turned down repeatedly by the courts, the Schindlers successfully lobbied Gov. Jeb Bush to pass "Terri's Law" that would restore her feeding tube. Terri was hospitalized and the tube was replaced. The matter went back to the courts yet again, where once more the Schindler’s claims were found to be without merit. Furthermore, "Terri's Law" was struck down by the Florida Supreme Court as unconstitutional, and eventually March 18th 2005 was set as the date the feeding tube would be removed. Repeated appeals by the Schindlers failed, and on Friday 18th March the feeding tube was removed. As you likely know, congressional Republicans decided to intervene. Embattled House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) engineered special legislation over the weekend, despite Congress being in recess for Easter, that gave the Schindlers standing to bring the case before a Federal Judge. Prior to this, the federal courts had refused to hear the case, citing lack of jurisdiction. President Bush cut short one of his holidays in Texas to fly back to Washington to sign the legislation into law, citing the importance of a 'culture of life.' Critics quickly noted that Bush passed legislation in Texas in 1999 that allows hospitals to withdraw treatment from patients despite family wishes in cases where there is no hope for recovery.

From here the case moved through the federal court system, to the Eleventh Circuit court of appeal, where the Schindler's appeals were denied due to no substantial likelihood of success. In-depth details of the legal cases can be found here. Despite the claims of Terri's parents and her supporters on the religious right, each examination has shown that she is in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. Comparing a 1996 CT scan of her brain to a normal brain, it is possible to see the atrophied areas throughout the cerebral cortex (above and to the sides of the large ventricles in the centre). Although there have been calls for an MRI scan, MRIs use powerful magnets for imaging and would cause the implanted electrodes to act as a blender inside her skull.

With no higher brain function, Terri Schiavo exists in a form of limbo - able to breath uninterrupted, her eyes move and she vocalizes. According to physicians who have actually diagnosed her in person, she displays no awareness of her surroundings, is unable to swallow, and any consciousness or personality died in 1990. Campaigners to reinsert the feeding tube have claimed that she has been misdiagnosed, on the basis of 4 minutes of edited footage, allegedly showing responsiveness. They have also claimed that Michael Schaivo is only concerned with benefiting financially from Terri's death, although it must be noted that there is little money left from a malpractice settlement, he has repeatedly turned down offers of large amounts of money to walk away, and unlike the Schindlers, he has not signed any book or TV deals. Some claim that medical advances could repair her brain damage, although the irony of these claims from such vehement critics of stem cell research are not lost on your correspondent. Despite questionable medical diagnoses from afar, in reality there is no hope of any recovery in this case. Public opinion overwhelmingly rests with Michael and Terri Schiavo, although there is some distaste over simply withdrawing her feeding tube and allowing her to die from dehydration. But as euthanasia remains illegal in the US, there is no other option.

The blogosphere has been on fire over this issue, with increasingly shrill calls from commentators decrying the judiciary and Michael Schaivo. Others castigate the Republicans as false champions of states rights and limited federal government, since they were so quick to try and overrule Florida's courts.

Barring Terri Schiavo having a secret Living Will somewhere, what do you think is the appropriate solution to this matter, and what should society take away from what may be the first of many such challenges in the future?