Since we've discussed just about every other taboo subject... Euthanasia?

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289475
The flip side to this is that Terry Shivo (sp?) case. There is no way I'd let em pull the plug then... The "husband" had no business being in that business...
Why? He ended up being right. Both sides handled that whole thing badly.
I think in the cases where the patient hasn't made their wishes known the family should have to convince a judge to let them unhook. But someone with Alzheimer's knows it's coming and can refuse the drugs and machines while they are still coherent. In those cases should the family get to decide when to unplug grandpa if he didn't have a living will or something? I don't think so.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289481
Why? He ended up being right. Both sides handled that whole thing badly.
I think in the cases where the patient hasn't made their wishes known the family should have to convince a judge to let them unhook. But someone with Alzheimer's knows it's coming and can refuse the drugs and machines while they are still coherent. In those cases should the family get to decide when to unplug grandpa if he didn't have a living will or something? I don't think so.
That's where the legal problems come in. I know multiple people, even family members, who don't have medical proxies or legal docs on file stating what their wishes are if they have a fatal accident or contract some fatal disease. My brother could get hit by a car tomorrow, go into a vegatative coma, and my SIL wouldn't have the right to pull the plug, even though he's stated multiple times that is his preference and wish. He's just been too lazy to get the legal paperwork filled out and notarized. A lot of elderly people don't even realize they have to get legal docs written up for medical proxies. They just assume it's covered in their wills.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289481
Why? He ended up being right. Both sides handled that whole thing badly.
I think in the cases where the patient hasn't made their wishes known the family should have to convince a judge to let them unhook. But someone with Alzheimer's knows it's coming and can refuse the drugs and machines while they are still coherent. In those cases should the family get to decide when to unplug grandpa if he didn't have a living will or something? I don't think so.
IMO once he started porking the other lady, he gave up any right deal with his ex wife. She didn't have anything straightened out. There was some question as to the status of being brain dead. The blood family wanted her alive. And they could pay for it. The government had no business forcing someone to be killed...

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289491
That's where the legal problems come in. I know multiple people, even family members, who don't have medical proxies or legal docs on file stating what their wishes are if they have a fatal accident or contract some fatal disease. My brother could get hit by a car tomorrow, go into a vegatative coma, and my SIL wouldn't have the right to pull the plug, even though he's stated multiple times that is his preference and wish. He's just been too lazy to get the legal paperwork filled out and notarized. A lot of elderly people don't even realize they have to get legal docs written up for medical proxies. They just assume it's covered in their wills.
Not sure about Texas law but in many states the wife would have the right to pull the plug if there is no brain function.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289495
IMO once he started porking the other lady, he gave up any right deal with his ex wife. She didn't have anything straightened out. There was some question as to the status of being brain dead. The blood family wanted her alive. And they could pay for it. The government had no business forcing someone to be killed...
There was no doubt about the condition of her brain in the minds of those who saw the scan and the autopsy confirmed it.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289500
Not sure about Texas law but in many states the wife would have the right to pull the plug if there is no brain function.
That isn't my point, the spouse should be allowed. But he's moved on with his life, already had a new family. He was just still legally married to her. Once he started porking that other woman he should have a say...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289509
That isn't my point, the spouse should be allowed. But he's moved on with his life, already had a new family. He was just still legally married to her. Once he started porking that other woman he should have a say...
Whether he was 'porking' another woman was irrelevent. If I recall, he still had a legal obligation as to her care. The whole argument he had with her family was that before she fell into her debilitative state, she explicitedly told her husband that she didn't want to live by artificial means if something like that were to ever occur. Unfortunately, he didn't have a legal document, or any other written document that would back that claim. It was a verbal understanding between the two. Her parents didn't agree with it, and forced him to get the government involved so he could do as she wished.
This goes back to family members who refuse to let someone go. Exactly what did her parents have to gain by keeping her alive? Their self gratification that they could go visit her as she just laid there staring out into space? The mother even came up with this, "Oh, she knows we're here. She blinks her eyes in response to our questions." The doctors and experts validated that wasn't true. This just came down to selfishness on her parents part. They are like every other parent - you never want to see your children die before you do. Unfortunately, life simply doesn't turn out that way sometimes.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289526
Whether he was 'porking' another woman was irrelevent. If I recall, he still had a legal obligation as to her care. The whole argument he had with her family was that before she fell into her debilitative state, she explicitedly told her husband that she didn't want to live by artificial means if something like that were to ever occur. Unfortunately, he didn't have a legal document, or any other written document that would back that claim. It was a verbal understanding between the two. Her parents didn't agree with it, and forced him to get the government involved so he could do as she wished.
This goes back to family members who refuse to let someone go. Exactly what did her parents have to gain by keeping her alive? Their self gratification that they could go visit her as she just laid there staring out into space? The mother even came up with this, "Oh, she knows we're here. She blinks her eyes in response to our questions." The doctors and experts validated that wasn't true. This just came down to selfishness on her parents part. They are like every other parent - you never want to see your children die before you do. Unfortunately, life simply doesn't turn out that way sometimes.
This is where I disagree, legally he was the responsible party. For all intents and purposes, he'd divorced her, and married another woman... How can you as a decent person, do that?

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289535
This is where I disagree, legally he was the responsible party. For all intents and purposes, he'd divorced her, and married another woman... How can you as a decent person, do that?
You do realize the situation he was in, don't you? The woman was essentially brain dead. How could he have any form of relationship with his wife when she was in that condition? So what was he supposed to do? put his entire life on hold for another 5, 10, or 15 years before she did finally pass? He stuck with her to the point that he KNEW she didn't want to continue living like that. But her selfish parents did want to give their poor baby away yet. He was looking out for her best interests. She didn't want to be a vegatable all her life. He knew it, she knew it. The parents refused to believe it. I hope my family has the decency to do that for me if that situation were to happen to me.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289582
You do realize the situation he was in, don't you? The woman was essentially brain dead. How could he have any form of relationship with his wife when she was in that condition? So what was he supposed to do? put his entire life on hold for another 5, 10, or 15 years before she did finally pass? He stuck with her to the point that he KNEW she didn't want to continue living like that. But her selfish parents did want to give their poor baby away yet. He was looking out for her best interests. She didn't want to be a vegatable all her life. He knew it, she knew it. The parents refused to believe it. I hope my family has the decency to do that for me if that situation were to happen to me.
You are missing Rubin's point. He no longer had a personal interest in the welfare of shaivo...He moved on. since he was no longer emotionally contected...his choice top have her pulled could have been motivated by malicsious means. Rubin isn't saying he should wait 5, 10, 15 years. He is saying the decision should have been made BEFORE he moved on. Since he had moved on, the decision should have gone to the immediate family.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289582
You do realize the situation he was in, don't you? The woman was essentially brain dead. How could he have any form of relationship with his wife when she was in that condition? So what was he supposed to do? put his entire life on hold for another 5, 10, or 15 years before she did finally pass? He stuck with her to the point that he KNEW she didn't want to continue living like that. But her selfish parents did want to give their poor baby away yet. He was looking out for her best interests. She didn't want to be a vegatable all her life. He knew it, she knew it. The parents refused to believe it. I hope my family has the decency to do that for me if that situation were to happen to me.
See below.
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3289585
You are missing Rubin's point. He no longer had a personal interest in the welfare of shaivo...He moved on. since he was no longer emotionally contected...his choice top have her pulled could have been motivated by malicsious means. Rubin isn't saying he should wait 5, 10, 15 years. He is saying the decision should have been made BEFORE he moved on. Since he had moved on, the decision should have gone to the immediate family.
That was my problem with the whole thing, here was this guy, who might as well be her EX except she can't phisically sign any divorce paperwork. Filing suit in court to end her life. It makes no sense.
Do I agree with her family, I don't know, I wasn't there. But I do know, that was family, this is a guy who moved on, was basically married to another woman had kids with her (if I remember right), he just didn't do the paperwork... Why in the world did he care enough to make a national story about his old wife... IT just doesn't sit right with me...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289599
See below.
That was my problem with the whole thing, here was this guy, who might as well be her EX except she can't phisically sign any divorce paperwork. Filing suit in court to end her life. It makes no sense.
Do I agree with her family, I don't know, I wasn't there. But I do know, that was family, this is a guy who moved on, was basically married to another woman had kids with her (if I remember right), he just didn't do the paperwork... Why in the world did he care enough to make a national story about his old wife... IT just doesn't sit right with me...
I don't fully remember the entire story, but I believe he decided to make her his Ex when he was informed that she would always be in a vegatative state, and would never be the woman he married again. If she wouldn't have had the cardiac arrest (which had something to do with her final state), they would most likely still be married today. Read the chronology of the events on her Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_schiavo
This excerpt talks about what her husband tried after her initial assessment:
Rehabilitation efforts – 1990-1993
Terri came home to her family[citation needed] in September 1990 but was sent back to the College Park facility due to her needs. In November, Michael took her to the University of California, San Francisco for experimental nerve stimulation – the Thalamic stimulator. The treatment took several months but was unsuccessful. Michael returned to Florida with her in January 1991 and admitted her as an inpatient to the Mediplex Rehabilitation Center in Bradenton, Florida. While there, he later said that he often took "her to parks and public places in hopes of sparking some recovery". On July 19, 1991, Terri was transferred to the Sabal Palms Skilled Care Facility, where she received neurological testing and regular speech and occupational therapy until 1994.[9][10] In mid 1993, Michael requested a do not resuscitate order for Terri after she contracted a urinary tract infection, but the staff advised[citation needed] him to withdraw it. Jay Wolfson[11] later wrote a report stating that Michael's decision was "predicated on his reasoned belief that there was no longer any hope for Terri's recovery."[6]
Does that sound like a husband who just wanted to dump his wife and 'move on' to greener pastures?

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289634
I don't fully remember the entire story, but I believe he decided to make her his Ex when he was informed that she would always be in a vegatative state, and would never be the woman he married again. If she wouldn't have had the cardiac arrest (which had something to do with her final state), they would most likely still be married today. Read the chronology of the events on her Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_schiavo
This excerpt talks about what her husband tried after her initial assessment:
Rehabilitation efforts – 1990-1993
Terri came home to her family[citation needed] in September 1990 but was sent back to the College Park facility due to her needs. In November, Michael took her to the University of California, San Francisco for experimental nerve stimulation – the Thalamic stimulator. The treatment took several months but was unsuccessful. Michael returned to Florida with her in January 1991 and admitted her as an inpatient to the Mediplex Rehabilitation Center in Bradenton, Florida. While there, he later said that he often took "her to parks and public places in hopes of sparking some recovery". On July 19, 1991, Terri was transferred to the Sabal Palms Skilled Care Facility, where she received neurological testing and regular speech and occupational therapy until 1994.[9][10] In mid 1993, Michael requested a do not resuscitate order for Terri after she contracted a urinary tract infection, but the staff advised[citation needed] him to withdraw it. Jay Wolfson[11] later wrote a report stating that Michael's decision was "predicated on his reasoned belief that there was no longer any hope for Terri's recovery."[6]
Does that sound like a husband who just wanted to dump his wife and 'move on' to greener pastures?
What is sooo hard to about what I'm saying? Is it really that difficult? The guy moved on, had another woman, kids house. Once he started doing the other woman, started a new family he has no business telling the parents what to do with their own daughter. It doesn't matter if he (otherwise) was the best husband to her in the world. Or locked her up in the closet. Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp even if you don't agree with it?

 

[meowzer]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289641
It doesn't matter if he (otherwise) was the best husband to her in the world.
YEAH....He should have divorced her and let her parents take care of her.....ALTHO....so hard to say what a person would do unless they are actually faced with it

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289641
What is sooo hard to about what I'm saying? Is it really that difficult? The guy moved on, had another woman, kids house. Once he started doing the other woman, started a new family he has no business telling the parents what to do with their own daughter. It doesn't matter if he (otherwise) was the best husband to her in the world. Or locked her up in the closet. Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp even if you don't agree with it?
Because you seem to be missing the point, and the main reason why he didn't simply move on - Terry Schiavo told him she didn't want to live the life of a vegatable if for any reason that ever occurred while they were together. Because he LOVED her and CARED for her, he was determined that he would carry out her last wishes, no matter how difficult of a decision that would be.
Remember your wedding vows? --
I, ____, take you, ____, to be my (husband/wife). I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life. I, ____, take you, ____, for my lawful (husband/wife), to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part."
"Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp even if you don't agree with it? "

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289665
Because you seem to be missing the point, and the main reason why he didn't simply move on - Terry Schiavo told him she didn't want to live the life of a vegatable if for any reason that ever occurred while they were together. Because he LOVED her and CARED for her, he was determined that he would carry out her last wishes, no matter how difficult of a decision that would be.
Remember your wedding vows? --
I, ____, take you, ____, to be my (husband/wife). I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life. I, ____, take you, ____, for my lawful (husband/wife), to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part."
"Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp even if you don't agree with it? "
riight, you're posts quite clearly show you where missing my point... I guess, being true doesn't mean you can't move in and start another family... Because I'm pretty sure he wasn't true (see commonlaw wife and kids) in sickness, or worse, and definitely parted before death. Even if legally he was married to her... Once again it doesn't make a lick of sense.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289679
riight, you're posts quite clearly show you where missing my point... I guess, being true doesn't mean you can't move in and start another family... Because I'm pretty sure he wasn't true (see commonlaw wife and kids) in sickness, or worse, and definitely parted before death. Even if legally he was married to her... Once again it doesn't make a lick of sense.
You know, once you get something stuck in that hard head of yours, you block out any sense of logic or reasoning. I'll explain it again R-E-A-L S-L-O-W --- HE MADE A PROMISE TO HER TO CARRY OUT HER LAST WISHES -- NOT TO LET HER LIVE A LIFE IN A VEGATATIVE STATE.
Whether he did that while leading a 'second life' with another wife is irrelevent. If he would've done as you suggest, the woman would still be there today with a tube stuck down her throat, withering away to nothing, with the only thing in life to show for it was massive bed sores. But he couldn't bear to live the rest of his life in good consciousness knowing that he left the woman he loved abandoned and sitting there in a condition he KNEW she would NEVER want to be in. I guess you'd have no problem living a life like that, because of course you're such an adamant Pro-Lifer.

 

[reefraff]

If he was resigned to the fact his wife was brain dead and met someone else while the court battle to put an end to things raged on I really don't see what the big deal is. I thought it was reasonable to allow the family to challenge the matter in federal court but it just seemed to me that in the end the guy did what his wife wanted.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289712
If he was resigned to the fact his wife was brain dead and met someone else while the court battle to put an end to things raged on I really don't see what the big deal is.
Now, this would be a good counter argument to my point... (see above)
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289692
You know, once you get something stuck in that hard head of yours, you block out any sense of logic or reasoning. I'll explain it again R-E-A-L S-L-O-W --- HE MADE A PROMISE TO HER TO CARRY OUT HER LAST WISHES -- NOT TO LET HER LIVE A LIFE IN A VEGATATIVE STATE.
Whether he did that while leading a 'second life' with another wife is irrelevent. If he would've done as you suggest, the woman would still be there today with a tube stuck down her throat, withering away to nothing, with the only thing in life to show for it was massive bed sores. But he couldn't bear to live the rest of his life in good consciousness knowing that he left the woman he loved abandoned and sitting there in a condition he KNEW she would NEVER want to be in. I guess you'd have no problem living a life like that, because of course you're such an adamant Pro-Lifer.
You saying that he was following his marriage vows by honoring her last wishes. *in real life* He was violating those same vows committing marriage's biggest no-no, adultery. Do you not see the disconnect in the argument here...
You can't have it both ways... Following his oath to his wife by pulling the plug, but not following his oath to stay true to her, (true imo means not knocking up other woman). While reserving the right to make medical decisions which result in his death. It just doesn't make sense...
But I guess at least you see the major problem I have with that case. Now we're discussing the concept I brought up.

And yes I am hard headed. But as demonstrated above with Reef's comment, not impenetrable if you're actually using logic...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289728
Now, this would be a good counter argument to my point... (see above)
You saying that he was following his marriage vows by honoring her last wishes. *in real life* He was violating those same vows committing marriage's biggest no-no, adultery. Do you not see the disconnect in the argument here...
You can't have it both ways... Following his oath to his wife by pulling the plug, but not following his oath to stay true to her, (true imo means not knocking up other woman). While reserving the right to make medical decisions which result in his death. It just doesn't make sense...
But I guess at least you see the major problem I have with that case. Now we're discussing the concept I brought up.

And yes I am hard headed. But as demonstrated above with Reef's comment, not impenetrable if you're actually using logic...
He stated that both he and his wife discussed in detail what she wanted if a situation like this was to ever occur. He stayed married to her "by law" so that he could have the legal power to make these decision for her, and carry out her last dying wishes. If her would've divorced her, he'd have no legal right to her medical decisions, and she'd still be stuck there today. He also stated that they both agreed that they should move on with their lives if something like this were to ever occur. She didn't expect him to remain celibate, and just do nothing with his life but sit around and take care of her until she died. The guy stayed loyal to her for THREE YEARS, not dating, not messing around, before he met who is now his wife in 1993. If I were in this situation, I wouldn't expect my wife to do it. I don't think any reasonable person whose in a healthy and loving relationship with their partner would expect the other to put their entire life on hold, knowing that there's absolutely no chance of the incapacitated partner from ever being the person who they married again.
So put yourself in his shoes. You and your wife have no living will. She gets into a massive car wreck, and her diagnosis is that she's completely brain dead. By law, since you are legally married to her, you are considered the primary family member that can make medical decisions for her. She told you that no matter what, if she's ever put into a condition where she can't have a complete and healthy quality of life, she doesn't want to live by artificial means. The doctor's say that she can live for YEARS on machines and feeding tubes. So what do you do? Ignore her wishes and say, "Not my problem. I don't want to hang around here and put my life on hold until she finally dies of old age."? Let's say you do want to abide by her last wishes, but her family doesn't agree with you, and will fight you in court to allow them to keep her alive. YOU MADE A PROMISE TO HER, that you wouldn't leave her in a condition like she is in. What do you do? If you ignore those last wishes, mainly because you want to move on with your life, then you probably shouldn't have been married to her in the first place.