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

[cranberry]

I'm for it. It needs standardization and very clear laws, but the premise of it I stand for.
Basically I assist people in dying all the time by withdrawing support and giving loads of pain meds to keep them "comfortable". Basically what I do is speed up the death process. It's not the same thing as euthanasia persa... well not on paper anyways. But if I give a treatment that basically ceases a patient's respiratory drive and offer no assistance..... well that's unofficial euthanasia IMO. I use to have a problem with it. I even brought back a kid that died due to a med I had given (they were DNR) and every laboured breath and cry after that I felt to my very soul. For all of that pain and misery she experienced thereafter was because of me.
Don't get me wrong. I don't just disconnect a baby and go about my business. I still have a "problem" with it, but it's more along the lines that it had to happen, not that it is me doing it. I've disconnected some very special babies and have never recovered myself. But it was right and it was time. So ya, basically I do things that let people die......

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/3289752
I'm for it. It needs standardization and very clear laws, but the premise of it I stand for.
Basically I assist people in dying all the time by withdrawing support and giving loads of pain meds to keep them "comfortable". Basically what I do is speed up the death process. It's not the same thing as euthanasia persa... well not on paper anyways. But if I give a treatment that basically ceases a patient's respiratory drive and offer no assistance..... well that's unofficial euthanasia IMO. I use to have a problem with it. I even brought back a kid that died due to a med I had given (they were DNR) and every laboured breath and cry after that I felt to my very soul. For all of that pain and misery she experienced thereafter was because of me.
Don't get me wrong. I don't just disconnect a baby and go about my business. I still have a "problem" with it, but it's more along the lines that it had to happen, not that it is me doing it. I've disconnected some very special babies and have never recovered myself. But it was right and it was time. So ya, basically I do things that let people die......
What you do in the NICU, my wife does in the MICU for the older individuals on the opposite end of the spectrum. What you do is far more gut wrenching than what my wife goes through. She's told me pretty much the same story as you, but at least she has some comfort in knowing most of her patients had the opportunity to lead a good life before they've come to their demise. She's done a couple of rotations in the NICU, and she says she could never have the mental 'stamina' to work in that unit on a daily basis. It's just too difficult for her to 'block it out'.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289750
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.
It is really simple, once I make the decision to fall in love with another woman, have kids and start a family, I walk away from her...
Look in my opinion, government shouldn't be in the marrage buisiness to begin with. That is covenent between you, your spouse and God. It is a religious institution. This man made the decision to end his marriage when he made the decision to all but be legally married to the other woman, that should end his say so in the first wife's case. Because you ALSO MADE A PROMISE (well usually who knows maybe they had one of those "open marriages") to stay true. Any well, imo I'm I'm betting most people everywhere staying true doesn't mean starting a second family...
(but hey you have provided some insite that makes me doubt his motives less)

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289757
It is really simple, once I make the decision to fall in love with another woman, have kids and start a family, I walk away from her...
Look in my opinion, government shouldn't be in the marrage buisiness to begin with. That is covenent between you, your spouse and God. It is a religious institution. This man made the decision to end his marriage when he made the decision to all but be legally married to the other woman, that should end his say so in the first wife's case. Because you ALSO MADE A PROMISE (well usually who knows maybe they had one of those "open marriages") to stay true. Any well, imo I'm I'm betting most people everywhere staying true doesn't mean starting a second family...
(but hey you have provided some insite that makes me doubt his motives less)

The "religious' part of the marriage ended when she was finally diagnosed as being brain dead. She was no longer the loving person he married. She was incapable of holding up her end of the marriage that you would define as being "true". If he had any inkling whatsoever she could come back to ANY form of herself, he would've never gone looking for love elsewhere. It has nothing to do with staying "true" as far as the physical aspects of the marriage. He always loved Terri, and always will. He never had any "motives". It's called reality. You never answered the question. If you were in his shoes, what would you have done?

 

[meowzer]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289770
You never answered the question. If you were in his shoes, what would you have done?
I really don't think anyone could answer that "for real" unless they are in those shoes.....
I have been faced with some things in my life, that How I THOUGHT I would react, and how I reacted or felt were like night and day

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by meowzer
http:///forum/post/3289771
I really don't think anyone could answer that "for real" unless they are in those shoes.....
I have been faced with some things in my life, that How I THOUGHT I would react, and how I reacted or felt were like night and day
With the responses I've seen from stdreb, it appears he's made it abundantly clear how he would react to the situation. I have absolutely no doubt how I would handle the situation, and my wife has made it very clear she would react the same way.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289770
The "religious' part of the marriage ended when she was finally diagnosed as being brain dead. She was no longer the loving person he married. She was incapable of holding up her end of the marriage that you would define as being "true". If he had any inkling whatsoever she could come back to ANY form of herself, he would've never gone looking for love elsewhere. It has nothing to do with staying "true" as far as the physical aspects of the marriage. He always loved Terri, and always will. He never had any "motives". It's called reality. You never answered the question. If you were in his shoes, what would you have done?
You can't say that he would have never left, he couldn't have even said that... You don't know the future. And quite frankly if I thought my wife was in a brain dead coma (or whatever the medical term was for her) never to be revived again. I'd move on...
But at least we are getting some where... Although I disagree, about the religious aspect ending at comatose. It ended which is the key for my argument... Once it ends he has no say over her body... And since, in my mind government recognized marriage is worthless (at least in terms of right and wrong) The family should have say over her vs the husband.
Now in my opinion, the end at brain dead argument is flawed, because I would want say so over my wife if say right now, she got into an accident and was brain dead. And I should have medical directive. But if say in 3-4 years (and I wouldn't let it go on that long) if I along the way met another woman, moved in had kids, and was married for all practical intents and purposes minus the legal paperwork. I've end my religious obligation to the first woman and should forfeit any other dealings in her status. (thus fitting my argument better)
Originally Posted by meowzer
http:///forum/post/3289771
I really don't think anyone could answer that "for real" unless they are in those shoes.....
I have been faced with some things in my life, that How I THOUGHT I would react, and how I reacted or felt were like night and day
I would agree.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289776
With the responses I've seen from stdreb, it appears he's made it abundantly clear how he would react to the situation. I have absolutely no doubt how I would handle the situation, and my wife has made it very clear she would react the same way.
So why did you say I didn't answer the question? I point blank answered it, based off my gut reaction now.
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289757
It is really simple, once I make the decision to fall in love with another woman, have kids and start a family, I walk away from her...
(her being the first wife)

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289770
The "religious' part of the marriage ended when she was finally diagnosed as being brain dead. She was no longer the loving person he married. She was incapable of holding up her end of the marriage that you would define as being "true". If he had any inkling whatsoever she could come back to ANY form of herself, he would've never gone looking for love elsewhere. It has nothing to do with staying "true" as far as the physical aspects of the marriage. He always loved Terri, and always will. He never had any "motives". It's called reality. You never answered the question. If you were in his shoes, what would you have done?
You are still missing the point. He moved on with his life. He stood to receive a substantial monetary gain by her death, As by law he was still her husband. He had everything to gain by her "death". This is the problem some of us have. Had he not moved on already, I would have never had a reason to question him. I can easily say my wife said anything if in a vegetative state. If it is not in writting there is no proof. The family claimed another thing she said.
I did not question the decision based on Law. And the outcome is how it should have been based on law. But this law needs challenged. Mainly because someone that has moved on with their life, stands to gain from an individual's death, should NOT be allowed to make those types of decisions.
What if it was her best friend that was saying she asked to not be resucitated?
Oh, I am not against assisted suicide either. Provided the individual is of sound mind...but and argument could be made that anyone that wants to die, is not of sound mind...lol.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3289783
You are still missing the point. He moved on with his life. He stood to receive a substantial monetary gain by her death, As by law he was still her husband. He had everything to gain by her "death". This is the problem some of us have. Had he not moved on already, I would have never had a reason to question him. I can easily say my wife said anything if in a vegetative state. If it is not in writting there is no proof. The family claimed another thing she said.
I did not question the decision based on Law. And the outcome is how it should have been based on law. But this law needs challenged. Mainly because someone that has moved on with their life, stands to gain from an individual's death, should NOT be allowed to make those types of decisions.
What if it was her best friend that was saying she asked to not be resucitated?
Oh, I am not against assisted suicide either. Provided the individual is of sound mind...but and argument could be made that anyone that wants to die, is not of sound mind...lol.
What did he have to gain? You talking insurance money? Come on. That's cruel by even your standards. Why would he spend THREE YEARS trying various 'treatments' to try and make her better if he was just in it for the money. He would've had them pull the cord after the first week if that were the case. I'll say it again - IT WAS HER DYING WISH. He knew her family wouldn't carry out her final wishes. His only 'interest' was making sure she got what she wanted. That's because he LOVED her. And yea, I'm sure her family would say anything to refute his claims. THEY WANTED HER ALIVE.
If her friend has her Power Of Medical Decison Proxy, and she knew that she didn't want to live on a machine, then yea, she has the LEGAL right to refuse that treatment. That's how the LAW works. Your stuck on this religious bond of marriage. For me, you're thinking opposite. A LEGAL marriage carries much more weight than a religious one. Mainly because of decisions like this. Considering I'm an agnostic, I'm not into this 'moving on to a better world' manta that religion tells you. Religion doesn't control how I feel for my wife. Religion doesn't dictate how I take care of my wife. I DO.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3289780
You can't say that he would have never left, he couldn't have even said that... You don't know the future. And quite frankly if I thought my wife was in a brain dead coma (or whatever the medical term was for her) never to be revived again. I'd move on...
But at least we are getting some where... Although I disagree, about the religious aspect ending at comatose. It ended which is the key for my argument... Once it ends he has no say over her body... And since, in my mind government recognized marriage is worthless (at least in terms of right and wrong) The family should have say over her vs the husband.
Now in my opinion, the end at brain dead argument is flawed, because I would want say so over my wife if say right now, she got into an accident and was brain dead. And I should have medical directive. But if say in 3-4 years (and I wouldn't let it go on that long) if I along the way met another woman, moved in had kids, and was married for all practical intents and purposes minus the legal paperwork. I've end my religious obligation to the first woman and should forfeit any other dealings in her status. (thus fitting my argument better)
I would agree.
So why did you say I didn't answer the question? I point blank answered it, based off my gut reaction now.
(her being the first wife)
Man, send me your wife's email. I need to let her know that if she doesn't want to live in a vegatative state if it ever comes to that, that she has a legal proxy stating she doesn't want to continue living by artificial means. If she depended on you to carry out her final wishes, she SCREWED.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3289783
You are still missing the point. He moved on with his life. He stood to receive a substantial monetary gain by her death, As by law he was still her husband. He had everything to gain by her "death". This is the problem some of us have. Had he not moved on already, I would have never had a reason to question him. I can easily say my wife said anything if in a vegetative state. If it is not in writting there is no proof. The family claimed another thing she said.
I did not question the decision based on Law. And the outcome is how it should have been based on law. But this law needs challenged. Mainly because someone that has moved on with their life, stands to gain from an individual's death, should NOT be allowed to make those types of decisions.
What if it was her best friend that was saying she asked to not be resucitated?
Oh, I am not against assisted suicide either. Provided the individual is of sound mind...but and argument could be made that anyone that wants to die, is not of sound mind...lol.
Ummm, The guy turned down a million dollar payment for giving up custody. Doesn't sound like someone who was just in it for the money to me.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289876
Ummm, The guy turned down a million dollar payment for giving up custody. Doesn't sound like someone who was just in it for the money to me.
Ummm, you answered your own question. HE TURNED IT DOWN. If he was "just in it for the money", then why didn't he TAKE the money and run? He didn't take the money because, HE WAS DETERMINED TO ABIDE BY HER FINAL WISHES.

 

[meowzer]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289886
Ummm, you answered your own question. HE TURNED IT DOWN. If he was "just in it for the money", then why didn't he TAKE the money and run? He didn't take the money because, HE WAS DETERMINED TO ABIDE BY HER FINAL WISHES.
reef didn't ask the money question

 

[dragonzim]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289871
Considering I'm an agnostic, I'm not into this 'moving on to a better world' manta that religion tells you. Religion doesn't control how I feel for my wife. Religion doesn't dictate how I take care of my wife. I DO.

 

[mantisman51]

The whole debate over Schiavo reflects the problem with euthanasia. For those who have ill intent it can be used to murder and then have legal cover. I don't know that's the case with Schiavo, but in cases like this, we have to take his word for it. Not a very safe mechanism of law IMO. Also, yeah, I think he did it for the insurance money and if he caused her original injuries as even some of the police investigators said they considered a high probability, of course he'd turn down the million bucks. At one point he hadn't visited her or made any inquiry with her physicians for over two years while he started another family. Yup, that's a loving and concerned husband. In the end, it demonstrates that euthanasia ain't the fix-all some people like to think it is. In fact it is murky at best.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3289886
Ummm, you answered your own question. HE TURNED IT DOWN. If he was "just in it for the money", then why didn't he TAKE the money and run? He didn't take the money because, HE WAS DETERMINED TO ABIDE BY HER FINAL WISHES.
I didn't have a question, I was agreeing with you. Now I need a shower

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3289993
I didn't have a question, I was agreeing with you. Now I need a shower

DOH! I've gotten so confused on who thinks what, I'm not even reading right. Sucks getting old. Oops, I better not say that too loud. My wife may hear me and tear up my DNR request.

 

[cranberry]

"Schindler family members stated that even if Terri had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it."
Why would you think it was okay to give this decision to her parents.... they wanted what they wanted, not what she wanted. If she did indead express these wishes to her husband, he's the one that did her right.
BUT! Why are we talking about Shiavo here in a euthanasia discussion? I just looked her up... she's in Florida. Euthanasia isn't legal in Florida. Now, you can argue whether or not is WAS indeed Euthanasia, but in the legal sense, what happened to her was not considered Euthanasia.

 

[meowzer]

Originally Posted by Cranberry
http:///forum/post/3290002
"Schindler family members stated that even if Terri had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it."
Why would you think it was okay to give this decision to her parents.... they wanted what they wanted, not what she wanted. If she did indead express these wishes to her husband, he's the one that did her right.
BUT! Why are we talking about Shiavo here in a euthanasia discussion? I just looked her up... she's in Florida. Euthanasia isn't legal in Florida. Now, you can argue whether or not is WAS indeed Euthanasia, but in the legal sense, what happened to her was not considered Euthanasia.

...yeah

 

[mantisman51]

Semantics-they stopped feeding and watering her to end her life. That is euthanasia, not allowing nature to take its' course. That is taking actions to CAUSE someone's death. That is euthanasia.