Terri Schiavo

[Melodramatic]

What do you guys think about this controversial case conflicting between the life & death of a woman?

[Backinblack]

It's been so overdone by the media, I'm sick of it. Let her die in peace, and then we can all get on with our lives.

[Neo79]

I defend life in any case.

[loveherfromusa]

The amount of money spent on this case would have done so much for so many other people. This is a personal problem, not a national one. By the time she dies (She has probably been effectively dead for years.) I'm sure millions of $$ will have been spent. How many lives could have been saved if this money were spent in other causes?

[gloin]

She's not even a human being anymore the way she is being kept alive. She's already dead.

[Melodramatic]

The amount of money spent on this case would have done so much for so many other people. This is a personal problem, not a national one. By the time she dies (She has probably been effectively dead for years.) I'm sure millions of $$ will have been spent. How many lives could have been saved if this money were spent in other causes?
I'm not sure but I heared that the hospital payed for the expenses.

[DavidAlizée]

I defend life in any case.

Yes. However there comes to a point when its a lost cause. Im not talking about this case though. In some cases, its better for the person to just pass over. Better for the family, to know she is safe and not in any pain. Better for everyone to know the suffering is over and she is at rest. I do see your point though.. and i agree with it to an extent.

[Magnus 84]

I am somewhat disgusted with the way Terry Schiavo's death has been made into a media and political circus. But this is truly a difficult case. I can understand both sides to the argument, but in the end..who really know's what the right thing to do is? She is effectively brain dead, and the chances of her returning to any state of lucid brain function are remote if any. Therefore, I would side with her husband on this.

Next controversial topic: Abortion :shock:
then the death penalty!

[Melodramatic]

I am somewhat disgusted with the way Terry Schiavo's death has been made into a media and political circus. But this is truly a difficult case. I can understand both sides to the argument, but in the end..who really know's what the right thing to do is? She is effectively brain dead, and the chances of her returning to any state of lucid brain function are remote if any. Therefore, I would side with her husband on this.

Next controversial topic: Abortion :shock:
then the death penalty!
Sorry Magnus, I already did an abortion thread :prop: . I agree with Neo on this. I personally think her being brain-dead makes her a good deal handicap but I don't see a need for her to die an unnatural death. If her hubby sees her as such an inconvenience (& truthfully she is), he should've just handed her over to her folks. It sucks that some people opt for the easy way out. There were other options available.

[Snatcher42]

If her hubby sees her as such an inconvenience (& truthfully she is), he should've just handed her over to her folks. It sucks that some people opt for the easy way out.
I think he's trying to do what he believes she would have wanted. Neither alternative is an "easy way out."


I agree with Neo on this. I personally think her being brain-dead makes her a good deal handicap but I don't see a need for her to die an unnatural death.
Unnatural? And the way they're keeping her alive is? In this state, her death would be very natural. The same can be said for many cases, so it comes down to the extent your willing to go... but that's a issue for the individual and the family. Outside that circle, I don't think larger moral issues should come into play - it's too personal. The only question here is who has the right to decide - the husband or the parents. Right now the law says the husband, but maybe that will change. Either way, I agree that this shouldn't be such a huge national event.
:roll:

[Manu]

I also think it's a personal problem, and it shouldn't be everyday on the news. And I guess it is easy to give a moral opinion for people who are not under that family's circumstances.

[DavidAlizée]

he should've just handed her over to her folks. It sucks that some people opt for the easy way out. There were other options available.

Well marriage vowls are very clear. Untill death. He can't just hand her over to her parents when he loves her and has taken them vowls.

Suicide is the easy way out, not this. If it was easy, she would be dead by now. We have to understand there is no cure here. Would she want to remain pumped full of meds and brain dead for the rest of her life. ( however long that will be ). The first fit she has, would be fatal.

Her parents love her too, i respect them for wanting to keep her alive. If her husband or the court had not suggested to end her life. I am sure her parents would has spoken for that option anyway.

The law states is the husbands choice and that is how it should be. She must trust him 100% if she married him, so let him make this decision. To be fair, it was aways going to be a national event. When something like this goes to court in the way it did.. it was always going to happen.

To her parents , let her go.. your making things 100x worse by dragging this out. Everyone understands how they feel, but think of your daughter, not yourselfs.

[ArlettyFan]

The unnatural thing is, like Snatcher42 hit on, keeping her alive and hooked up to all these machines like a science project.

[Melodramatic]

Then what do you make of every ill patients? Bound to die? I'm surpised her husband didn't divorce her during her illness for 15 years. And previously, he stated that Terri requested to be on life support, & now that the bills are weighing, his story changes. How bazaar. And in the news today, it has been reported that the neurologists only gave a 30 minute evaluation on her condition & that isn't really enough. She didn't make a request to die (according to family members), but her husband saw it fit, & since the law says the spouse has the say on things, HIS own version of what's best for Terri is granted. I don't get why it is so hard for him to surrender guardianship over his wife to her parents. Is a brain-dead person really that forfeited of his/her own self-worth?

[Moco]

Then what do you make of every ill patients? Bound to die?
Every ill patient isn't brain dead.

I can see why her parents would want to hold on to the slimmest hope that their daughter might recover, but in the end all they are doing is delaying the inevitable. They must think from their daughter's perspective (well, if she could think). Would they want to be kept alive in a vegetative state with almost no hope of recovery while being a burden to those closest to them? It's time to let go.

I guess there's another question. Would anyone here want to be kept alive if you were in Terri Shiavo's shoes? I know I wouldn't.

[Zoomer]

If a patient is brain dead, it means they have no concious, no awareness, no response at all. She cannot feel, cannot respond, cannot do anything. In such a state, someone is not alive as we know it - they are just organs hooked up to machinery.

They can 'revive' dead bodies, and keep the organs going - which is effectively what has been going on.
For me, its not to define what death is, but what life is.....and then apply it to her body. Was she alive? If not for machinery, certainly not. Her heart may beat, but that is a completetly involuntary muscle (imagine if it wasn't!!)

From my personal perspective - she isn't aliv, as a person, as a human, and as a mammal - she isn't alive. The only thing defining her as alive is that there is a heartbeat, and warmth. Since you can stick electrodes into heart muscle and stimulate it to beat, that by itself for me is not be a definition of life.

Since her brain (and therefore by definition, his wife) is dead, she isn't dying at the moment.......as she wasn't alive.
Its just a tradegy that 15 years have passed that she has been in this state, and he has been loyal and devoted to her. He has devoted 15 years of his life to something that would be completely incapable of even being aware of his presence, let alone respond. I feel terribly sorry for the husband.

Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the woman as well, and the family etc, but after fifteen years of vigil with his wife, he now has the whole world peering in on his life, and whats worse - they are judging him, questioning his love, his motives, his reasoning, and his passion for his wife.

That in itself is horrible.

The whole thing is a tragic event.

[DavidAlizée]

I guess there's another question. Would anyone here want to be kept alive if you were in Terri Shiavo's shoes? I know I wouldn't.

Yeah, i thought about that myself. Its hard to call. If it was my mum in that state.. id have to say i couldnt let go. Its easy for me to say, its time for him to pull the plug. Fact is, i couldnt bring my self to do what that husband is doing. I say he is right and correct, but when it comes to someone i love, i just couldnt do it in a selfish way. If there was a miricle that one day, a drug might come on the scene that can fix her problems.. its a hope to hang onto. 1% chance.

Its really the kind of decision the husband has to make, i don't think there is any right or wrong decision in this case.

[tern]

I defend life in any case.

Sad as it is to see this I don't think it's up to us to take the life of an innocent, even as a mercy killing.

[Melodramatic]

Edited:

To me she's alive. Perhaps in a limited way. No interaction to the outside world. No response that can be deciphered. Absolutely handicap. Perhaps we all have different definitions of what it is to be "alive". We don't really know what the truth is or what her husband could've been doing in the span of 15 years to earn a title of a "faithful husband". That's pretty hard to believe for somebody to all of a sudden opt to pull the plug on his wife just like that. If he got to this point after 15 years, why can't he continue it? The priorities aren't all for him to bear. Terri's family is there. How come their charity doesn't mean anything to him or to the world? So what if her folks are trying to delay the inevitable? Is that such a bad thing? Is hoping against all hopelesness too dreary? Don't we all hang on to people we LOVE? We all use machinery or medicines, or whatever remedy we can to prolong life & i don't see any difference with that of Terri, although her condition is much more severe. I'm sympathizing with David here, if it was one of my/your loved ones... would it be really easy for me/you to say "Okay, you're a veggie & my dad/mom's been dead the moment his/her brain deteriorated." Can you really nullify a person's right to life due to his/her severe disability...

[Snatcher42]

I don't think that matters. It's not our place to say what's wrong or right in this situation - it's the family's decision. We should respect the wishes of Mr. Schiavo and the parents. The fact that they don't agree is the only reason this has become a hotbed. The law places responsibility with the husband. The parents want to change that, and it's their right to appeal, but it should be a question of general law and not the ethics of either party.

(In other words, I'm not an expert on the law so I can't come down on one side or the other, but if I wanted to make an informed decision, I would look at the laws dictating who administers care for patients who cannot take care of themselves. I would consider if the law was inadequate or not in regard to the parent's arguments. I would not base the decision on my own opinions about the sanctity of life, etc.)

That's not to say that ethics are not involved... but they should be left to those close to Schiavo whom the law supports. I'd want the same freedom granted to me in any similar situation.

[Melodramatic]

But why does Terri's husband feel a liability towards Terri when he's freakin' dating another woman?! He's a shady man. How can he call himself that (her "husband") when his life with Terri is over & he's involved with another woman? Sounds to me like this fucker is after the money. Since Terri didn't leave a will, the premium choice should've been to let her live but everybody has a little gold-digger within them.

[Jenny]

As soon as she's dead, he recieves 1million+ $$. She is his common law wife, not his legal wife, he already has a legal wife with 2 children. It's not that after 15 years she is 'ready' to die, it's that HE is ready for her to die and move on. In all actuality, if he is prepared to move on with his life which he did when he married a few years after her accident, maybe he could stop seeing her and allow her parents to be with her. Unfortunately all he is thinking about is $$.

[tern]

As soon as she's dead, he recieves 1million+ $$. She is his common law wife, not his legal wife, he already has a legal wife with 2 children. It's not that after 15 years she is 'ready' to die, it's that HE is ready for her to die and move on. In all actuality, if he is prepared to move on with his life which he did when he married a few years after her accident, maybe he could stop seeing her and allow her parents to be with her. Unfortunately all he is thinking about is $$.

Yeah, huge life insurance claim. I'm sure he saw the new tonka truck and decided he wanted one. :P

[Melodramatic]

I'm wondering how much longer this woman will live. Does anyone know what the hole in her neck is?

[Zoomer]

Sounds like a tracheotomi (naw, cannot spell it) if its a hole in the neck. Its where they cut through the front of the neck, around the base of it, and into your windpipe. It means when you 'breathe' it doesn't go through mouth etc, it goes through the neck (misses voicebox etc). They usually do this when the airway is obstructed, or alternatively, to leave the mouth free. This could be for the feeding tubes, IF they went through her mouth down to her stomach.

If he is just turning 'her' off for cash, then thats a little furbar! However, I aint versed in all the ins and outs of her condition/situation - I only know what I read - and lets face it, do you trust the papers :roll:

[Misfit]

It's been so overdone by the media, I'm sick of it. Let her die in peace, and then we can all get on with our lives.


She's not even a human being anymore the way she is being kept alive. She's already dead.

I agree with both of you.

[Melodramatic]

Sometimes, it's all about the benjamins.

[Magnus 84]

I think though Melo, those who are siding with the Schindlers would do so even if Benjamins weren't involved. Mostly the more conservative Christians in this country. Again, religion is the key motivator for these people. But tell me, does the Bible ever directly address this issue. No it doesn't. People have to resort to their own "interpretations" of biblical passages to create this "choose life" agenda. Its even weaker when arguing against abortion.

[DavidAlizée]

She's not even a human being anymore the way she is being kept alive. She's already dead

Try telling that to her parents. They would slap you right across your face.

[Melodramatic]

Like I said, if she didn't have a will set, then there is no reason for her "husband" to be so involved in putting her to sleep. You wouldn't even go to that Bible argument 'coz it would only apply if Terri did have a will that said she wanted to be put to sleep & these conservative Christians would've stoppped it from happening anyway. But she didn't have a will so that's the point.

[Magnus 84]

She's not even a human being anymore the way she is being kept alive. She's already dead

Try telling that to her parents. They would slap you right across your face.

So what??? The truth is sometimes painful, what makes humans inherently unique is a certain level of brain function. Therefore, when it no longer exists.....

[Melodramatic]

She's not even a human being anymore the way she is being kept alive. She's already dead

Try telling that to her parents. They would slap you right across your face.

So what??? The truth is sometimes painful, what makes humans inherently unique is a certain level of brain function. Therefore, when it no longer exists.....
Then she becomes disposable? And this was in her husabnd's recommendation right?

[Magnus 84]

Melo, if she had a living will...they "could not" argue against it, but doesn't mean they would approve and if the Schindler's felt like fighting against it--they would certainly join in. I frequent many conservative christian websites and forums. They are up in arms about this as a spiritual matter. Sort of the culmination of America's evil and turning away from God by murdering helpless women.

[DavidAlizée]

Its sad how people bring religion into this.. This topic is getting stupid now.

[Magnus 84]

Its sad how people bring religion into this.. This topic is getting stupid now.

Religion is the deciding factor for much of the world's population for several issues. Of course its sad, but its reality. Just look at the signs of the Schindler's supporters.

[Melodramatic]

Melo, if she had a living will...they "could not" argue against it, but doesn't mean they would approve and if the Schindler's felt like fighting against it--they would certainly join in. I frequent many conservative christian websites and forums. They are up in arms about this as a spiritual matter. Sort of the culmination of America's evil and turning away from God by murdering helpless women.
Well you really don't have to generalize all christians out there. Many of us believe that if she indeed have had a living will to be put to sleep if ever such condition befalls on her, then I think it should be considered. There's nothing wrong with opting to die than to suffer many a year but she left no will.... and 2 years ago her husband has stated that Terri wants to be on life support & all of a sudden changed his "facts". The funny thing is he feels that he is obligated to finish her off because she's disposable. Why not divorce her? Oh wait, she can't freakin sign the papers! Why is it so hard for him to just hand her over to her folks if he can't really handle it? I smell some phat dough in the oven.

[Magnus 84]

I never said ALL or even most Christians support the Schindlers..I said most of the Schindler's supporters ARE conservative christians. Big difference. I know plenty of CHristians which are pro-choice and even athiests which are pro-life. I work in the area of religious conflicts. And I keep my ear to the ground in regards to any nation's religious "fudamentalists" if you will...from my monitoring of the most popular conservative Christian forums and websites, it matters little whether or not Mr.Schiavo stands to gain from this, and living will or not..they would consider it euthanasia. Which they oppose vehmently because they believe, unless its the death penalty or war, man should have no part to play in deciding the time and manner of anyone's death including his or her own, no matter what the circumstances. Only God can decide that.

[Melodramatic]

^ But Terri & her family are catholic. The religion clearly opposes Euthanasia so it wouldn't make sense to alter from that belief especially if there was no will left, thus leaving her husband looking like the bad guy (which I think he truly is).

[Magnus 84]

We know her parents are devout catholics, can we be so sure she was? Bulimia for example would be considered a sin by the Catholic church, and is what led to her condition. Im sure there are also Catholics out there who support Mr.Schiavo despite the official stance by the Church against him. The Catholic Church does not speak for all Catholics, just ask John Kerry :cheesy: :cheesy: Half of my family is Catholic and their beliefs are all over the spectrum.

American catholics might be horrified to learn that the Catholic Church in Brazil permits Voodoo rituals to be performed in their church cemetaries and does not condemn parishoners for engaging in these rituals. But in Brazil, its just fine.

[DavidAlizée]

American catholics, LOL!!!

Please, Catholics are catholics.. in doesnt matter what country you are from!

[Magnus 84]

American catholics, LOL!!!

Please, Catholics are catholics.. in doesnt matter what country you are from!

You don't think location matters?? You must be kidding. With so many catholics out there, you will find with some research that they hold a myriad of views. Many catholics in latin america honestly believe themselves to be devout catholics yet still practice Macumba/Santaria/Voodoo. Would that go over well in Ireland?? Most likely they would call out the exorcists for them.

With the explosive growth of the evangelical churches in much of the world but particularly in Latin America. The Roman Catholic church is having to confront some very fundamental theological issues in certain geographic regions. The whole veneration of Mary thing is causing a subtle but growing schism if you will among Brazilian catholics. The evangelicals/protestants refer to it as idoltary and blasphemous, and many catholics are being influenced by by this....while many others cling to the more traditional beliefs, horrified at the thought of diminishing the prestige and honor of Nossa Senhora Apparecida, the patron saint of Brazil (allegedly a manifestation of the virgin mary).

[tern]

Sorry to break up your little argument but I got a question.

How did she get in her current state anyway? You said bullemia but I heard something about an accident. What up with that?

C'mon guys just calm down and David please stop with all the anti-American discourse. It does no one any good.

[Snatcher42]

I believe she had a heart attack and/or stroke brought on by an eating disorder (bulimia I guess).

[DavidAlizée]

American catholics, LOL!!!

Please, Catholics are catholics.. in doesnt matter what country you are from!

You don't think location matters?? You must be kidding. With so many catholics out there, you will find with some research that they hold a myriad of views. Many catholics in latin america honestly believe themselves to be devout catholics yet still practice Macumba/Santaria/Voodoo. Would that go over well in Ireland?? Most likely they would call out the exorcists for them.

With the explosive growth of the evangelical churches in much of the world but particularly in Latin America. The Roman Catholic church is having to confront some very fundamental theological issues in certain geographic regions. The whole veneration of Mary thing is causing a subtle but growing schism if you will among Brazilian catholics. The evangelicals/protestants refer to it as idoltary and blasphemous, and many catholics are being influenced by by this....while many others cling to the more traditional beliefs, horrified at the thought of diminishing the prestige and honor of Nossa Senhora Apparecida, the patron saint of Brazil (allegedly a manifestation of the virgin mary).

haha, it was just funny how you called them "American Catholics" like every catholic in America has the same view!! I don't care where you copied and pasted that shit from, i don't care. Stop talking about religon in this topic.

[Magnus 84]

haha, it was just funny how you called them "American Catholics" like every catholic in America has the same view!! I don't care where you copied and pasted that shit from, i don't care. Stop talking about religon in this topic.

Copy and pasted what? LOL, just because you are ignorant about your own church, doesn't mean "heretics" like myself are as well. Religion and the controversy surrounding Schiavo go hand in hand, like it or not. You seem to like confrontation and debate David...care to have a go in a new thread?

[Melodramatic]

I highly agree with you Magnus on the differences of how catholicism is being practiced in different countries or people for that matter. For example, David & me. We're both catholics but he agrees with abortion & I don't. I think individuals interprete their beliefs in customized manner & that's what divides many religions today. Well, since Terri's death is inevitable... then I guess it's useless for us to debate on the subject but I still maintain my stance. I think that Terri should be allowed to have a burial with that of the daughter of the catholic church. She was baptized catholic in her infancy & I believe she should remain that way unto her death. But her "husband's" decision to cremate her just astounds me. I mean, he already succeeded into pulling her plug & hasten her death, & now he wants to burn her.... it seems to me that he really wants to forget her as quickly as possible. Why can't he just surrender the dead body over to the parents & allow it to have a proper catholic burial? I mean, he didn't hand her over during her life... & he has other priorities mind you.

[tern]

I was very impressed when the religion thread in café corse didn't dissolve into something like this. Makes me sad.

As they say: "no donation, no salvation" (from GTA2)

[DavidAlizée]

I agree with abortion to an extent. There are some conditons i don't agree that an abortion should take place.

[Magnus 84]

I was very impressed when the religion thread in café corse didn't dissolve into something like this. Makes me sad.

As they say: "no donation, no salvation" (from GTA2)

Well in all fairness, its things like the Schiavo case...that really get people to simultaneously think about religion/faith and exposes their true values and beliefs. Much like what an MRI did to my knee last year . :doc:

@Melo, yep...abortion is one of the main "dividers" in this country among people of faith. I don't know what should be done about Mrs.Schiavo after she has died, would seem like a nice gesture on his part...to hand over her body to her parents. But he is the spouse/guardian..

[Melodramatic]

But he is the spouse/guardian..

ok, can you explain to me why he's still the legal guardian/spouse? Didn't he remarry someone?

[Magnus 84]

But he is the spouse/guardian..

ok, can you explain to me why he's still the legal guardian/spouse? Didn't he remarry someone?

Terri Schiavo died this morning...

No, I don't think he can remarry so long as Terry Schiavo was living and there was no divorce. He was still the legal guardian because he was her husband.

[Melodramatic]

But he is the spouse/guardian..

ok, can you explain to me why he's still the legal guardian/spouse? Didn't he remarry someone?

Terri Schiavo died this morning...

No, I don't think he can remarry so long as Terry Schiavo was living and there was no divorce. He was still the legal guardian because he was her husband.
Wow. I can't help but feel sad. :cry: How long has it been since her feeding tub was plugged?

[mot]

Who ever watches Southpark, they used this story for their new episode, pretty funny!

[Magnus 84]

Who ever watches Southpark, they used this story for their new episode, pretty funny!
I adore South Park...my favorite show on TV :D. Good call on that Mot.


Wow. I can't help but feel sad. :cry: How long has it been since her feeding tub was plugged?
A week and a half? I think.

[tern]

@Melo
Hey in your new gif are you concentrating on the guy dancing or Alizée? I'm just curious is all.. because he's pretty good I guess. :wink:

[Melodramatic]

@Melo
Hey in your new gif are you concentrating on the guy dancing or Alizée? I'm just curious is all.. because he's pretty good I guess. :wink:
Huh? I'm confused with your random question. :?

[tern]

Terry Shaivo passed away today.

[Samster33]

In other news... the Pope is also on a feeding tube... should he be removed as well?

I understand this was not about being unable to feed your self but about mental coherency. Thing is no one can say what her innermost thoughts were. No one can read minds. It may be very that she had lucid thought and was simply unable to control her body. After she came out of the coma some nurses claimed they were working with her to get her to eat on her own... and her husband decided to stop it.

I do see a logical side too... she could have very well been mostly braindead and in which case it would not be fair to waste taxpayers money.

I dunno... if it is a grey issue like this I choose life.

[Snatcher42]

Thing is no one can say what her innermost thoughts were. No one can read minds. It may be very that she had lucid thought and was simply unable to control her body.
That's not true. You can measure such things. Sure, you can't read a persons mind and tell what exact thoughts they are thinking, but you CAN tell if they are thinking or not by measuring neural activity. Brain dead means exactly that - nothing's going on in there. If she were still having lucid thoughts and simply couldn't move her body, she would be classified as paralyzed, not brain dead.

[Samster33]

Yes but how long ago was this test taken? Isn't that why everyone was so mad, because the last scan was done like 10 years ago?

And, there is no doubt had she been able to eat by herself with no feeding tube this never would have happened.

[Snatcher42]

I don't know the specifics of this case, but generally neural activity is monitored all the time. An imagining scan looking at physical damage to the brain might not have been done in many years, but I'm sure they were always keeping any eye on brain activity. And again, if she could feed herself - she wouldn't be brain dead.

[thomast]

Terri Schiavo died this morning...

Rest In Peace.

[Tyza]

Terri Schiavo died this morning...

Rest In Peace.

Yes, that's all I can add now. :|

[tern]

In other news... the Pope is also on a feeding tube... should he be removed as well?


He'll be alright, as long as he doesn't vacation to Florida. :mrgreen: Because.. it's florida.

[DavidAlizée]

na, i think the pope may die tonight. Such a great man..

[Melodramatic]

About the Pope:
Sadly, I agree with David. I just hope his successor will be as good as him.

About Terri:
All the same. May she rest in peace. I think her husband's an idiot. He should face the media & not cower so he can explain himself. If he claims to know that Terri didn't want to live like this, he should've not let her be in this situation for 15 years & had done away with her long before.

[Melodramatic]

In other news... the Pope is also on a feeding tube... should he be removed as well?

I understand this was not about being unable to feed your self but about mental coherency. Thing is no one can say what her innermost thoughts were. No one can read minds. It may be very that she had lucid thought and was simply unable to control her body. After she came out of the coma some nurses claimed they were working with her to get her to eat on her own... and her husband decided to stop it.

I do see a logical side too... she could have very well been mostly braindead and in which case it would not be fair to waste taxpayers money.

I dunno... if it is a grey issue like this I choose life.
Well, about the Pope, I don't know what they'll do with him but according to the Catholic Church, they abide by the following rules:

End-of-Life Decisions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The death of Terri Schiavo raises a number of issues  moral, legal and constitutional, about the right to life and the so-called right to die. Most coverage of the case focused on the question of her guardian's right to decide according to her alleged wishes and the due process of the judicial proceedings. However, at base the question was a moral, not a legal, one: under what conditions, if any, may a patient, a guardian, medical personnel or civil authorities, withhold or withdraw nutrition and hydration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Catholic Teaching on Extraordinary Means

The natural law and the Fifth Commandment1 requires that all ordinary means be used to preserve life, such as food, water, exercise, and medical care. Since the middle ages, however, Catholic theologians have recognized that human beings are not morally obligated to undergo every possible medical treatment to save their lives. Treatments that are unduly burdensome or sorrowful, such as amputation, or beyond the economic means of the person, or which only prolong the suffering of a dying person, are morally extraordinary, meaning they are not obligatory.

The many advances in medicine during recent decades, however, has complicated the decision whether to undergo or forego medical treatment, since medicine can now save many people who would simply have been allowed to die in the past. Further, having saved them, many people continue to live for long periods in comatose or semi-conscious states, unable to live without technological assistance of one kind or another. The following Questions and Answers will address some of the complexities of this issue.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. When may medical therapies, procedures, equipment and the like be withheld or withdrawn from a patient.

A. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states,

2278. Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

The key principle in this statement is that one does not will to cause death. When a person has an underlying terminal disease, or their heart, or some other organ, cannot work without mechanical assistance, or a therapy being proposed is dangerous, or has little chance of success, then not using that machine or that therapy results in the person dying from the disease or organ failure they already have. The omission allows nature to takes its course. It does not directly kill the person, even though it may contribute to the person dying earlier than if aggressive treatment had been done.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. Does this also apply to artificially provided nutrition and hydration?

A. Yes, when the moral conditions noted above are met. We must, therefore, ask the question "will the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration allow the person to die, or kill the person?" When it will allow a person to die from an underlying condition, rather than unnecessarily prolonging their suffering, it may be removed. So, for example, in the last hours, even days, of a cancer patient's life, or if a sick person's body is no longer able to process food and water, there is no moral obligation to provide nutrition and hydration. The patient will die of their disease or their organ failure before starvation or dehydration could kill them.

However, when the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration is intended to kill the person, or will be the immediate and direct cause of doing so, quite apart from any disease or failure of their bodies, then to withdraw food and water would be an act of euthanasia, a grave sin against the natural law and the law of God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. What about the case of Terri Schiavo?

A. In Terri's case, while there was some disagreement as to her exact medical condition, she was not dying. The withdrawal of her food and water directly caused her death, and thus was a violation of the natural law and the law of God.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. You mention the natural law, what is it?

A. The natural law is morality which reason can determine from the nature of man, without the assistance of God's revelation. An example is the right to life. Almost all human societies throughout history, both religious and non-religious, have recognized that it is wrong to kill an innocent person. This is a conclusion which reason can easily come to, since all human beings have an inborn desire to live. From this natural law principle we can easily see that any action that directly and intentionally kills an innocent person is an unjust taking of a human life. Therefore, withdrawing food and and water from anyone who is not about to die and who can still tolerate it, has no other reasonable name than murder.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. What does the Church say about this?

A. The Pope addressed this issue in an address to a group of physicians who were in Rome in March 2004 precisely to discuss it. Note how he both uses the language of the natural law and the language of faith, which also tells us what we may do and not do.

I should like particularly to underline how the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act. Its use, furthermore, should be considered, in principle, ordinary and proportionate, and as such morally obligatory, insofar as and until it is seen to have attained its proper finality, which in the present case consists in providing nourishment to the patient and alleviation of his suffering.

The obligation to provide the "normal care due to the sick in such cases" (1) includes, in fact, the use of nutrition and hydration (2). The evaluation of probabilities, founded on waning hopes for recovery when the vegetative state is prolonged beyond a year, cannot ethically justify the cessation or interruption of minimal care for the patient, including nutrition and hydration. Death by starvation or dehydration is, in fact, the only possible outcome as a result of their withdrawal. In this sense it ends up becoming, if done knowingly and willingly, true and proper euthanasia by omission.

In this regard, I recall what I wrote in the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae making it clear that "by euthanasia in the true and proper sense must be understood an action or omission which by its very nature and intention brings about death, with the purpose of eliminating all pain"; such an act is always "a serious violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person" (n. 65). [Pope John Paul II, To the Congress on Life-Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative State, 20 March 2004)

(1) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iura et Bona, p. IV)

(2) cf. Pontifical Council "Cor Unum", Dans le Cadre, 2, 4, 4; Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Charter of Health Care Workers, n. 120


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. What can a person do to ensure that their wishes and their religious beliefs are respected by their family, medical personnel and the courts?

A. The best way is by means of an Advance Directive which states the patients wishes with respect to aggressive medical treatment. There are two basic kinds, a Living Will by itself or an Advance Directive with a Durable Power of Attorney (or Proxy) for Health Care Decisions. The merits of each are as follows:

1. Living Will. By this document a person decides completely in advance whether they want to be kept alive by technology. It is a "yes" or "no" statement, which then places the matter in the hands of the medical community. Many Catholic bishops and moralists consider this an unsatisfactory approach, as it does not provide for unforeseen circumstances. Despite the enthusiasm of the media, many medical professionals, and sadly even some Catholic institutions, Living Wills are NOT the way to go!

2. Advance Directive with a Durable Power of Attorney or Health Care Proxy. These documents give to a friend or family member the authority to make health care decisions according to one's mind as expressed in an Advance Directive. By appointing an agent, or giving someone durable power of attorney, the patient allows for unforeseen circumstances. By stating in an Advance Directive that one wants Catholic teaching adhered to, one can ensure that neither the agent or the medical institution will disregard that teaching. Together they ensure that a trusted person, rather than strangers, will make circumstantially appropriate decisions, in keeping with the Faith.

Endnotes:

1The 5th Commandment, 6th in the Protestant listing, says "Thou shalt not kill." The implicit corollary is that one must save life, one's own and others by reasonable care  not driving too fast, not taking drugs, seeing a doctor if home care cannot effect a cure of sickness, etc..

[DavidAlizée]

Yeah, there are a few choices for next pope.. but, today he had his last rights read to him. Last time the pope died, he was dead for weeks. they kept propping him up now and again , waving his hand.

The pope we have now, is the most important person in the world imo. I wish i could have gone to the square, outside his window to show my support. He has touched so many thousands upon thousands of people across the world, catholics.. non catholics.. all over the world. A great man indeed. He won't last any more than 24 hours i don't think. He was even giving blessons, not long ago, and took holy communion today.

We were very lucky to have had such a great person in the catholic rain.

[Melodramatic]

^ I don't know much of the Pope's great deeds that are admirable even to non-catholics so can you tell me why he is so admired by alot of people?

[DavidAlizée]

The holy father is admired by millions of non catholics. Just last night, on the news.. lots of people visited the pope city.. in his last hours. They felt touched by his will to carry on his amazing rain, even at his last stages. With parkinson's disease, arthritis and very ill he still managed to perform many of his dudties and never gave up.

I can't even believed you asked that question.

[Melodramatic]

^ Yeah. It's embarassing isn't it. I've heard many great deeds including him responsible for the fall of communism (is that right?). He's not dead just yet. thank god.

[esceka]

By now, the pope and Terri Schiavo both have passed away. The last time anyone posted here is over 2 weeks ago. I've read all the 5 pages, and I think it's a very interesting topic.
I must say, I, personally, choose life, no matter what. But it's interesting to see how other people think. I should read more topics like this