Why isn't Terri Shiavo's husband on trial?

I've been following the case on the news, and what surprises me, is that many people criticise the judge, the court decisions, and the government, but I don't hear a whole lot of critisism of Terri's husband, Mr. Shiavo (whatever his first name is, I forgot). This is the man, who wants his wife to die a slow, tortureous death. Then he'll get that 1 million dollars that had been won in the malpractice suit. Why is HE not on trial? He is the Scott Peterson of his own kind!

It is so obvious that he just wants to get the money - and this is what's driving him, not the concern for Terri's wishes. If he wished her well, would he let her suffer for two weeks, dying a slow death from starvation? Even convicted murderers get to die faster! And Terri didn't commit any crimes.

I want to remind those of you who speak in favor of "letting her die" - please do not confuse "brain dead" and "brain damaged". Braindead person is pretty much gone - he/she is in a coma, eyes shut, no reaction to what's happening around them. In most cases, they are NOT HERE anymore. I think, in this case, it's all right for the relatives to decide when to pull the plug.

However, brain damaged person IS HERE. In this case, anyway. You've probably seen the footage of Terri responding to the people around her. She smiles, she laughs, she cries. She has feelings. She may not be able to speak, feed herself, walk... So what, she should die because of that?

One summer I got to work as a camp counselor with mentally retarded campers. Some of them were pretty severely retarded. They couldn't feed themselves, couldn't speak, wore diapers. But does it enter anyone's mind to "let them die" because of that?

That's what Hitler did: he said it's foolish to spend money on the homes for mentally retarded people - they weren't useful in any way. After a while there weren't any homes for them - because there wasn't any need for them. All mental patients were killed.

Another point to remember. Even if you happen to think it's a mercy killing, think of THE WAY do die. Try to go without food and water for a week and record what you're going through. Thirst, hunger, pain, delusions. And it lasts, and lasts... Is this mercy? How is it better than her life now?

She wakes up and she sees her parents who love her. They smile, they talk, they groom her. They are happy to be around her. She gets fed through a tube twice a day. So what if she can't chew? She still feels good when she's had a meal, just like we do. Many people with different disabilities can't chew, talk or walk - and nobody wants them dead because of that.

Now, back to Mr. Shiavo. Interestingly, when Terri's parents, while trying to justify why Terri should live (!), suggested that Mr.Shiavo's real motive was to inherit the million dollars. Then he, in return, accused them of wanting to get that same million... It doesn't surprise me. But the court viewed both mutual accusations as equal... Loving parents and a husband, who already has a common law wife and two children.

I must say, I can't blame him for starting a family with another woman - after all, it has been 15 years. But he should've divorced Terri and let her parents take care of her. But then he won't inherit a million dollars... So, like Scott Peterson, he chooses death for his wife instead of divorce.

What scares me about our society is that this situation is at all possible. We are so tied and trapped by our own laws. A slime bag wants his wife dead so he can get the money - and not only he wins the case, but he has supporters! What's next?

 

Something I have not seen addressed by the media: Who has been paying the hospital bill for all these 15 years? Wouldn't the hospital have claim on the million dollars?

 

And if not the hospital then whatever underwriter is paying, I guess.

On trial for what? He has done nothing except to follow the process with the doctors and hospital involved, for dealing with this horrible situation.

The "quick death" of execution might indeed be more humane but it would also be murder.

Weird, hunh? You'd not hesitate to euthanize your loyal dog under these circumstances but you can't do the same for a human.

BTW, I am NOT in favor of changing that particular law!

 

Dear Board,

These are my opinions only. This is why you need a LIVING WILL. If you do not have one, make one so your family will know. My wife and I are making ours out now. If she or myself are in the predicament, then we know what to do.

 

To LauraDay

Are you aware of the Texas Futile Care Law? (Signed into law by our current Prez). Care to comment?

How about this case?

"The baby wore a cute blue outfit with a teddy bear covering his bottom. The 17-pound, nearly 6-month-old boy wiggled with eyes open, his mother said, and smacked his lips.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive."

Then at 2 p.m. Tuesday, a medical staffer at Texas Children's Hospital gently removed the breathing tube that had kept Sun Hudson alive since his birth Sept. 25. Cradled by his mother, he took a few breaths, and died.

"I talked to him, I told him that I loved him. Inside of me, my son is still alive," Wanda Hudson told reporters afterward. "This hospital was considered a miracle hospital. When it came to my son, they gave up in six months. ... They made a terrible mistake."
Sun's death marks the first time a U.S. judge has allowed a hospital to discontinue an infant's life-sustaining care against a parent's wishes, according to bioethical experts.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3087387

BTW do you have a “living will?

Oh, Mr. Schiavo's first name is Michael.

 

Oh come now Laura, where do you get your information from, the Tom Delay webpage? The malpractice lawsuit was far less than a million and it has been spent already in medical and legal bills. Michael is making a very tough decision - and a decision that is personal in nature. He is no Scott Peterson.

You really should look at Tom Delay in disguist. The congressman from Texas is using this case in order to delay ethics hearings. Hearing which will probably remove this POS from office. To use Terry Schivo for political gain is pure sickness at its worst.

Michael should have to worry about his family and his wife. Instead he has to worry about two-bit politicians using his life and the life of his wife for political gain. Sick sick sick.

My wife and I have a living will. Pull the damn plug for me if this ever happens. The government, especially the federal government, should not be involved.

 

Well, I suppose Tom Delay sees a chance to rally his base of support; He's in seemingly perpetual ethical trouble, so he might be grateful for a chance to move the spotlight away from his own dealings for a while.

The President is NOT in trouble that way, but this is a convenient bone to throw to the Religious Right. They've been sounding a bit annoyed with him lately. That would explain why his actions as Governor and President are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

This whole federal show is nothing but cynical politics. If there were REALLY an issue, Congress would consider general legislation governing all similar cases; they are not; they are (unconstitutionally) tailoring their expressions of outrage to fit THIS case only. They don't care about anyone else.

The common error, a serious emotional error, in these awful cases is to trust one's own feelings about what, if anything, the patient is conscious of. Human beings are able to create the impression of "consciousness" where there really isn't any. Think of a child and her favorite teddy bear. Think of the affection adults have for a good ol' truck ("I hate to see her go to the crusher.")

It's an especially pathetic kind of denial. I've seen it in my own practice.

Those saying that T.S. will undergo a horrible death by dehydration and starvation ignore the extreme probability that she will feel nothing whatever. She's been dead for years and years, if the Florida court got it right. And so far, the Florida court is the ONLY court that has seen the evidence.

 

Laura,
He is not on trial, because sadly, what he is doing is not illegal. We live in a pro-death culture and this is the result of it.

We could also ask your question of the aboritionists and the whole abortion industry. Why aren't the doctors who perform abortions in jail? To say nothing of the women who contract with the doctors to murder their babies...

BLD

 

Well, if you want to put it that way, your buddy Dubya and his brother Jethro should be in jail too - between these two religious demogogues, they have signed more death warrants than all other governors combined.

Of course GW has send 1500+ soliders to their deaths as well for a out and out lie.

I guess our society does not really value life...

(if you put it that way)

 

This was a reasonable if emotional discussion before the Katzenjammer Kids showed up. So much for that.

 

To see this argument hashed out in great length, check this thread.

http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18235

 

Say Uncle, a few years ago, I found out what "katzenjammer" means in colloquial German.

Your description is indeed apt!

 

1. At least one third of the money is already gone. It has been used to pay for her expenses.

2. I don't know her wishes. I'm surprised that you do. Are you related to the family?

I'm always amazed at those who want to break this down to the lowest common denominator. There are no easy answers here. Please don't let others convince you that there are.

I can categorically say that I would hope my wife is brave enough to let me go should something horrible like that occur to me. She wishes the same.

Having said all this, I think, probably, the decision should be left to the one person who might know Terri's wishes. I'm just glad that I don't have to make this decision. It is *not* an easy one.



Tom Nixon

 

Check out this link:

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/11/Tampabay/1_million_offered_to_.shtml

He just turned down the firm offer of a million dollars, and may even have turned down the offer of TEN MILLION DOLLARS to sign over his rights.

You can call him a fiend in human form all you want, but he's obviously not a moneygrubber.

 

Re: Re: Why isn't Terri Shiavo's husband on trial?

IMO, the decision shouldn't be any more difficult than similar decisions made every day. At this point the only factor should be what is her current medical condition. What is her current medical condition is something I've not been able to isolate from the daily blather.

I've become disgusted with the coverage of the Schiavo case as it has consisted mostly of emotional reactions to irrelevant matters (regarding the decision of whether to pull the plug) and has now become an extension of political positions taken on other matters.

 

I just can’t imagine how difficult this must be on all parties: Terri’s husband and her parents. Regrettably, real people’s tragedies become the fodder for special interest groups … of whatever bent. I also have a great deal of compassion for the judge who has been presented with the case. I expect that whatever decision he makes he’ll have ample opportunity to wonder for years if he made the right call. It makes me wonder if there isn’t a form of post traumatic stress experienced by the judiciary.

I read this post before going to work this morning so I decided to talk with a few of my medical colleagues. I spoke at length with a friend, a nurse practitioner, who has a significant amount of end of life experience. Her report is that at the end of life there is massive systemic shutdown. Consequently, the afflicted do not experience pain or distress that would otherwise be expected from dehydration and malnutrition. Her notion, which I suspect is a position most of us have encountered, is that God built in an override mechanism to prevent suffering. It makes sense to me. She also noted that parenteral feeding by way of a g-tube isn’t a panacea. The purpose of parenteral feeding is to circumvent swallowing disorder when the pharyngeal mechanism has been disrupted. The risk is aspiration pneumonia where the food is introduced into the lungs instead of the stomach. Aspiration, she informed me, can and does occur with g-tube feeding although she had no information on the prevalence.

In my experience, pipe up here Nos if I’m wrong, the POA for healthcare, especially one that contains the durable springboard provision, is superior to the living will. I would also encourage folk to read up on end of life issues in order to make an informed decision and include special requests as part of the advanced directive. For example, a common cause of death in end of life scenarios is systemic infection from UTI or pneumonia. So an important decision would be whether you wish to be treated with antibiotics v. aspirin for symptom relief. Nurses often refer to pneumonia as “the old man’s friend.”

Do I know what the right decision is? Most emphatically, no. I would like to say I’ve practiced psychology in healthcare settings for so long I remember when a person’s request to be allowed to expire was NEVER honored. Under any condition whether the request was made by a cognitively intact patient, by advanced directive, or by proxy as is the case with Ms. Schiavo. I think it’s important to recognize that many patients and their families suffered and aggrieved much like the parties in this case in the face of having no right to be permitted to die on their own terms. I would hate to see a return to that policy.

 

I have worked in healthcare since I was 16, and I am in my mid-40's now. For a couple of decades, I have had both a living will and a durable power of attorney for healthcare. Both documents are important.

In both documents, I direct that if I am in a persistent vegetative state with no reasonable chance of improvement or in a terminal condition with death expected within two weeks as confirmed by two physicians, I request that doses of morphine sufficient to suppress respiration and cardiac function within 24 hours be administered. None of this withdrawal of food and water for me.

Suffice it to say that this very protocol is followed every day in hospitals across the USA. The reason why you never hear about it is that is 99.9% of these cases, the family is in agreement as to what is to be done.

And oh yes, if I am a good donor candidate at the time of my death, please use everything possible for transplants.

And by posting this message on the Internet, this is further evidence of my wishes. You will recall that in almost all of these sorts of cases, it is the lack of any documented 'end of life' wishes on the part of the patient that complicates the situation.

 

What ever happened to "less government"?

Ronald Reagan preached less government, which should mean Congress has no business interfering with Mr. Shiavo's desire to honor his wife's wishes.

As a society, we cannot afford to keep vegetables alive forever. The money we spend keeping people alive artificially could be used in more productive areas.

A final thought--70% of Americans believe Congress has no business in the Shiavo case. The fact that they did get involved sets a very dangerous precedant, that government can control your life. Overall, I think this is just a neo-con diversion tactic to keep us from looking at real issues, mostly the huge deficit and trade imbalance.

 

This is exactly the problem I have with the Shiavo case. Everyone speaks of her "dying of starvation" but it's even worse. She's actually dying of dehydration, dying of thirst. Regardless of her condition and how long she has been in that condition, to force her to die of thirst is unimaginably cruel.

I heard her father speak last night and say that he and his wife are searched before visiting their daughter and while visiting they are watched by a guard to make sure they are not trying to slip her any water or ice chips by mouth. Her father noted that his daughter is already showing signs of dehydration such as cracked lips and dry mouth and is acting extremely distressed.

People inside or outside of the medical profession can argue all day about whether or not she is feeling any of those effects, but it hardly matters. Regardless of tests and conclusions drawn by what the "equipment" shows, no one who has actually died that way has ever come back to tell anyone what they may have felt. Further, to deny a parent the ability to comfort a dying child by providing water or ice chips is beyond cruel. Put yourself in their place, don't just think about it, try hard to really be there. Don't you do all you can to comfort your child during an illness, even just a brief cold? Now put your child in Terri's place and yourself in her parents' place. How would you feel?

Kit

 

Kit

I think the point your missing is that if they comfort her as you describe it would prolong what ever she is going through. It may make the parents feel better, but it isn't in Terry's best interest.