3 Days now, no food or water

Terri continues to be starved. It's easy to shrug our shoulders at this case and its easy to remain ignorant about this case, but the more I look into it the more I find myself falling plainly on the side of life and Terri's parents.

Clifton has a good post on the matter.


I heard an interview with Terri's parents lawyer about how she had spoken with Terri (yes, spoken). The lawyer told Terri: This could all be over if you could just say "I want to live." And then the lawyer told us that Terri was clearly trying to say precisely that, managing only to say: "aye......whaaaaaaa"

Say what you want, the facts are that this woman is obviously trying to communicate and interact with people who are present with her. This, in my mind, is NOT a vegetable. I've never had an experience where my cauliflower was trying to talk to me or smile at me.

I've heard a lot of talk saying that Terri's cerebral cortex is "mush", but the fact of the matter is Terri's parents have the signatures of 50 neurologists who say that the "popularly perceived" diagnosis of Terri cannot have been made without certain test being performed (CAT scan among others) and Terri's husband has refused to allow such tests and furthermore has denied Terri any substintive form of therapy or treatment since 1991.

You can read and find out more HERE.

I find it interesting that Terri's maiden name is "Schindler." People are telling me that they don't think the government should interfere, that it is not the business of the federal government to intervene. But the government is already involved and you and I are involved because we are presently in the business of letting this woman's husband starve her to death. Something that proponents of starving Terri would not stand to see happen to even the likes of John Couey, I suppose because he can walk and talk? No, for my part, whether or not the Feds have a "legal" mandate doesn't matter...they have a moral one.

I am guessing Terri cannot survive much longer without water...maybe another day or two.

Comments

Anonymous said…
One of the best comments on this case I found at the following UR (you have to scroll down to Sunday's comments)L:

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/view353.html

He says, in part:

"If we decided to kill a dog by starving it to death and giving it no water, the police would come and rescue the dog and jail the perpetrators.

I am not sure I understand the almighty urge to kill Terri Shaivo, or torture the husk. Many experts have concluded that she is already dead. So what? If she is already dead, then keeping her alive does no harm beyond financial. Why the insistence on killing her? If she is not already dead, then this is murder. The only party who seems certain that she wants to be dead is not disinterested, and stands to make some money when she's gone; certainly there are no documents or third party witnesses."

Juliana
fdj said…
Of course Michael WON that lawsuit with the argument that he would need the funds to care for Terri for the rest of her natural life.

I'm not terribly interested in demonizing Michael...but why he does not now give over care to her parents I cannot understand. I have heard heartbreaking testimony from nurses who have cared for Terri painting a radically different picture than that which we are given: a vegetable.

I wholly support congress' action and reject your cynicism on the matter Seraphim - but even if your cynicism is true, it does not make it any less the right thing to do.
Were I a congressman I could not have slept at night if I at least did not give this case another chance at review.

Of course...now...she continues to starve.

We've seen Roman Catholic leadership take a public stand on this...has anyone seen the Orthodox?
fdj said…
20 judges did NOT fully review the case...rather the number is something like 3 or 4. The bulk of the others simply reviewed the other few decisions in regards to specific legal due process issues. This is a profound misconception (one of many on both sides of the "argument") that is being floated way too much.

Bill O'Reilly actually had some very interesting things to say about the fact that we are getting so much "spin" on this issue that he doubts anyone knows what's going on. Many are reading Michael's spin (whether believing it or not makes no difference) and I and others have been reading the Schindler's spin. I've never heard such subtle yet ominously present bias as I have these last few days on NPR with regard to this. "brain dead" is a word I heard a lot. Well brain dead people are dead people, come on...get a clue...they don't speak and they don't smile and they certainly aren't able to breath on their own.

I really don't care what is motivating michael...demonize him or adore him makes no difference to me. He has apparently won his family squabble at the cost of a life being slowly snuffed out...hard for me to side with that in ANY circumstance or with any "reading" of the details.

Seraphim, sometimes I think you are as cynical toward Repubs as I am often accused of being toward Protestants. :)

It's not about politics for me, and I suspect it wasn't so much so for at least a couple (1 or 2 maybe?????) of the Republicans? A matter of conscience? Naw...they are republicans for crying out loud! It's all about money, oil, big business, and getting re-elected.

Yes they could send in the National Guard or something but with what long term effect? Would any of these "forceful means" really be remotely feasible? I mean we don't want to rehash 1860's federal vs state politics.

It's a piss poor situation and the less I hear about the politics involved the better off I am. I just don't care. What has become of us as a people?

Sodom had nothing on us.

Popular Posts