Straight Up with Sherri

Saturday, March 26, 2005

He Says, She Says

No wonder there is so much banter.

I have noticed a few things.

One side believes this is a "right to die" case.

One side believes this is a "right to life" case.

Just out of PURE curiosity, let's clear some things up.

Question to the "right to life" side:

If a person has a LIVING WILL and has stated IN WRITING that they would want to be allowed to starve to death in certain situations, do you believe the government has the right to intervene and stop this?

Question to the "right to die" side:

If a person has a
WILL TO LIVE and has stated IN WRITING that they would want "heroic measures" to be taken to sustain their life, do you believe the government has the right to intervene and stop this?

10 Comments:

  • NO

    and

    NO

    The government has no right to intervene in private family matters.

    Would you want them to intervene in YOUR LIFE?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:14 AM  

  • Key words, IN WRITING.

    In this case it is not in writing, so then the decision goes to the guardain. Michael. cut and dry case, except that Michael has been lying too much to be believed and should have been removed as her guardian the moment he got engaged to another woman. Herein lies the problems and the major issue in this particular case.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:15 AM  

  • WELL YES IT USED TO BE A CONTITUTIONAL RIGHT
    LIFE , LIBERTY

    The people in Gov work for us to PROTECT US
    we have been set up
    by all three branches of goverment
    by all main stream media

    new presidence YOU MAY NOW BE STARVED AND REFUSED WATER

    they just opened the door .. who will be next

    will we be so desentized by Terri's sad story that we wont even notice

    God gave us Terri - for a very important message - will we notice

    God Bless You Terri Schlindler

    By Blogger keeka, at 10:24 AM  

  • Michael Schiavo has taken steps that will prevent investigators from examining Terri Schiavo's body for evidence of abuse after she dies - a suspicion her family has repeatedly raised as her death grows more imminent.

    Schiavo's attorney George Felos told the Washington Post on Friday that Terri will be cremated and buried in a plot owned by Michael's family in Pennsylvania.

    Guess that was what she told michael too -

    By Blogger keeka, at 10:37 AM  

  • KEYES:

    And of course, when the judges are judging a case, if a law seems to them to conflict with the Constitution, they have go with the Constitution. But if a governor is faced with a judicial decision, and he conscientiously concludes that that judicial decision conflicts with the Constitution and his constitutional duties, he can't obey it!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:28 AM  

  • By Anonymous, at 9:14 AM

    Key words, IN WRITING.

    In this case it is not in writing, so then the decision goes to the guardain. Michael. cut and dry case, except that Michael has been lying too much to be believed and should have been removed as her guardian the moment he got engaged to another woman. Herein lies the problems and the major issue in this particular case.

    By Anonymous, at 10:15 AM


    Michael Schiavo has not lied. Why should he have been removed as her guardian for doing something that the Schindlers encouraged him to do?

    That is NOT the problem nor a major issue.

    NO ONE on this site has answered that question.

    THE SCHINDLERS ENCOURAGED MICHAEL TO MOVE ON WITH HIS LIFE .. .TO DATE .. WHILE HE WAS LIVING WITH THEM ... taking care of Terri. They even encouraged him to bring his dates home to meet them.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:12 PM  

  • keeka said...

    Michael Schiavo has taken steps that will prevent investigators from examining Terri Schiavo's body for evidence of abuse after she dies - a suspicion her family has repeatedly raised as her death grows more imminent.

    They have repeatedly raised this suspicion 4 years after the fact. Why? Why didn't they bring it up in the first trial? They keep CREATING new allegations because they are desperate and trying ANYTHING to have their daughter put back on the tube.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:14 PM  

  • This is actually a very difficult question. Right now, for example, if someone attempts suicide, their loved ones will (with the support of the hospital) take heroic measures to save that person's life, even though it is clear that at least at the moment of action, that person wanted to die. So if a healthy person is determined to commit suicide, he could get a living will drawn up saying "just let me go," then overdose on a medicine, and if his family finds him before he's dead and hauls him off to the emergency room, according to the living will, their efforts to save his life could be stymied.

    While I think it is a good idea to at least look into the living will and durable power of attorney for determining the extent of care you do or do not want to receive should you become incapacitated, I'm not sure it would really help in the case where a judge is just dead set against you.

    This whole situation has really shattered my faith in our country's legal system. I have doubts that were I to sign a living will stating exactly what my wishes were, that it would really matter in court as actual evidence should there be a dispute. We all know lots of evidence was summarily dismissed in Terri's case.

    The other thing is that people who sign living wills stating they want to die if they are in a certain type of medical situation often change their mind, so I would think that at least at first, measures ought to be taken to stabilize them and at least attempt to communicate with them. Again with Terri, I am under no impression that any serious attempt to communicate with her was ever made by a professional--at least not any of the court appointed professionals. I'm thinking simple things like "Can you hear me? Blink twice if you can." etc. An person who actually works in this field could speak to what is actually available, but my understanding is there are options. Once communication is established (if possible), I suppose the question could be asked "Do you want to live?"

    The Roman Catholic church teaches that suicide is immoral as taking your own life is murder against yourself and according to Church teaching, we are not the final decision-makers on whether we live or die. God is. I'm not necessarily advocating our government automatically adopt that position (I have to think about it some more). But I can see that there is very good reason to hold that teaching. Exploring the idea of it being acceptable to in essence commit suicide really does open up a huge can of worms, and it may be inevitable that often, people like Terri will be tragically caught in the middle.

    By Blogger Beautiful Belgian Babe, at 12:14 PM  

  • By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 12:31 PM  

  • if someone attempts suicide, their loved ones will (with the support of the hospital) take heroic measures to save that person's life, even though it is clear that at least at the moment of action, that person wanted to die.

    I'm not sure that's the best example, because in the vast majority of cases, attempted suicides that actually fail are really "cries for help." In other words, suicides where someone does something to themselves then immediately alerts someone about it. In those cases, I don't think it's heroic to save them -- it's pretty much called for.

    And Sherri: your hostultra links aren't working.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:29 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home