Straight Up with Sherri

Monday, April 25, 2005

Judge: Only Parents Can Remove Life Support From Son

Judge: Only Parents Can Remove Life Support From Son


By
Eyewitness News' Joe Torres

(The Bronx-WABC, April 25, 2005) — The ruling for a 13-year-old on life support since last week is in. The judge says only the boy's parents can decide whether to turn the machines off, and doctors must honor their wishes.

Eyewitness News Video

Teron is not on life-support, Teron is dead - those are the words of the medical director here at the Montefiore Medical Center, who earlier told reporters that Teron was declared dead on Thursday of last week, and they say the reason the teenager is still on what they call organ-support is to give the Francis family time to come to grips with the teenager's death.

Francis' Brother: "I just want my brother back and whatever happens, I just hope a miracle happens."

Teron Francis' mother and brother emerged from Bronx Supreme Court happy with a judge's ruling. Moments earlier Judge Douglas McKeon decided to keep in place a restraining order preventing doctors here at Montefiore Medical Center from removing the respiratory equipment attached to their loved one.

The ultimate decision regarding the teenager's future now belongs solely to the Francis family, and they aren't sure just yet what to do.

Annmarie Douglas, Aunt: "We are very religious, yes, and we do need some time and quietness to decide Teron's fate."

Judge McKeon visited Teron at Montefiore late Friday night. Doctors said a dental infection spread to the brain, leaving the teen in a coma. But the hospital disputes the family's claim that doctors planned on removing the ventilator from Teron following a diagnosis of "brain dead."

Dr. Gary Kalkut, Montefiore Medical Center: "We would never pull the plug, as it's been quoted, remove the ventilator, in the face of family objection. We wouldn't do that - that's our policy and we continue to do that to this point."

Bob Genis, Family's Lawyer:
"A hospital can go to court and ask for permission to terminate life support, but the hospital didn't go to court to do that. They just told the family they were going to do it."

The hospital says it never did go to court because again it never was their intention to pull the plug on Teron. For the Francis family the options are two: they can do nothing and the doctors say that Teron's heart will give out even with the respiratory equipment or the family can decide that the respirator is no longer needed.

90 Comments:

  • This is something I tried to point out to Michael Schiavo supporters: If Terri were truly "brain dead," no amount of life support would keep her around for fifteen years. When you're dead, you're dead, and your body won't stay alive no matter how much air they pump in and out of it.

    By Blogger GrannyGrump, at 8:35 PM  

  • This is something I tried to point out to Michael Schiavo supporters: If Terri were truly "brain dead," no amount of life support would keep her around for fifteen years. When you're dead, you're dead, and your body won't stay alive no matter how much air they pump in and out of it.

    By Blogger GrannyGrump, at 8:35 PM  

  • Not for Nothing, BUT They should bury /cremate him "INTACT" NO Organ Harvesting!!!

    By Blogger KC, at 9:07 PM  

  • I disagree KC. This is a case which must be handled slowly. It is deeply puzzling. I have never before heard of a toothache going to brain-death. If in fact, he really is brain-dead, the moral action is to donate those healthy 13 year old organs to persons who will die without them.

    I cry for this family.

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 9:18 PM  

  • I agree KC. People do not know the truth about organ donation. Check out this link for info.
    http://www.geocities.com/organdonate/

    I now carry an organ keeper card with me.

    By Anonymous Kay, at 9:38 PM  

  • Interesting website Kay. I shall do some rethinking. (I have refused to fill out organ donor cards for fear of the sorts of things this site posits). I was a little disappointed that most of the links from the site were dead. (not brain-dead, but clicking got you nothing.)

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 10:09 PM  

  • Their lawyer has made several statements to indicate that the family agrees with the notion that Terron will not survive, no matter what.

    This was never a question of whether Terron should die, but when and how.
    The hospital favours pulling the plug, his parents favour letting his heart stop and have issued a DNR for Terron.

    If they have trouble with the notion of ending life support, but can find peace in ordering him not to be resuscitated then that's what should happen and I'm happy it's their choice to make and not the hospital's.

    But there is no life or death debate here, and the fact that you're once again using a regrettable tragedy to selfishly promote your own propaganda with selective reporting of facts is more than wrong.

    If the parents were adamant about having any attempt made to restart his heart should it fail and to keep him alive and the hospital refused, you would have a clear cut one. This isn't another Charlotte so stop trying to turn it into what it's not and have some actual, genuine sympathy for what this family is going through.

    By Anonymous Vanessa, at 5:01 AM  

  • Levi,

    I understand your hesitation, but I believe that organ donors are very important. I would hate to think that someone who could have been helped or saved wasn't due to my fears about what is happening in our medical community.

    Again, I DO understand your hesitation - but I intend to continue being a donor.

    By Blogger Sarah D., at 8:21 AM  

  • Vanessa

    You need to chill out. The reason this story was posted is because the Judge ruled the family has the say. That's it. This is exactly in contrast to Charlotte's story. YOU are the one jumping to conculsions all the time and thinking the worst of people. You have something thoughtful to bring, bring it! You want to nip at heels, expect to be treated as such. capiche?

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 9:47 AM  

  • I am glad the judge gave the parents the option(kind of). If the family and the hospital both think there is zero chance for recovery I wish the judge would have put a time limit on it say a week or two for family and friends to say thier goodbyes. Unless the family is willing to pay for the expenses from here on out then they should have all the time they like.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:05 PM  

  • Unfortunately, Teron is already dead and this whole attempt to make this a new "Schiavo case" is a bit unsettling. Since the boy is dead, it doesn't make sense to keep treating him, pretending that he were alive.

    As for organ donation, for folks who claim to be in favor of LIFE, there sure seems to be alot of greed when it comes to letting your organs go to waste once you are dead....

    By Blogger Sterling, Massachusetts, at 1:27 PM  

  • The reason this story was posted is because the Judge ruled the family has the say
    JUST LIKE TERRI!!!!
    The judge said her husband had the say!!!!

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 1:31 PM  

  • this judge is cool and nice and kind because he agrees with sherri and crew.
    Greer is evil, the devil, and a murderer because he disagreed with sherri and crew.
    GET IT!!!!
    Are more of you starting to understand how it works now?
    The difference is that in this case the family agrees with the Dr.s. But I will bet you one years pay if they disagreed with the Dr.s they could find some Dr.s out there that would say he has a chance then it would be Terri alllllll over again.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 1:46 PM  

  • sam i am,
    Actually, in the Schiavo case, Judge Greer said that the parents who choose continuation of support of any kind have no say whatsoever. Only the husband who wants to murder Terri had a say. In this regard, Michael Schiavo was acting in the same capacity as the hospital was in Teron's case. The real issue is whether the court will side with "right to murder" versus "right to life". To say that Teron is already dead may or may not be a stretch of imagination.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 1:56 PM  

  • The problem with the judge is that his ruling makes no sense. If the boy is dead (and nobody is disputing that fact) why are they treat as though he were alive?

    I guess one could make the argument that continuing such a charade "is good for the family", but I strongly disagree. If someone is dead, then that has to be communicated to the family in a very straightforward way. There is something gruesome about keeping the pretenses of life in a situation when someone is dead. Isn't weird that they have an IV pumping liquied into the arm of a boy that is already dead? I find it very disturbing.

    Worse is the attempt to compare it to Terri (who was very much alive) with someone who is dead. The more people make that comparison, the more you will convince folks that Terri was dead to... which she was not!

    By Blogger Sterling, Massachusetts, at 1:57 PM  

  • sam i am

    You miss the point. The decision belongs with family above the doctors. The gov't should never have the right to order death. Doctors should not have the right to order death. Even family should not have the right to order death.

    Do I think the judge is "cool"?

    No

    Judges should uphold the constitution. No where in the constitution does it say that the sick, handicapped, infirm, or unborn should be killed for "their own good" or for the "greater good- weather that be on monetary grounds, or for harvesting organs.

    I happen to believe in the Constitution. Most Americans do.

    Why are you so mean-spirited?

    RWNJ

    I believe if someone shot Teron in the head- the charge would be murder, not abuse of a corpse.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 1:59 PM  

  • RWNJ glad to see you I have rarley agreed with you but you are very fair! You and I are very much alike you will not change my mind and I will never change yours but you have a level head.
    you are right when you said greer said what the parents wanted didnt matter. but by law it was the husband who had the say. If theis poor boy was 21 and married the wife would have the say not the parents I thiink what needs to be done on your side of it is that the law needs changed more then anything. Someone here once said that these cases should be decided by a group of family rather then 1 person and that sounds like a good start.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:04 PM  

  • Worse is the attempt to compare it to Terri (who was very much alive) the drs said she was brain dead as they do here the difference is the family agrees thats what i am trying to say if they disagreed they could find a dr out there who said the poor boy had a chance.(I wish he did)
    Why are you so mean-spirited?
    I am not sorry if thats how you took it.
    what makes you think that?

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:11 PM  

  • I am not sorry if thats how you took it.

    that is one indication.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:14 PM  

  • sam i am,
    Actually, in the Schiavo case, the law was changed. Several times in fact. But usurpatious judges refused to accept the law any more than they accept the Constitutions of states or the U.S.
    The idea of who has the power of say over life and death decisions, it is God alone by my reckoning.
    As far as making these decisions by committee? No way!

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 2:15 PM  

  • The gov't should never have the right to order death.
    if this is how you truely feel then you should be verry pissed at this judge because he has givin the choice to the parent to chose death.
    If thats how you truely feel you should be mad that the judge didn't say " I don't care what the family wants or the drs want. The boy will stay on life support till he dies."

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:15 PM  

  • SAM I AM, you are wrong. Very wrong.

    Doctors in Terri's case NEVER said she was brain dead. That is what made it such an awful thing that they did to her. She was not dead and nobody said she was...

    In this case, the boy is already dead.

    By Blogger Sterling, Massachusetts, at 2:15 PM  

  • LOL sorry sorry sorry I put 2 toughts into one.
    first thought was "I am not trying to be mean spirited"
    2nd thought was I amsorry you feel this way."
    but the 2 together and you got what i typed. sorry thats not what i mean.
    I think faster then i type.
    that being explained what makes you think I am mean spirited?

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:18 PM  

  • The idea of who has the power of say over life and death decisions, it is God alone by my reckoning.
    Thats id your right to think that way but it is not gods country we live by our laws.
    As far as making these decisions by committee? No way!
    WHy not? If this is how the law was then Terri would still be alive.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:20 PM  

  • If thats how you truely feel you should be mad that the judge didn't say " I don't care what the family wants or the drs want. The boy will stay on life support till he dies."

    Actually this is exactly what I think the judges should say and do.

    I do however see a shred of light in the fact that the judge didn't kick the family to the curb, but this does not mean I think the judge is "cool." Not by a long shot.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:20 PM  

  • pol
    yes they never said she was brain dead they said she was in (PVS) with no chance for recovery. To me it is very close to the same thing.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:22 PM  

  • I do however see a shred of light in the fact that the judge didn't kick the family to the curb.
    the judge let the (GAL POT) have final say yes I agree but so did Greer.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:24 PM  

  • that being explained what makes you think I am mean spirited?
    ohh and this too lol.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:25 PM  

  • I guess I feel you were mean spirited in assuming that we all fall into a stereo type that the MSM has created about those that defend life so passionately.

    you assumed I thought the judge was cool.

    this judge is cool and nice and kind because he agrees with sherri and crew.
    Greer is evil, the devil, and a murderer because he disagreed with sherri and crew.
    GET IT!!!!


    People aren't mean and cruel because they disagree with "sherri and crew"

    People are not cool and nice and kind for agreeing.

    The character of people is not dependent upon agreeing or disagreeing with "me" or any crew. Character is based on what people hold to be morally right and wrong.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:26 PM  

  • Unfortunately, Teron is already dead and this whole attempt to make this a new "Schiavo case" is a bit unsettling.
    Dont be fooled if there were family members who disagreed with the drs and found thier own dr to say the boy had a shot it could very very easily be Terri all over again.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:28 PM  

  • the judge let the (GAL POT) have final say yes I agree but so did Greer.

    Actually, Greer did not let the GAL have final say. Greer dismissed the Court appointed GAL (Pearson) in Terri's case. Then proceded to state he felt no such entity was needed, it only overlapped HIS JOB.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:29 PM  

  • The character of people is not dependent upon agreeing or disagreeing with "me"
    thats how you judge people though.
    this judge is cool and nice and kind because he agrees with sherri and crew.
    Greer is evil, the devil, and a murderer because he disagreed with sherri and crew.
    GET IT!!!!
    not mean just the vibe you give off

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:30 PM  

  • Politica Obscura

    Doctors in Terri's case NEVER said she was brain dead. That is what made it such an awful thing that they did to her. She was not dead and nobody said she was...

    Thank you for pointing this out....

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:31 PM  

  • I think Greer was not pefect don't get me wrong he NEVER should have let anyone other then her husband be GAL to begin with. Unless there was good reason (abuse, attemted murder and so on)

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:34 PM  

  • sam i am,
    I'm not sure that we rarely agree. I think we agree on a lot. You are, as I am, driven by a desire for independent control of your life and those around you. We differ in how this should be achieved. I strongly disagee that we are a Country of laws (the Jaycees preach this, not I). Rather, we are a Country of Constitutions. The fact that judges choose to ignore the laws and the Constitutions makes them multiply wrong.
    Our Constitution (in the Bill of Rights, items V & IX) guarantees the right to life. Nowhere does the Constitution respect the "right to die". I agree that the laws that derive from these provisions do need work.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 2:34 PM  

  • they never said she was brain dead they said she was in (PVS) with no chance for recovery. To me it is very close to the same thing.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:35 PM  

  • Hmm, so I give of a certain vibe that allows you to make assumptions, yet you don't?

    If I give of the vibe that people condoning killing is evil, well then that is fair- because I do believe this to be true.

    The other stuff is just jumping to conclusions.

    When people overlook facts and dismiss facts that support life in order to carry out evil, well then I go all the way to the mat and say THEY ARE EVIL..

    I know people I love and respect that think what happen to Terri was okay. I don't htink they are evil. I do think those that actively and aggressively SEEK to kill people like Terri ARE indeed evil.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:37 PM  

  • (in the Bill of Rights, items V & IX) guarantees the right to life. Nowhere does the Constitution respect the "right to die".
    I agree but i think what is going on is time has passed this by.
    What i mean is when it was written they didnt know that some day we could keep brain dead people and pvs people alive as we can now.
    Just for thought but lets say in 10 years we could have a machine to hook up to a person dying (for whatever reason) for as long as the machine had electricity then should we do so? In your view as i understand it I think your answer would be yes.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:39 PM  

  • sam i am,
    NEVER should have let anyone other then her husband be GAL to begin with

    That's exactly the idea behind the GAL. There is reason to believe that the husband (any husband) may not have the best interests of the ward at heart. It is the GAL's responsibility to investigate and represent the interests of the ward, not the interests of the spouse, who obviously has a vested personal interest. It may or may not be found that the two interests differ; I believe they are usually coincident, but certainly not in Terri's case, which is why Pearson was dismissed.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 2:42 PM  

  • I do think those that actively and aggressively SEEK to kill people like Terri ARE indeed evil.
    I think her husband wanted to let her go I don't think he SAUGHT out to kill her.
    Hmm, so I give of a certain vibe that allows you to make assumptions, yet you don't?

    I am sure I give off vibes also we all do. I am not evil. I am not mean (unless you really reallly piss me off lol and trust me I dont know anyone that can piss me off that much.)
    I just disagree with some of your views.

    By Anonymous sam i iam, at 2:43 PM  

  • Boy this is so hard to keep up with lol.
    I think what it boils down to is that you feel the way you do because of your god and religon.
    I feel that "god" and religion should not be in any part of government. But thats where the problem is, because of religion you cant seperate the 2 because religion is what runs your life.
    I AM NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS A BAD THING. I don't believe in god but I dont mind what a person believes in, if it makes them a better person them more power to them.

    By Anonymous sam, at 2:48 PM  

  • RWNJ
    The court appointed a dr to look into it and agreed that she was PVS to me that was good enough.
    P.S. we should have let DR. House on the case he always wins.

    By Anonymous sam i am, at 2:50 PM  

  • Well,

    disagreeing with my views certainly doesn't make anyone evil-LOL!

    Yes, Michael actively sought out to kill Terri. She was "ruining" (sp?) his life.

    We may disagree on this, but that is way okay with me. I did enought reading and researching that I am very comfortable with my view on this...and no, I have no interest in rehashing all the same old arguments about why I know Michael set out to kill Terri. I spent two months on it. My time is better spent moving forward to protect others from the same tragedy...

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:51 PM  

  • sam,
    In your view as i understand it I think your answer would be yes.

    BINGO! you read my living will, didn't you?

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 2:52 PM  

  • RWNJ

    LOL!!

    I LOVED YOUR LIVING WILL!!

    I am going to have to print that out and get it notarized!

    adding of course that I am completely nuts as I sign it, but it is still perfectly legal...

    Well, my babies are home from school, time to go help with homework!

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:56 PM  

  • Yes we don't need to rehash it all the last I will say is ..
    1. he spent the first few years trying many thing even electrode implants and other off the wall things. that to me isnt seeking to kill.
    2. Yes, Michael actively sought out to kill Terri. She was "ruining" (sp?) his life.
    please say stuff like "this is my opionion" you , I , and no one other then himself knows what was going on in his mind.

    By Anonymous sam, at 2:56 PM  

  • actually there was testimony that Michael said that Terri was ruining his life. Judge Greer dismissed it though....

    Greer dismissed quite a bit...

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 2:59 PM  

  • RWNJ
    LOL no i have not but to tell you the truth if i had the money I would be on the list to be frozen. I will not even try to spell that word out lol. ok i will try lol cryrogenicly frozen.
    I really mean it too not a joke.

    By Anonymous sam, at 2:59 PM  

  • sam,
    The court appointed a dr to look into it and agreed that she was PVS to me that was good enough.

    Actually, the court appointed 5 doctors to look at this. Micheal's hand-picked two said Terri was PVS. Bob's hand-picked two said she was not PVS. And Greer's doctor, who was hand picked by Felos and his "death squad" said she was PVS. Of course that doctor would also say the same about you and me! Death should never be administered by a "preponderance of evidence". In every capital case, it requires beyond a reasonable doubt. This requires unanimous jury decisions and unanimous multiple-judge panels to effect. Why such a low level of proof for a civil case that already violates the Seventh Article of the Bill of Rights?

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 2:59 PM  

  • actually there was testimony that Michael said that Terri was ruining his life. Judge Greer dismissed it though....
    he very well may have said that I have said the same about my wife lol. But he tried like hell saw no hope and let he go and he moved on nothing we can say or do to change that.
    I am not for him and against her I really wish he would have passed any power he had to her parents when he had givin up.

    By Anonymous sa, at 3:02 PM  

  • of course when 1 side hand picks they will only pick a dr that will agree with them.
    3 out of 5 said pvs and the one not picked by either side was the decider is what it boils down to and i have to say that is good enough for me.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:06 PM  

  • MSM?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:10 PM  

  • sam
    ALL FIVE WERE HAND PICKED! George Greer is a pro-death jurist! This is well documented.

    If you wish to read my living will, please forgive the several spelling & typo errors. I threw it together quickly before some judge would decide for me.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 3:12 PM  

  • Anonymous,
    MSM = Main Stream Media. In the context of this blog, that is a leftist, highly biased, coalition of socialist, anti-life, tyrants who support the concept of legislation from the bench, hate religion as a general rule, and believe that they should rule the world because of their elitist enlightenment.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 3:15 PM  

  • ALL FIVE WERE HAND PICKED! George Greer is a pro-death jurist! This is well documented.
    in by pro death you mean people who are not against pulling plugs, then i would fit into that group. BUT this doesnt mean i would seek out a person who i would know to say yup she should die. I would even as a "pro death" person want a true opinion and i think greer would also want the same.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:17 PM  

  • I dont like hearing alll left or alll right when you do this you never get the whole truth you need to find the middle to learn the truth

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:19 PM  

  • Sam -- perhaps I am a natural extremist. But I think new truths are generally found on the edges and then the middle moves to that edge.

    There were several problems with Terri's case- one of the biggest is that her husband was actually her ex-husband and manifestly did not have her best interests at heart.

    For organ donation, I have given all authority to my wife with the proviso that she is to consult with my children. And she is to keep in mind the one profound line from that incredibly stupid movie--Jurassic Park -- "Always bet on life."

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 3:31 PM  

  • What I am saying is I don't look at one side all the time I am not for always pulling a plug but I am not always for not pulling the plug I want to know all the facts that i can before I would make up my mind. If i was the judge or family member or what ever I think what happens is that a person can not be against pulling the plug and right away all the pro lifers think that person is LOOKING for death and thats not the case at all.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:34 PM  

  • sam,
    you need to find the middle to learn the truth

    I understand what you are saying. But I believe that you are wrong. This is one of the few points that I actually agree with Rush Limbaugh. There is no truth in the middle. If you have fundamental beliefs, then you must live by those beliefs. As such, you will take your stands and choose your battles accordingly. The fact that we seem to disagree is posited on differences that we have in our underlying principles or basic assumptions (religious, social, individual, family, etc.).
    You do not seek the middle ground! You seek the truth that will be consistent with your postulates. You seek ideas and structure that make sense and provide illumination to your life. There are those who just always want to "carefully evaluate" all sides, then find some compromise in the middle. They have nothing! They will spend their whole lives looking, confused, bewildered and pawns to be manipulated by other people who do have direction.
    No, sam, you are not one of these "lost sheep" at all. You definitely have purpose and you do not look for answers in the middle.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 3:34 PM  

  • There were several problems with Terri's case- one of the biggest is that her husband was actually her ex-husband and manifestly did not have her best interests at heart.
    that is the way it seems when all of US got a hold of it but thats where it gets messed up none of us you, i, sheeri, any of us here were there for the first 14 years so we dont know all the facts and never will.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:38 PM  

  • You do not seek the middle ground! You seek the truth that will be consistent with your postulates.
    I seek truth. what I am trying to say is that I will not find the truth for the far right, what I will find are facts that support that side and wont hear facts from the other side. If i listen to the far left I will hear facts from the left side and none from the right. What I want are allllll the facts. And thats what everyone should want. If Someone on the right finds a good fact that disagrees with them they will dismiss it or bash the person with the fact or call tham a liar and thats what i dont like.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:45 PM  

  • sam i am

    You have the art of backtracking down to a science... lol-- too bad so many see right through it.

    Life is life, death is death, killing is killing. active or passive, killing is killing.

    the sick rapist burried little Jessica ALIVE-- but he still KILLED HER!

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 3:49 PM  

  • There are those who just always want to "carefully evaluate" all sides, then find some compromise in the middle.
    yes I know the type I am never lost well now and then I know you said that at the end lol.
    I think it goes like this...
    Your bosses job is not as hard as he will try and make you think it is but.... It is harder then what you say it is. get my drift?

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:49 PM  

  • You have the art of backtracking down to a science.
    what does this mean?

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:51 PM  

  • You have the art of backtracking down to a science... lol-- too bad so many see right through it.
    this is why I said that I was happy to see RWNJ he can discuss things without comments like this. you need to try and do the same.

    By Anonymous sam, at 3:52 PM  

  • You have the art of backtracking down to a science.
    what does this mean?

    well?
    where have i backtracked?

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:04 PM  

  • Sam -- interesting good ideas always come from the edges. Frequently when an idea surfaces, the facts known do not support it. But the existence of the idea calls forth the investigation which locates the facts which ultimately prove the idea.

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 4:06 PM  

  • sam,
    If Someone on the right finds a good fact that disagrees with them they will dismiss it or bash the person with the fact or call tham a liar and thats what i dont like.

    That is really more of a trait of the left. The left uses more emotion or feeling to drive their decisions. The right uses a more rational approach, based on parochial concepts. True rightists are willing to adapt to new facts, if indeed they can be shown to be facts. The rightists will criticize those who challenge their parachiolism and universal truths. It is the arguments they find despicable. The rightists generally separate the beliefs and actions from the people who manifest them. The left, on the other hand, tend to take a holistic approach - you are what you believe and what you do. It's all the same to them.
    My points may seem trivial - the result in either case can be hostility and meanness, but there a difference and it is a difference between the way the right thinks and the way the left thinks.
    Lest you get confused, few people on this blog are as right wing as I, and I wouldn't recommend it for many, either.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 4:06 PM  

  • I don't need to do a darn thing you claim. You have backtracked TWICE now- TWICE- on just this thread- I call it like I see it- I don't hide behind "looking for truth in the middle"

    When I stand corrected- I stand corrected. You don't seem to handle that concept. Instead- when you are wrong- you move on to something else. Or you doubletalk or backtrack.. Re-read the thread. I don't have to coddle to your ego. When you backtrack and change the angle- I will call you on it- just as you feel so compelled to call me on the things you feel I do wrong.

    I have conviction, passion, and integrity. I stand by what I believe. You can disagree all you like. You say you don't like when one side starts personal attacks- yet this is exactly what you engage in. You assujme things- YES_ you did it in THIS thread- then when shown for it- you move on and don't bother acknowledging that YOU did it. You are a dishonest broker, struggling to look like the "sane" and "rational" one- YOU FAIL at it miserably.

    YOU are just as biased and tainted as anyone. You want others to decide facts for you...

    3 out of 5 doctors say..... enough for you...

    3 out of 5 doctors is enough to KILL someone? That is NOT SEEKING TRUTH. It is justifying your opinion.

    Take a poll on everything, huh? So if most of America thinks abortion is not killing then that is fine.. justifies your stand. BUt if 80% of America believes in God, well then I guess things change for ya.

    You may disagree with me and my tactics- but I DO THINK FOR MYSELF! I take a stand and am willing to take the heat for it.

    KILLING IS WRONG! NO MATTER WHO OR HOW!



    Now back to my children...

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 4:11 PM  

  • Both sides do it just as much in my opinion, and it is sad.
    I myself like to go into anything with an open mind but i dont think the right or the left can do so they just cant. that is what bothers me. A rep will vote along party lines just because thats wht his party thinks and so on for the dem. that is just childish in my mind.

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:12 PM  

  • You are a dishonest broker

    in the words of RWNJ,

    BINGO

    By Blogger justapoint, at 4:18 PM  

  • 3 out of 5 doctors is enough to KILL someone? That is NOT SEEKING TRUTH. It is justifying your opinion.
    is this what you call backtracking? what I am saying is simple I am not a DR. I don't know all the facts but if I have to chose one way or another yes I want to find someone not from his side and not from the family side to help me because I JUST DONT KNOW I AM NOT A DR.
    Take a poll on everything, huh? So if most of America thinks abortion is not killing then that is fine.. justifies your stand. BUt if 80% of America believes in God, well then I guess things change for ya.
    What changes for me? I don't believe in it I just dont. I cant help it. I am not even saying there is no god I know i could be wrong but it is the way i feel sorry if you dont like it. And I have no ego lol I just like to chat.

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:20 PM  

  • You are a dishonest broker

    in the words of RWNJ,

    why am I a dishonest broker?

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:21 PM  

  • I don't hide behind "looking for truth in the middle"
    how am i "hiding" if i want to look for the truth from hearing both sides?

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:24 PM  

  • sam (the one who thinks he is a god)

    No- you are not a doctor, as far as I know, none of us here are.

    ALL doctors also bring forth an agenda. The point is that "3 out of 5" doctors should never be enough to kill anyone. Killing Terri was KILLING TERRI, not monetary damages. It was actually torturing and killing someone.

    Sherri

    Your passion and integrity are refreshing. The little god just doesn't like that you go to a higher power for truth because then he/she can't persuade you to buy into his/her propaganda. Very frustrating for little self-proclaimed gods.

    By Blogger justapoint, at 4:29 PM  

  • You may have misunderstood what i meant when i said the middle. I don't know how I set you off.
    what I mean is I dont want to hear one side of a story. what would that be like in court? "ok everyone we are going to flip a coin to day heads you hear the the states case tails you hear the defense. you dont get to hear both just one side?" is that a better way then listening to both sides?

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:29 PM  

  • sam (the one who thinks he is a god)
    that was said as a joke lol.
    The little god just doesn't like that you go to a higher power for truth because then he/she can't persuade you to buy into his/her propaganda. Very frustrating for little self-proclaimed gods.
    once again you feel the need to try and put me down i dont know why you feel the need to do so just because i dont agree with everythihng you do.
    his/her propaganda ... no I just express my feelings thats all.

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:32 PM  

  • Let's see how if I can imitate your little game:

    Where did I put you down?

    Conjecture, insinuation, play, play, play. You are a child. I am only expressing my feelings.

    By Blogger justapoint, at 4:37 PM  

  • justapoint

    I think you have "sam" down pat. You play it's game quite well!

    LOL!

    I am glad to have you here, but I must go get dinner ready.

    By Blogger Straight Up with Sherri, at 4:40 PM  

  • lol ok just if you dont want to discuss just put me down go ahead you win I am a bad bad parent worst ever. I never got out of the third grade, and I think i am my own little god and should rule the world you win i am all those sorry to have bothered you.

    By Anonymous sam, at 4:40 PM  

  • LOL i guess I have made everyone mad as hell sorry for that. just liked the conversation what ever i have done to strike a nerve i am sorry i will move on and not bother you anymore.
    peace out,
    Scott Alex Mcbride SAM

    By Anonymous sam i was, at 4:43 PM  

  • don't play coy. No one suggested we don't "hear" both sides. The TRUTH is NOT in the middle. There is ONLY one truth, no matter how many "sides" you listen to. You play lukewarm and innocent. YOU ARE NOT EITHER ONE.

    The truth is in YOUR OWN words.

    By Blogger justapoint, at 4:44 PM  

  • SAM is a young poster. He is playing with different ways of thinking. He has not yet thought through all of his positions coherently. While he would like approval, (as would each of us), he also enjoys being provocative. I, for one, hope he comes back and thinks more carefully as he posts the next time.

    (I speak as somebody who believes that several of my prior minds were idiotic and believe in multiple chances for all)

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 4:48 PM  

  • levi

    I have enjoyed your posts.

    I don't have patience for those that start off offensive and attacking and then throw their hands over their mouths and sing "who me? What did I do?"

    I know Sherri very well. VERY IMPRESSIVE woman.

    By Blogger justapoint, at 4:52 PM  

  • P.S. RWNJ I enjoyed you and visit other blogs please e-mail me with some you like. We can have more talks someday
    Thanks
    Scott
    ScottA64@aol.com

    By Anonymous Sam, at 4:55 PM  

  • justapoint -- Thank you. I agree Sherri is very impressive.

    I have a great deal more patience for someone from 13 -25 such as SAM than for the same traits in an older person. SAM is clearly twisting and trying to figure out how he thinks. I pray he hears the Way. (BTW, it is also perfectly ok to box the ears of the young -- but we must also be ready to forgive.)

    By Blogger levi from queens, at 4:57 PM  

  • (BTW, it is also perfectly ok to box the ears of the young -- but we must also be ready to forgive.)

    ROFLLL!

    yes, but only if they bother to ask. If Sam wants to come back here playing innocent, I just won't buy it. If he wants to own up to being offensive, fine with me. Forgiving is actually the best part of any encounter or relationship. Sam needs to be more careful instead of telling others to be more careful. We all get out of line, not just the young ones.

    By Blogger justapoint, at 5:10 PM  

  • sam,
    what I mean is I dont want to hear one side of a story. what would that be like in court?

    It's not that uncommon. George Greer would only allow one side to present hearsay evidence against Terri Schiavo. Actual evidence or anything that would support Terri's right to life was quashed by King George. Frequently the U.S. Supreme Court hears cases with only testimony from the Federal Government and absolutely none from the other side (a classic case is United States v Miller).

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 5:49 PM  

  • I am slipping in here, with a plea, where it doesn't really belong, but where I do hope it will be read! (I'm sorry Sherri - just need to get this in...)


    Everyone, **please please really pray tonight** for a contact which I have received an email about, which may be quite feasible for helping baby Charlotte over in Britain (as far as her needing another doctor to evaluate her, and for her to go home), but we are waiting this evening to hear back from Charlotte's parents about it, through Hannah. Part of what needs prayer is for discernment as to if the doctor would need to go to England, or if Charlotte would have to be brought to the US for the doctor's help. Please, please pray! God must make a way!

    By Anonymous Juleni, at 7:15 PM  

  • I work in the donor tissue and organ industry and I have seen first hand the miracles performed through donation. I also just wrote a research paper on the whole "Right to Die" issue. Now don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the way Terri Schiavo died. But what many are failing to realize is that there are no options to assist with a quicker more humane passing. Assisted suicide and euthanasia is not legal.

    Here is a short exerpt from my paper:
    "I can speak from first hand experience on this subject. My father-in-law, George Hicks, was admitted into the hospital in October 2003 with severe breathing problems. Within 3 days he was diagnosed with a rare form of leukemia. Death was never discussed as a possibility, only his treatment which was expected to be long and grueling. However, within 13 days of admittance his body began to fail and we had to make a choice whether or not to put him on additional life support; he was already on a ventilator. The doctors told us that George would never regain consciousness. His medical diagnosis was that he would not recover without anything less than a medical miracle. We chose to let him go peacefully and painlessly. Knowing George the way that we did, we knew he would never have wanted his body to be kept alive by mechanical means. And seeing him before the ventilator was shut off, I could tell that he was already gone. We had made the right choice.

    At the time that this took place, our family didn’t know about Terri Schiavo or any of the other medical or ethical issues that we have discussed thus far. But if we had to make that decision again with this knowledge, I can assure you we would do it the same way.

    But what if one is cognizant of their situation, but the body is not supportive? I have a co-worker who endured this same situation with her mother only 3 weeks ago. The mother was diagnosed with a connective tissue disorder. Within 2 weeks her health declined rapidly which eventually led to the need for a feeding tube. All attempts to heal her lesions (open sores) and internal bleeding failed. A decision had to be made to determine if they were going to let her remain on the feeding tube or to remove it and allow her to eventually die. This was a difficult decision for Sylvie as her mother was still coherent and responsive. Having a very hard time making a decision, Sylvie asked her mother what she wanted them to do. Her mother asked that the feeding tube be removed. She died within minutes. There was no pain or suffering; only dignity and peace.

    My husband’s grandfather had instituted this request into his living will. Until about 5 months ago, he didn’t think he would even need to consider it. Ed was diagnosed with lung cancer in November. The doctors told him it was treatable although not curable. Unfortunately, the cancer spread into his spinal cord before treatment could begin. His treatment options were no longer available. He has been given 4-6 months to live. Only a week ago he is at home and doing well. Now his health is declining and Hospice is visiting regularly. He has become bedridden and oxygen tanks have been brought in. Ed is refusing now to eat. We visit him often, as we know it won’t be much longer. The doctors have him on large doses of painkillers but they have taken a toll on his mental abilities. He is in his final stages of cancer and I expect that he won’t survive past the next 2 weeks. Hospice will try to keep him comfortable until the end comes. Once his body decides it can no longer go on, it will begin shutting down. No resuscitation efforts will be provided. This is not the easiest way to die, but for now it is his only option because lethal prescriptions are not available in Georgia.

    No one deserves to have his or her body forced to be kept functioning by mechanical means especially when the treatment will not eventually return him to the lifestyle that they once knew. When the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of mechanical support and absence of mental capability, death is a welcoming option. Is it the right of the patient to choose how and when they wish to die? Or should it be up to family members or legal systems? After enduring the pain and sadness that comes along with death, I believe that the individual should be able to die with dignity. It is not fair that the living should be able to keep someone alive for his or her own state of mind or as a result of public opinion. Neither the government nor the legal system has the legal authority to decide how and when a terminally ill patient should be treated.
    It seems that we have lost sight of the fact that this decision is not taking the best interest of the afflicted to heart. We are not doing them any favors by plugging them into a machine so they can lie in a bed for us to visit, worship, and pity. We were not made to live forever. Nothing is. We all will face the same end, death. The only thing that changes for each of us is the route that gets us there. No government, court, or public display should have the ability to take this right away from us. But providing life sustaining measures that do not give us back the fulfilling and joyous life we once had or can never look forward to again, makes a mockery out of the beauty of leaving our current life and it debilitates our release into our next life. It doesn’t matter what one believes in as far as life after death, because one thing remains constant; we will die. Our bodies will stop functioning. Regardless of the choice for physician assisted suicide, removal of life support, or DNRs, mortality is waiting for all of us. Whose right to die is it anyway? It is the individual who is at the end of life’s road and has to choose which path they want to take. No one but the traveler can make this final decision."

    My husband's grandfather passed away this past Friday. He was on a morphine pump for 5 days which left him in an unconscious state. In total he was without food for 9 days.

    For those of you who freely pose your opinion and pass judgement without experiencing similar situations first hand, I hope you have written out your decisions in case something similarly happens to you. And whether you have or haven't really stop and think about how you would want to continue living...or not.

    By Anonymous mh7086, at 6:34 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home