Yes I agree with all of this assuming that a) she is in fact medically hopeless and b) she did in fact express such wishes.
But her husband's behavior makes me question this. And once you question this the right to privacy goes out the door. Dana On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:44:59 -0500, Bill Wheatley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nah none of what he called her matters. Dana points out he has not > acted as her husband for a long time and that somehow equates that to > being a reason for him lose his rights as her guardian. > > 1) It does not matter, the piece of paper is still the piece of paper > and no matter how you behave until you're divorced it is still the way > it is. If i died today my wife would still be able to decide what > happens to my body even though we haven't seen each other in 3 years. > 2) If i was in his position i don't think i could sit by her bed alone > the whole time i was going through it. I would probably find someone > else too. And i can see how i might get resentful over time at all the > stuff thats going on and say something out of anger. > > And I don't know if a feeding tube falls under HEROIC EFFORT either. > But it should go along with a DNR if you don't want to be hooked up to > any machines then you shouldn't be hooked up. I can't imagine how > horrible a way to die starving is but until our country allows > physican assisted suicide its the only way possible (Being removed > from machines keeping you alive). And myself personally i would not > want to be like that. I would want to given a lethal dose of morphine > or precluding that i would want to be disconnected from the machines. > Be it a feeding machine or a ventilator. I mean people including my gf > have said its a horrible way to die and I would say dieing itself is > horrible and i have come close to drowning before so i know how sucky > it must be to have your ventilator pulled and not be able to breath. > Sure you die faster but is it a less painful death? Nobody can say. > > Just because they are her parents does not make them right. And just > because the hubby has made some mistakes doesn't mean he did not know > her wishes. > > But what shouldn't be happening is the federal government jumping into > a case that has been upheld all the way to the FL supreme court. The > US Supreme court would not hear the case maybe because it is such a > firestorm but maybe because they think there was no need and that the > merits spoke for themselves. > > I think this is the point bluntly: > We as humans should be able to do whatever we want with our bodies. > It's not the f'ing govt's business. It is certainly not these > buttheads business who keep jumping in and protesting because somehow > in their heads they draw a parallel to abortion. It really should be > private. So it is really the case of 2 parents who can't accept the > fact that their little girl is gone. And even above that they can't > respect her ADULT wishes of never wanting that to happen to her. > > BTW guys if i ever die and for some reason my living will was not > executed (because the govt started second guessing us to if we really > meant it) please point them to this thread so they can see i want to > have my plug pulled if i can't speak for myself. *shrugs* > > Sucky case and its sucky that the republicans are taking this on > because they think the democrats have a weak case. And also because > they want to screw with bill nelson. Anyone who plays politics with > this shit should be shot. Any republican any democrat whoever tries to > use this crap as a political goldmine needs to be drug out on their > ass. > > But that's not what will happen people who believe its murder etc etc > will rally around the republicans and say YES they are fighting for > this poor innocent woman. That is horsecrap, they don't give a flying > feather about her, especially since she can't vote :>. > > I have a prediction where this will go. The us govt tries to step its > nose into peoples lives too far the supreme court will get involved > and overrule the law for whatever reason and she will die. EVENTUALLY > but she will die. Maybe the republicans will even go for a > consitutional amendment if it gets overruled. > > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:14:17 -0600, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Brian wrote: > > > I would hope this is the case....as Mr Schiavo's position is that this > > > scenario was discussed with his wife before her accident, and she made her > > > wishes known. > > > > > > > That's the horrible part - the (now Federal) government getting > > involved in family medical decisions because someone may not agree > > with a family's choice. > > > > The counter arguments about Mr. Shiavo such as: > > > > "he's not honest" or, > > "he's in it for the money" or, > > "he wants to marry his girlfriend" or, > > "he called her a b1tch" > > > > all miss the point that the federal government is now second guessing > > Mr. Shiavo's motives. > > > > What next, questioning your motives for spanking your children? Maybe > > if you spank your children the government should take your kids until > > they can determine you're not abusive? > > > > That's the problem - once you start using the government to question > > someone's motives, you open the door for the government to question > > everyone's motives about anything. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Protect your mail server with built in anti-virus protection. It's not only good for you, it's good for everybody. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=39 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:151077 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
