Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes

Some relevant articles...

Terri Schiavo's Life
Gov. Jeb Bush stays an innocent woman's execution.
BY DAVID GELERNTER
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004220

Torturing Terri Schiavo
Andrew C. McCarthy
She’d be better off if she were a terrorist.
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200503170758.asp

'Don't let me starve'
LAW: A recovered stroke victim joins the fight to save Terri Schiavo |
by Lynn Vincent
http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle.cfm?id=10457

Starving for a Fair Diagnosis
Terri Schiavo is not out of medical options. But that’s the “fact” her
husband wants you to believe.
By Reverend Robert Johansen
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp

PEGGY NOONAN
'Don't Kick It'
If Terri Schiavo is killed, Republicans will pay a political price.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006442

When Judges Play God:
Civil Disobedience and the Terri Schiavo Case
Joe Carter
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/001240.html#more

Maybe we should ask the question: What would Jesus do?
Heal her, possibly. Can't we at least care for her?

--Bill Yates

jack syme wrote:

> It happens every day. It happens all the time.
>
> It is not cruelty, it just isnt.
>
> Most people that have ever been involved in the experience consider the
> discontinuation of treatment in such a situation as compassionate.
>
> For one thing, patients are made comfortable with medications.
>
> For another, the patients that tube feedings are withdrawn from are
> generally not "sentient" like you and I are. It is the opinion of most
> medical authorities that patients in these conditions do not suffer.
>
> The analogy to cats and dogs is not relevant. We euthenize animals for
> conditions that in humans are treatable. Do you want us to euthenize
> humans for having arthritis, or any other of the hundreds of benign
> conditions that we euthenize dogs for?
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
> To: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>; <rfaussette@aol.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 6:17 PM
> Subject: RE: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes
>
>
>> If you withheld food and water from your cat or dog and let them die of
>> dehydration, you would be charged with a felony in most states in the
>> US. Given that humans are animals, it seems to me that removing the
>> feeding tube, denying her food and water and letting her slowly dry out
>> over the next 1-3 weeks is a clear case of cruelty to animals. Such is
>> the compassion of modern society.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of drsyme@cablespeed.com
>>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>>> To: rfaussette@aol.com; drsyme@cablespeed.com; asa@calvin.edu
>>> Subject: Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes
>>>
>>>
>>> What justifies a government official intervening over a
>>> spouses right to make decisions? It is not the spouse's
>>> fault that the court cases have dragged this on for so
>>> long.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:13:59 -0500
>>> rfaussette@aol.com wrote:
>>> > The conservative backlash against this, I think, is
>>> >another example of our society's eroding respect for the
>>> >institution of marriage.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I could be wrong but I thought her husband already is
>>> >living with another woman or remarried and insurance
>>> >monies would be saved for him if Terry died instead of
>>> >having to pay for her care. Her parents are willing to
>>> >care for her. If her husband is an adulterer what does
>>> >this have to do with eroding marriage?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: drsyme@cablespeed.com
>>> >To: asa@calvin.edu
>>> >Sent: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:48:00 -0600
>>> >Subject: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade
>>> >makes
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >In 1983 at the age of 25, Nancy Cruzan was in a motor
>>> >vehicle accident from which she suffered severe head
>>> >injuries. As a result of this she was ultimately
>>> >diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state.
>>> >Years later, her parents wanted to discontinue her
>>> >feeding tube, but this was blocked by the State of
>>> >Missouri. Nancy Cruzan was young and healthy when the
>>> >accident ocurred, and had not prepared a writted advanced
>>> >directive of what treatments she may or may not want if
>>> >she was severely ill. The State of Missouri determined
>>> >that there needed to be clear and convincing evidence
>>> >that the patients' wishes would be to withdraw treatment
>>> >in such a case.
>>> >
>>> >This went to the US Supreme Court in 1990 and they upheld
>>> >the State of Missouri's ruling saying that it was not
>>> >unconstitutional for a State to require such a standard.
>>> >
>>> >As a result of this the lawmakers passed a federal law
>>> >that requires all hospitals to discuss advanced
>>> >directives with all patients as they enter the hospital.
>>> >The prevailing sentiment at the time was that the
>>> >Missouri decision was essentially a violation of Ms.
>>> >Cruzan's rights, that her parents should be allowed to
>>> >make decisions for her, and the thought was that the new
>>> >law would help to prevent such a situation.
>>> >
>>> >But it hasnt helped Terri Schiavo. The cases are very
>>> >similar. No prior medical history in either case, no
>>> >advanced directives. Both in a persistent vegetative
>>> >state. One difference between now and the late 80's early
>>> >90's is that most states have legislation in place
>>> >addressing both advanced directives, and addressing who
>>> >should make decisions for people without advanced
>>> >directives.
>>> >
>>> >And Florida has a law similar to most states, that give a
>>> >hierarchy of decision makers when a patient is unable to
>>> >make decisions on their own, and when there is not an
>>> >advanced directive. And, in every state that I know of,
>>> >the spouse has higher priority than parents or children
>>> >of the patient.
>>> >But now the political climate is such that not only did a
>>> >state official intervene to block a procedurally
>>> >appropriate decision to withdraw treatment in the case of
>>> >Terri Schiavo, but now there is talk of federal
>>> >legislation that would either block the removal
>>> >specifically in this case, or to pass some other
>>> >legislation that may require stricter evidence of what
>>> >the patients wishes would be.
>>> >
>>> >I think that there is a strong conservative agenda here.
>>> >But I think that conservative position is making a big
>>> >error here. My problem with their position is even the
>>> >conservatives are not accepting marriage as seriously and
>>> >as absolute as the bible claims that it is. In what I
>>> >understand as a biblical view of marriage, the spouses
>>> >are joined as one. Why shouldnt the husband be the one
>>> >making decisions here? They have gone through the Florida
>>> >courts three times, both sides presented evidence, and
>>> >all three times the courts agreed with the husband that
>>> >the evidence indicates that Terri Schiavo would not have
>>> >agreed to continue with the feeding tube.
>>> >The conservative backlash against this, I think, is
>>> >another example of our society's eroding respect for the
>>> >institution of marriage.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

-- 
--Bill Yates
--mailto:billyates@billyates.com
--http://www.billyates.com
--http://billyates.blogspot.com
--CD Reviewer, Webmaster, Roots66.com
--Editor, WorldVillage.com's Believer's Weekly
--Theron Services: Web Design, Editing, Writing