Withdrawing her feeding tube, in accordance with her wishes and making her
comfortable, IS caring for her.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Yates" <billyates@billyates.com>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 8:02 PM
Subject: 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 For another, the patients that tube feedings are withdrawn from are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
Received on Fri Mar 18 20:22:27 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Mar 18 2005 - 20:22:27 EST