So, what do you think?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
So, what do you think?
13
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 8:35am

What do you all think about the controversy with the woman that had her feeding tube removed by court order because her husband says she would not have wanted to live in the vegetative state she is currently in?

 

                        

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2000
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 9:50am
Haven't really been following it. I've heard too that the husband has denied therapy, and that's difficult to fathom - what's his reasoning on that? If it's not a religious thing (some sects/cults turn their backs on modern solutions, even though God does indeed work through those), then it sounds like he wants her dead. In which case he's pathetic and needs therapy. I *can* understand a loved one saying "He/She wouldn't want to be in this state", but it doesn't sound like she's as vegetative as he claims. While it bothers me that the govt is getting involved, perhaps it's because of the potential legal ramifications vs. that she could be recovering if husband wasn't stonewalling. Here's a question: If he possibly faced manslaughter or murder charges upon his wife's death because of his negligence, would he be as eager to continue on this path?

I really don't know enough to have an opinion on this particular case. Those are just my thoughts on those issues.





Cussette, CL for Family Finances
Visit the Family Finances Website

for links, tips, reading, tools and answers to your financial questions

C

Avatar for ive_got_five
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-11-2001
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 9:57am
Susan, what brought on the vegatative state? Being way up north here, I'm not familiar with the case. Definitely sounds like the guy is after the bucks. Of course if there was no prenup, wouldn't half of it be his anyway? Hmmm.....

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 10:03am
He had a heart attack years ago and was without oxygen for 10 minutes causing brain damage.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/980564.asp?0cv=CB10

Here's a bit about it.

Sassy

 

                        

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 10:19am

She had a potassium deficiency which caused her heart to stop, which kept oxygen from getting to her brain back when she was 26. She's now 39. Don't know what caused the deficiency, but could probably do some research and find out. Wonder if she was on the Atkins Diet? All you hi pro-low carb people be sure to get enough potassium, since that type of diet causes you to lose higher amounts of potassium.


In this situation, I would side with the parents and Gov. Bush. I've watched films of her, and her eyes follow movement and people in front of her and would seem to indicate that she knows what's going on around her. She doesn't appear to be in pain. There is no living will to prove that she would not want to be kept alive, so it's only his word on that. Also, if she had an illness such as cancer where a painful

       ~~Rhonda~~


<

Avatar for imthebigsister
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 10:38am
Good story in Time on this case - describes "coma", "vegetative state" and "minimally conscious state" in cold clinical terms that lawyers and doctors can use and laypeople can understand. Husband's experts say vegetative, no chance of recovery; parents' expert disagree, say "minimally conscious". Her seeming reactions could be recognition, or they could be reflex. Tragic case, made more tragic by the divisions it's causing the family and the darned publicity these things bring with them.

After seeing that story, the cynic in me has to wonder if the husband isn't trying to protect what's left of a malpractice settlement that he won against the doctors; $700,000 for Terri's care, $300,000 for his "loss of companionship". He's got a girlfriend and a child with her to care for. Her parents have accused him of not providing care that could have improved Terri's chances for recovery. We'll never know the reality of this situation unless we've been party to those discussions.

The only moral in this whole thing - make sure you have a will, and a living will also. I wonder how many people are going to sit down and discuss the possibilities of this happening in their own families and prepare themselves as a result of this case.

Would I want to be in the position to decide a loved one's fate? How long is long enough to try to keep someone alive who can't speak, seemingly can't think, and seemingly won't recover? Would I be rational, compassionate, and respectful in my decision; could I be, regardless of the decision? How would inevitable long-term health care and cost considerations weigh in the decision? In this day and age, that has to be a factor and no one with any sense of realism or practicality can deny it.

Would I want to be Terri Schiavo? I used to think after a reasonable amount of time and if hope for my recovery were so fleeting, I'd want someone to pull the tubes; I sure wouldn't want to be "kept alive", bankrupt my family in the process, and have them hating each other. Now, with DH and having my nieces and nephew and loving being part of their lives, I can't truly say I still feel that way.

I think we all need to talk to our families if we haven't already, or haven't got the legal paperwork in place to protect everyone from these kinds of horrors.

The bottom line is, God's ultimately going to make our decisions for us; if we're meant to live without assistance of a feeding tube, or ventilator, or other life support, we're going to live. To take steps after that, like Dr. Kevorkian, I would never condone.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 10:54am

I need to pick up "Time." I believe you mentioned another good story that was in there the other day, but it may have been the previous issue.


You've raised some very good points. Tim and I

       ~~Rhonda~~


<

Avatar for bootywhompus
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 12:02pm
Ok, so here's my thoughts.

I am all for the living will idea. I personally would not want to live in the state that I saw that poor woman living in. I worked in the medical field and cared for people in her condition long enough to know that it is not living but mere existance.

Having said that, I also believe that without a specific, legal directive from her, I could not in good conscience remove those tubes. No one can speak for another without a little paperwork to back it up. No one can know another's mind. Besides, she may have changed her mind about the whole thing and is unable to communicate that to anyone.

On the other hand, I can also see where I wouldn't want someone that I love to endure the humiliation and demeaning condition that minimal consciousness can mean. I also know that my DH has told me on many occasions that he would prefer to not live that way and I can't imagine him changing his mind.

What it really comes down to is what you can live with. The choice is never easy. Let someone live a mere existance and deal on a day to day basis with their discomfort. Or allow nature to take it's course and let them die with peace and dignity. This is clearly a case of letting your conscience be your guide...God and the law notwithstanding.

I cannot say that I know what her husband's reasoning is. Maybe it's money. Maybe he's tired of watching her suffer. Doctors don't know everything...I had one doctor who told me he wasn't sure they know anything. And they certainly cannot predict the outcome with 100% certainty. I can empathize with her family not wanting to give her up and let her go. Parents are used to seeing their children in a less capable state and seeing potential in their kids. Maybe they don't think of her as debilitated and can see her fighting to recover. Her husband on the other hand, sees what used to be his wife slowly disintegrating before his eyes. He may feel guilt or not. I don't know. But as crazy as it might seem, I think not only does she have a right to live with dignity, but she also has the right to die with dignity.

Lori

Lori

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 1:14pm

Starvation doesn't strike me as a way to die with dignity. I mean, we are supposedly kinder to deer and other animals because it's more humane to hunt them than to let them die of starvation.


It would help to know if she is experiencing pain or not. From the film footage I've seen, she doesn't appear to be, but then she doesn't show much other than to follow movement and light with her eyes. A very difficult situation any way you look at it...

Rhonda


Time invested in improving ourselves cuts down on time disapproving of others.

       ~~Rhonda~~


<

Avatar for bootywhompus
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 2:51pm
It is a difficult situation. No starvation doesn't sound good to me either. I wonder if she feels pain, too. I'm just glad I'm not the one that has to make this decision. I only know that I wouldn't want to live like that and given the opportunity, I would hope someone would end it for me. And so I have my living will so there will be none of this business.

I still don't think anyone other than the woman herself has the right to decide to end her life.

Lori

Lori

Avatar for imthebigsister
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-22-2003 - 3:36pm
"His reflex actions were jerks and noises as opposed to his eyes being able to follow someone's movements."

This is how my BIL's uncle, who passed away after a stroke, was reacting to things before he died. No coordination to his movements, no coherence in his speech - just random tics and noises. We don't know if the photographer caught true recognition of Terri's mother's voice in Terri's face, but my heart aches for her mother for wanting to believe that so much.

Donna

Pages