Do you support suicide assistance?

Do you support suicide assistance?

  • Yes

    Votes: 21 44.7%

  • No

    Votes: 16 34.0%

  • Don´t know

    Votes: 8 17.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • Total voters
    47
Oceanbreeze said:
You're partially correct. Terri was placed on a ventilator for a time after the initial collapse, but she was taken off of it. She was able to breathe on her own. The only thing at issue and what was challenged in court all those many times, was her feeding tube. That was the only thing sustaining her. That's what made this so controversial. Certain people thought the tube was merely basic care; while others akin it to medical intervention. Michael Shiavo ultimately won the court challenge to have her feeding tube removed and it was in March 2005.
Click to expand...

yes sure... but point is - like I said, we have ability to prolong it indefinitely (even if the person is clinically dead). Just because a person can breathe does not mean he/she is conscious. We all know that brain is a very complex organ. A part of her brain is merely functional enough to perform autonomous function such as breathing but her "soul" or "conscious mind" is not there. She is long brain-dead. At what point should we continue.... or not?
 
Jiro said:
yes sure... but point is - like I said, we have ability to prolong it indefinitely (even if the person is clinically dead). Just because a person can breathe does not mean he/she is conscious. We all know that brain is a very complex organ. A part of her brain is merely functional enough to perform autonomous function such as breathing but her "soul" or "conscious mind" is not there. She is long brain-dead. At what point should we continue.... or not?
Click to expand...

:gpost:

I can't answer for someone else, so I'll just speak for myself. I would want to be taken off life support including feeding tubes.
 
shel90 said:
Terri was being kept alive by machines. If these machines werent around, she would have died a long time ago as nature would have intended her to.
Click to expand...

Yep, you are right about the " nature " will take place if, the machines weren't around. She will die naturally. Her husband wouldn't have gone to court to request for the feedin' tube to be removed. No body will blame or sue for " commit murder " ... nada. Everythin' will fall in right place the way it should be.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
:gpost:

I can't answer for someone else. I'll just speak for myself. I would want to be taken off life support including feeding tubes.
Click to expand...

but then... you'll end up like Terry... decaying away. I don't really want to die like that. Just let me die in sleep with a small dignity... pump me up with morphine or whatever. but you know what they say..... cocaine is a hell of a drug.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Thought you'd might be interested to know this: for biology, we did frog dissection. Instead of getting a bunch of frogs in formaldehyde, my teacher actually cut off their heads minutes before class started (disturbing I know). And we didn't know why until we opened them up... guess what? Their hearts were still beating even though their heads were completely cut off. Some students actually cut out the heart to re-enact the Indiana Jones scene and it STILL was beating for at least a minute or two. I have never been so disturbed and amused at the same time.
Click to expand...

See ? That's what I am meanin' about the heart. The body don't die until the heart stop beatin', then it dies.
 
Maria said:
See ? That's what I am meanin' about the heart. The body don't die until the heart stop beatin', then it dies.
Click to expand...

People's hearts stop all the time. What do you think defibrillators are for? If someone's heart stops, its "their time"? So you must be against CPR then?
 
shel90 said:
What if it was in the 1800s and this happened to Terri when she fell into the comatose state? Would she have died right at that moment or lived for another several years in a vegative state?
Click to expand...

No one knows. Maybe, it will cut her life short than expect because, of germs, infections and so on. It's why I kept pressin' to say that it is best to leave the " nature " alone to take its place and it will decide on its own.
 
Maria said:
See ? That's what I am meanin' about the heart. The body don't die until the heart stop beatin', then it dies.
Click to expand...

I dont get your point. Pls clarify?
 
Maria said:
No one knows. Maybe, it will cut her life short than expect because, of germs, infections and so on. It's why I kept pressin' to say that it is best to leave the " nature " alone to take its place and it will decide on its own.
Click to expand...


Then they shouldnt have kept Terri on a feeding tube for so long if I were to follow that statement in bold.
 
shel90 said:
Then they shouldnt have kept Terri on a feeding tube for so long if I were to follow that statement in bold.
Click to expand...

Then they would have to feed her by hands everyday if there weren't any feeding tubes.

It's cruel to starve someone to death.
 
shel90 said:
Then they shouldnt have kept Terri on a feeding tube for so long if I were to follow that statement in bold.
Click to expand...

Well, her heart was still beatin' at that time and they should have kept Terri on a feedin' tube.
 
Angel said:
Then they would have to feed her by hands everyday if there weren't any feeding tubes.

It's cruel to starve someone to death.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong but.... I don't even think she could swallow. If she could, what was the purpose of the feeding tube? Without the feed tubes, you'd have to ram food down her throat, which could choke her.
 
jillio said:
I meant that she was only alive as the result of artificial means. There was no more relationship, as she was not capable of engaging in the thought process and emotional process that would define an interactive relationship.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that she was unable to give her husband his "needs" so he has every right to jump in bed with someone else?

Just wanted to make sure I'm reading you correctly.
 
Daredevel7 said:
I could be wrong but.... I don't even think she could swallow. If she could, what was the purpose of the feeding tube? Without the feed tubes, you'd have to ram food down her throat, which could choke her.
Click to expand...

She couldn't swallow, but even that was contested. There are some who believe that she could swallow. Her cerebral cortex was gone. The brain matter was gone and replaced with cerebral spinal fluid. You can debate her ability to swallow under those circumstances, but in my view, it was impossible.

Terri's autopsy report for those that care to read:

http://www.blogsforterri.com/archives/5050439_autopsy report and supporting documents.pdf
 
Daredevel7 said:
People's hearts stop all the time. What do you think defibrillators are for? If someone's heart stops, its "their time"? So you must be against CPR then?
Click to expand...

I don't think you get it. I will explain it again. If, a patient's heart stop beatin' and that a doctor or paramedic attempts to save a patient's life by usin' defibrillator -- if it don't success to save a patient's life, then that means a patient's heart decided to shut down without givin' an effort. Who says that I must be against CPR ?
 
Daredevel7 said:
I could be wrong but.... I don't even think she could swallow. If she could, what was the purpose of the feeding tube? Without the feed tubes, you'd have to ram food down her throat, which could choke her.
Click to expand...

Agreed...she was being kept alive artifically and we would never know if that was what she would have wanted or not.

How many of you do u want to be kept alive in a vegative state with absulotely NO quality of life at all? I sure wouldnt..I would tell my mom to throw me out in the desert and leave me there!
 
Back
Top