Moderator: Dictators in Training
The severity of Theresa’s medical condition was explained by the Second District as follows:
The evidence is overwhelming that Theresa is in a permanent or persistent vegetative state. It is important to understand that a persistent vegetative state is not simply a coma. She is not asleep. She has cycles of apparent wakefulness and apparent sleep without any cognition or awareness. As she breathes, she often makes moaning sounds. Theresa has severe contractures of her hands, elbows, knees, and feet.
Over the span of this last decade, Theresa’s brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid.
Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years. Schiavo I, 780 So. 2d at 177. In affirming the trial court’s order, the Second District concluded by stating:
In the final analysis, the difficult question that faced the trial court was whether Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo, not after a few weeks in a coma, but after ten years in a persistent vegetative state that has robbed her of most of her cerebrum and all but the most instinctive of neurological functions, with no hope of a medical cure but with sufficient money and strength of body to live indefinitely, would choose to continue the constant nursing care and the supporting tubes in hopes that a miracle would somehow recreate her missing brain tissue, or whether she would wish to permit a natural death process to take its course and for her family members and loved ones to be free to continue their lives. After due consideration, we conclude that the trial judge had clear and convincing evidence to answer this question as he did.
shiraz wrote:Well, let's just say that I am not convinced enough that she is brain dead enough to not suffer while slowly starving over seven(?) days. Remember, this states that "much" of her brain cortex is gone. Is enough active and functioning to sense pain and "suffer"? There is certainly a chance.
Kizzy wrote:I thought about this some, and I am a little irriated at the hypocrisy in this thread. My view on abortion was brought up. Would I ever have an abortion? I can say with 95% certainty that NO, I would not. I also say that it is not my place to choose or judge what another woman does with her body. Finawin, for example believes no woman has the right to abort a fetus.
Finawin, this woman is being kept alive by a feeding tube, and in essence that is how a fetus is kept alive, by a sort of feeding tube, the ambilical cord. So if science found away to detach the ambilical cord from a fetus, letting it starve to death, would that be acceptable to you? Guess I am not the only one being hypocritcal here.
Martrae wrote:It is barbaric, they are right about that, but so is keeping her in this state and not allowing her (and her family) to move on.
I would absolutely want the plug pulled....a couple days of starving vs. decades of nothingness says it all imo.
There are worse things than death and this is one.
So you think you have some right to trump her expressed wish not to be kept alive in the state she's become?
Donnel wrote:Erodalak wrote:Who needs an education when you are hawt like advina
fixt :P
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests