ClumsyMonkey.net

We play our own god in everyday life, every decision we make.

I dont see how taking out her feeding tube will alleviate suffering. She'll be dying from starvation.

Am I the only one who feels like they're about to throw up at the thought of it?

forcing her to stay alive with no hope of ever recovering makes me sad
in that sense
the feeding does nothing to alleviate her suffering nor does taking it out alleviate her suffering if not for anything other than to not prolong it

Well, they're claiming that she can't feel any sort of pain, aren't they? If that's the case, than taking away her feeding tube wouldn't cause suffering. However, I must say I agree that there are other ways this could be done.

She died this morning after 13 days of being off the feeding tube.

Horrific.

Is it bad that the first thing that came to mind was "finally"? That's far too long to go without food and water.

They deprived her of water too? I thought that a person could only live about 3 days without water.

forcing her to stay alive with no hope of ever recovering makes me sad
in that sense
the feeding does nothing to alleviate her suffering nor does taking it out alleviate her suffering if not for anything other than to not prolong it

Exactly. So why not euthenization?

Cass didn't you say up there that it should never become legal??

What a terrible way to die.


If I ever end up being a veggie burger like that, I'd want to die.

I don't think it should be legalized as a generalization, for fear of abuse. I think each case has to be looked at individually. Unfortunatly, I don't think there are enough resources to do that. It's sad that we take the time to make sure criminals die painlessly when they are put to death, but we starve women to death.

Yeah
This is a real shame.
I dont know how we can live in a modern society and starve someone to death, while the public watches.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... %20Vatican
He's right.

Oh please, I'm pretty sure she can't feel anything to begin with and even if she could, they used enough drugs to make sure she wouldn't. You all got what you wanted, she's dead. So what's the problem? It's not that big of a deal.

On a side note, I didn't care either way what was decided. I just think its ridiculous that this is SOOO important to people who have NO relation whatsoever with this person to decide her fate. Though it seems crazy that the judicial system had to get involved, it makes sense. The case became torn between the parents and the husband. Law says that the husband has the final say so he got his way. Case closed. Move on.

I feel bad for the parents but the husband held out for 15 years. What more could he do? (besides divorce her...)

The point is that it's a landmark case that will set the precedent in the future for what's acceptable and regularly practiced and argued in the country.

The system is fine the way it is. If you need machinery to keep you alive, its your choice whether to live or die. If you are perfectly healthy, then it isn't. That's pretty cut and dry.

How was she to communicate, or even make, that choice?

That's why the choice dropped down to the husband as specified by law. Had he divorced her, it would have been the parents' decision.

Agreed

I guess my main gripe is that while the conversatives are screaming murder (murder?!?! Murder requires an action, not an inaction.) others are calling to put her to death like its that easy for the parents to let go. You don't know them so who are you to sit there and say she wants to die and is suffering? It is really none of our business.

The only problem i ever had with the whole thing, was "Death by Starvation".
Perhaps you are correct and she cannot feel anything.
But what if she can.
It is far more merciful to just euthanize her.

Cass wrote:They deprived her of water too? I thought that a person could only live about 3 days without water.

forcing her to stay alive with no hope of ever recovering makes me sad
in that sense
the feeding does nothing to alleviate her suffering nor does taking it out alleviate her suffering if not for anything other than to not prolong it

Exactly. So why not euthenization?

im all for euthanasia in cases along these lines where a patient is a permanent vegetative state and have been for extended periods of time
ive always been for it and always will be