Re: OT - "lie" vs "error"

From: William M. Klein (wmklein_at_nospam.netcom.com)
Date: 03/24/05 

Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 04:36:30 GMT

"LX-i" <lxi0007@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:3dfb4$4242391b$45491f85$2166@KNOLOGY.NET...
> William M. Klein wrote:
>> I thought I would give one person's response to your serious question about
>> Why let Terri Schiavo die, but convicted murderers live?
>
> Thanks!
>
<snip>
>>
>> However, I do believe that there is sufficient medical evidence available
>> that Terri Schiavo is in a "permanent vegetative state" (despite what Gov
>> Bush said today) and that, therefore, there is NO reasonable chance that she
>> will ever regain a "reasonable quality of life". (as her husband believed
>> SHE expressed that she wanted)
>
> What if she's not? Would you still feel this way?
>

I have both a "living will" and have signed a "power of attorney for medical
issues" document - to deal with such issues in MY case. If she had done such, I
beleive that things would be "much clearer" and I certainly would encourage
others to take these steps (or whatever your local government allows to handle
such issues).

PERSONALLY, I have minimal "philosophical" objection to suicide - and would
allow a person in his/her "right mind" (if such is possible) to take that step.
The next step of indicating under what circumstances a person would want others
(doctors, hospital, "loved ones") to implement their desires under specific
situations, is also reasonable.

In the specific case of my father, he became "brain dead" after a long struggle
with side-effects from diabetes. "Luckily" he had made his wishes well known to
my mother, my sisters, and to me (even though he had not done "paper work" to
specify this) and my mother authorized the hospital to remove "extrordinary"
means and allowed him to die peacefully and quickly.

In *my* case, I have made it clear to my sisters that should I (permantently)
lose the ability to make appropriate mental decisions for myself, I would ask
that they STOP (have stopped) my AIDS medications - even if I was not suffering
from other physical problems. This would, I believe, lead to my death as
quickly as possible.

I would *not* ask my sisters (a doctor, or anyone else) to take this action if
it was against THEIR beliefs - but I would ask them to allow others to follow my
direction.

  ***

Now, in the Terri Shiavo case, there MAY be some question about whether she
really did or did not convey her desires to her husband. If that was what was
being argued in the courts, I would have more sympathy with those trying to keep
her alive. However, as *I* hear the news reports, her parents are stating that
she was a "good Catholic" and that she wouldn't want to commit a "mortal sin"
but NOT that they heard her (after the reports from her husband) actually
indicate that she would want to be kept alive in a "vegatative state". Even if
her parents did argue with her husband about exactly what views she had
expressed AND when, I think I would "err" on the side of believing her husband -
unless there was evidence from "neutral parties" that she did not have such a
relationship with her husband.

Finally, I don't think that I quite understand what is and isn't actually
happening vs what is being reported. It seems to me that the news reports have
indicated that the courts have said that the feeding (and hydration) "tubes"
needed to be removed. However, there seems to be some evidence that she is not
being given any food or water thru "normal" means. Some of the medical experts
say that a person in a vegatative state CAN chew and swallow. If this is the
case, then I (like you - I think) don't understand why her parents and the
hospice are being denied the right to provide these. 

-- 
Bill Klein
 wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com