Whats your opinion on this?

Terri's Situation
Terri was 26 years old when she suffered brain damage from a sudden collapse. Terri receives her food and water by means of a feeding tube. Terri’s other bodily functions are physically stable. Terri smiles, laughs and cries. Terri recognizes voices and responds. At times, she vocalizes sounds, trying in her best way to speak. Terri is not a brain dead vegetable as characterized by her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo nor a houseplant as implied by his attorney. Terri is not on a respirator or any artificial life support. She is a living human being and needs to be granted an opportunity to recover. Terri has not had any progressive rehabilitation or arousal therapy in more than ten years.

In a trial initiated by Michael Schiavo, Circuit Court Judge, George W. Greer, issued a verdict delivered on February 11, 2000. Judge Greer granted authorization to discontinue Terri’s feeding tube. Judge Greer’s verdict will cause Terri to die in 10 to 14 days. Terri’s death will be by painful starvation.

Background
In a malpractice lawsuit, Terri’s husband personally received over $300,000 for his loss of consortium. Terri was awarded $750,000 from this suit and an additional $250,000 from a separate malpractice lawsuit. The money was awarded to Terri for her care and rehabilitation and to be placed in a Medical Trust Fund. Terri’s husband received his personal award money and Terri’s medical fund money in early 1993. From the date he received the award money in 1993, Michael Schiavo has denied Terri any rehabilitation treatment. Michael Schiavo has confined Terri to a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility) where she is 'maintained.'

Her husband has directed that Terri only be sustained in a nursing home which is contrary to the intent of the award money. Michael Schiavo has on two occasions unsuccessfully attempted to end Terri’s life by instructing her caretakers not to medicate Terri for potentially fatal infections. The first occasion occurred less than nine months after her husband received the malpractice award money.

Some Facts
-Terri has no will. Should she die, her husband will inherit what is left of Terri’s $750,000 medical fund.
-Terri’s husband lives in a house with Jodi Centonze. He openly admits that he has been engaged to this women for over seven years, have recently given birth to a baby girl, and has announced plans to marry her when Terri is no longer alive.
-Since receiving the award money in 1993, her husband has ceased and prohibited any new or aggressive treatment for Terri. He has only maintained Terri at a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility). He has totally ignored or denied rehabilitation therapy that could possibly assist Terri’s recovery.
-Since 1993, Terri’s husband has consistently and deliberately withheld all medical information and data from Terri’s family. Over the past eight years he has ordered Terri’s caretakers not to reveal any medical or neurological information
-Michael Schiavo will not permit any doctor to examine Terri other than the doctors he selects.
-As Terri’s legal guardian, her husband has used her medical fund money to offset the legal costs when his guardianship of Terri was initially challenged and to pay the current legal costs to have Terri’s life ended.
-Terri responds regularly to the presence of her parents and friends. Her husband's doctors testified
Terri's cognizant responses to Terri’s parents and friends are simply a reflex action.

They have removed her feeding tube, and she is starving to death now.

Terry's Fight.com (http://www.terrisfight.org/downloads/index.html)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=8&u=/nm/20031021/ts_nm/life_coma_dc

My opinion is that she is unable to live without feeding/liquid tubes, can't care for herself AT ALL, and that her spouse should have the right to end her life.

This is a case where CONSERVATIVE DO-GOODERS want to interfere in what should be a private matter.

Physician assisted suicide goes on ALL THE TIME, but it's just not legal.

Originally posted by bitkahuna
My opinion is that she is unable to live without feeding/liquid tubes, can't care for herself AT ALL, and that her spouse should have the right to end her life.
Neither can some of the elderly, should their kids be allowed to end their lives too?

Originally posted by bitkahuna
My opinion is that she is unable to live without feeding/liquid tubes, can't care for herself AT ALL, and that her spouse should have the right to end her life.

This is a case where CONSERVATIVE DO-GOODERS want to interfere in what should be a private matter.

Physician assisted suicide goes on ALL THE TIME, but it's just not legal.

That would be true if she had a Living Will that stated her intentions after death. Also, she has many injuries associated with physical abuse. Also, her husband will not allow an autopsy after she dies and is pushing to have an immediate cremation. Also, her husband will receive over 1 million dollars after she dies. Also, her doctor says that he injuries were not associated to a heart attack and the only time he has seen injuries like this were from strangulation.

I wouldn't believe anything this man says!

Update: Gov. Bush instructed the hospital to reinsert the feeding tube after the Florida Legislature gave him to power to do so.

Originally posted by 93LexoGS300
Neither can some of the elderly, should their kids be allowed to end their lives too?

If those elderly have no ability to express their own wishes, I believe yes, their kids should be able to.

Originally posted by SCLexus3.0
That would be true if she had a Living Will that stated her intentions after death.

What would be true?! She's not dead.

Also, she has many injuries associated with physical abuse. Also, her husband will not allow an autopsy after she dies and is pushing to have an immediate cremation. Also, her husband will receive over 1 million dollars after she dies. Also, her doctor says that he injuries were not associated to a heart attack and the only time he has seen injuries like this were from strangulation.

I wouldn't believe anything this man says!

Those points are irrelevant. If the police or anyone think they can make a case against him, fine.

I know she's not in a coma, but do you believe that there is ever a case that relatives should be able to 'pull the plug' for a person in a coma (perhaps for years), who didn't do a living will? If not, who should foot the cost?

Originally posted by bitkahuna
What would be true?! She's not dead.

If she had documentation of her wishes then it would be a different story, but its only his word.. The same word coming from a man who could have been responsible for the condition she is currently it!

Originally posted by bitkahuna

Those points are irrelevant. If the police or anyone think they can make a case against him, fine.

There probably will be....

Originally posted by bitkahuna

I know she's not in a coma, but do you believe that there is ever a case that relatives should be able to 'pull the plug' for a person in a coma (perhaps for years), who didn't do a living will? If not, who should foot the cost?

He Should! Hes already been given the money!
Did you not read this part?

Background
In a malpractice lawsuit, Terri’s husband personally received over $300,000 for his loss of consortium. Terri was awarded $750,000 from this suit and an additional $250,000 from a separate malpractice lawsuit. The money was awarded to Terri for her care and rehabilitation and to be placed in a Medical Trust Fund. Terri’s husband received his personal award money and Terri’s medical fund money in early 1993. From the date he received the award money in 1993, Michael Schiavo has denied Terri any rehabilitation treatment. Michael Schiavo has confined Terri to a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility) where she is 'maintained.'

Her husband has directed that Terri only be sustained in a nursing home which is contrary to the intent of the award money. Michael Schiavo has on two occasions unsuccessfully attempted to end Terri’s life by instructing her caretakers not to medicate Terri for potentially fatal infections. The first occasion occurred less than nine months after her husband received the malpractice award money.

Some Facts
-Terri has no will. Should she die, her husband will inherit what is left of Terri’s $750,000 medical fund.
-Terri’s husband lives in a house with Jodi Centonze. He openly admits that he has been engaged to this women for over seven years, have recently given birth to a baby girl, and has announced plans to marry her when Terri is no longer alive.
-Since receiving the award money in 1993, her husband has ceased and prohibited any new or aggressive treatment for Terri. He has only maintained Terri at a nursing home (currently, Terri is in a Hospice facility). He has totally ignored or denied rehabilitation therapy that could possibly assist Terri’s recovery.
-Since 1993, Terri’s husband has consistently and deliberately withheld all medical information and data from Terri’s family. Over the past eight years he has ordered Terri’s caretakers not to reveal any medical or neurological information
-Michael Schiavo will not permit any doctor to examine Terri other than the doctors he selects.
-As Terri’s legal guardian, her husband has used her medical fund money to offset the legal costs when his guardianship of Terri was initially challenged and to pay the current legal costs to have Terri’s life ended.
-Terri responds regularly to the presence of her parents and friends. Her husband's doctors testified
Terri's cognizant responses to Terri’s parents and friends are simply a reflex action.

Originally posted by bitkahuna
If those elderly have no ability to express their own wishes, I believe yes, their kids should be able to.
So, if a person has no ability to express their own wishes, we should just terminate them because they have become a burden? Unless the person has expressed their wish to reject medical treatment under certain circumstances, then their wishes should be followed. If this has not been done or if their wishes are severely disputed, then I don't think anyone should interject their desire to terminate the life of another.

Vids

http://www.bottomlineradio.net/vid.html

"Sadly for Terri, that's exactly what they were created to do. The site is maintained by the Schindler family who are quite literally willing to do whatever they have to do to "save" Terri. Unfortunately, that isn't what Terri told her husband she would want under the circumstances. Question, why do you think the tape(s) stopped where they did? If she was in such a cooperative state, why didn't they show her following the command to close her eyes, as heard at the end of the first tape? Granted these are affirmative signs singularly, but more definitive test by other court appointed examiners weren't so positive. You wouldn't let something slide because you heard a positive spin on a bad tale, don't let a few seconds of edited videotape change your heart from thinking what is right. "

Originally posted by jpa2400
"Sadly for Terri, that's exactly what they were created to do. The site is maintained by the Schindler family who are quite literally willing to do whatever they have to do to "save" Terri. Unfortunately, that isn't what Terri told her husband she would want under the circumstances. Question, why do you think the tape(s) stopped where they did? If she was in such a cooperative state, why didn't they show her following the command to close her eyes, as heard at the end of the first tape? Granted these are affirmative signs singularly, but more definitive test by other court appointed examiners weren't so positive. You wouldn't let something slide because you heard a positive spin on a bad tale, don't let a few seconds of edited videotape change your heart from thinking what is right. "

Actually I could care less of what I see in the tapes, I am more concerned with how the Husband is treating this.

A few things,
1. Why would he get engaged to another woman if Marriage meant so much to him in the first place?
2. Why has he been concealing the medical records of his wife?
3. Why did he not spend any of the money he received for her medical rehab ON her medical rehab?
4. Why is he ONLY allowing doctors he personally chooses to examine and comment about her health?
5. Why would he want the body to be immediately cremated upon death, with no autopsy?
6. Why did he lie about the cause of her being in the hospital in the first place?
7. Why does she have injuries associated to physical abuse and strangulation?
8. Why did he try to keep her from getting the medication she needed RIGHT AFTER he received the money that was awarded to take care of her?

I don't think that she ever told him to end her life at any point.

This just seems like an easy way for him to commit murder and get away with it.

Also, whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, it’s not HIS choice to make this decision

Just a heads-up: Michael Schiavo is on Larry King. The interview will probably be re-aired a couple times if you missed it.