A wishy-washy win
The Supreme Court decided not to intervene on behalf of Terri Schiavo's parents in their bid to keep her alive through the use of a feeding tube. However,the court declined to make any sort of comment on the case, which I find a little cowardly.
I still see it as a win for those of us on the "quality" side of the right-to-die/quality-of-life arguments. This woman has been in a vegetative state for 14 years. Shouldn't she be allowed to leave this life at some point? While there is some disagreement on whether it's even possible for her to improve, at what point do the efforts to keep her alive become cruel? I feel very sorry for her parents (who are fighting to keep her alive), but the quality of life for this woman is just depressing.
As an aside, one of the arguments the "pro-life-no-matter-what" crowd makes is that we should never hasten death, but allow it to occur naturally. Well, how natural is it to be kept alive for 14 years with a feeding tube? If you've seen any video of this woman, you know how depressing her life is. Shouldn't we allow nature to take it's course at some point?
I still see it as a win for those of us on the "quality" side of the right-to-die/quality-of-life arguments. This woman has been in a vegetative state for 14 years. Shouldn't she be allowed to leave this life at some point? While there is some disagreement on whether it's even possible for her to improve, at what point do the efforts to keep her alive become cruel? I feel very sorry for her parents (who are fighting to keep her alive), but the quality of life for this woman is just depressing.
As an aside, one of the arguments the "pro-life-no-matter-what" crowd makes is that we should never hasten death, but allow it to occur naturally. Well, how natural is it to be kept alive for 14 years with a feeding tube? If you've seen any video of this woman, you know how depressing her life is. Shouldn't we allow nature to take it's course at some point?
posted by Richard at 10:39 AM
2 Comments:
Richard
I am in no way promoting people to stay alive in order to duffer- but I am just curious if you are aware of all the facts on THIS case. It is definitely a high profile case- but not a real good case to use in the argument against "life-no-matter-what" cause. I am not trying to criticize- so please do not take it that way. In this particular case- I feel cery strongly that the husband abused the system in order to get money and has done nothing to try and change her "vegitative" state. In fact- I believe- I stress- I believe- because the courts find it "interesting" but refuse to investigat the allogations- but i believe HE was actually responsible for her being in this state in the first place. He won quite a hefty settlement when he testified that he needed the money to care for her and give her the care she needed to try and improve her "state" and then once he got the money-refused to give her the treatment he claimed he needed the money for. THis guy is a scumbag- and should not be in charge of ANY decisions for HER well-being.
ANyway- I do like your blog and will be back- I just wasn't sure if you knew all the stuff that the press really doesn't want us to know on THIS case.
Thanks and keep writing
SHerri
Thanks for the comments Sherri. Do you have any links for the deeper story? I had understood that the husband had won a settlement, but that the money was gone by now after caring for his wife. Is that not the case? Let me know if you have any leads, thanks
Post a Comment
<< Home