Terry Schiavo, Finally died Options

[BlackCelicaGT94]

How can you not agree with the fact he cheated and thats wrong when ur married still?
Get a divorce if you are going to fall in love with someone and have children.


I wonder how his girlfriend feels about him wanting Terry to be at his family plot. hmmmm...


Regardless of the fact of whether she stated she wanted to be kept alive or not its now on to where she should be buried.

[Supersprynt]

I dont agree with you, not at all. Probably because its so ludicrous, that your just searching and searching for stupid **** to bring up, stuff that has no bearing on anything and anbody.

First, I dont even think you CAN get a divorce, especially when the other party is disabled and doesnt know whats going on. And if he was with this woman for 10 years and has 2 kids, any notion that he's doing this to get married, is also ridiculous.

Edit: You CAN get a divorce, however this is not done because he feels that this is her wish to not live like this, he's doing this for her wishes, thats why he doesnt divorce her.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Apr 1, 2005 - 1:32 PM

[madmods]

How can you not agree with the fact he cheated and thats wrong when ur married still?
Get a divorce if you are going to fall in love with someone and have children.


I wonder how his girlfriend feels about him wanting Terry to be at his family plot. hmmmm...


Regardless of the fact of whether she stated she wanted to be kept alive or not its now on to where she should be buried.
[right][snapback]265234[/snapback][/right]

Amen. this guy found another lady, what the f@@k does he have to judge terri's life for? Hes not with her anymore. He should have got a freaking divorce. Like I said, he's a dead man walking.

[BlackCelicaGT94]

Edit: You CAN get a divorce, however this is not done because he feels that this is her wish to not live like this, he's doing this for her wishes, thats why he doesnt divorce her.
[right][snapback]265236[/snapback][/right]

Im sure her wishes were for him to find another woman and have children with that lady while she is still his wife legally.

[Supersprynt]

You absolutely love to state the irrelevant huh.
This is not a matter of who he is sleeping with.
THis is not a matter of what she wanted her husband to do if she ended up in a vegetative state.
This is about what she wanted, when she ended up in this kinda state.

[ILuvMyCelica95]

I have to put my opinion in here

The main issue in this case is that regardless of the state she was in she was not on life support. She was breathing on her own, and her heart was beating on it's own with no artificial support what so ever.

A feeding tube is not life support.

It's really sick for people to say that she's a vegetative state so she should die. There are plenty of people in this world who have diseases and can not do things for themselves.

It's not their fault they are in a vegetative state. Regardless, NO ONE should have the right to play God.

Terry's husband killed her. He starved her to death. end of story. There is no arguing that point. Pulling a feeding tube from someone who can not defend themselves is killing them by starvation.

Thats like puting a baby in a room with out food or water, like Terry it depends on something else to give it food. ( the tube in her case )

Personally i think its sick what he did.

This post has been edited by ILuvMyCelica95: Apr 1, 2005 - 10:21 PM

[saleeka]

I have to put my opinion in here

The main issue in this case is that regardless of the state she was in she was not on life support. She was breathing on her own, and her heart was beating on it's own with no artificial support what so ever.

A feeding tube is not life support.

It's really sick for people to say that she's a vegetative state so she should die. There are plenty of people in this world who have diseases and can not do things for themselves.

It's not their fault they are in a vegetative state. Regardless, NO ONE should have the right to play God.

Terry's husband killed her. He starved her to death. end of story. There is no arguing that point. Pulling a feeding tube from someone who can not defend themselves is killing them by starvation.

Thats like puting a baby in a room with out food or water, like Terry it depends on something else to give it food. ( the tube in her case )

Personally i think its sick what he did.
[right][snapback]265465[/snapback][/right]

I disagree. If nobody should play god- terri should have never recieved the feeding tube in the first place, because clearly her time had come in god's eyes. Or better yet people on what you discribe as life support should never be taken off either, because once again your playing god, even though all they do is lay alive thanks to a machine that does everything for them except give them a "liveable" life. Put this case into perspective if this happened to someone without life insurance. no money to pay the hospital bills, no feeding tube, plain and simple... if you want to boil it down beyond the individuals in this case, after all the drawn out trash both familes had to endure, the extemes that came out were absurd. CONGRESS DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE YOUR MEDICAL CARE. Nobody ends up a winner in this case, and thats a fact, but the bottom line to me is more complex than what happens to Terri- when congress decideds that the 15th or so court ruling once again isnt in favor of what the "lifers' think to be what sould be done does NOT give them the right to try to invalidate years of previous court rulings. When the basics of the constitution are challeneged because its a touchy subject- too bad in my eyes- id like to keep my rights, for me, and the future generations.

This post has been edited by saleeka: Apr 2, 2005 - 2:45 AM

[soltrain]

word. ^


This post has been edited by soltrain: Apr 2, 2005 - 6:06 AM

[ILuvMyCelica95]

[right][snapback]265465[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
CONGRESS DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE YOUR MEDICAL CARE.
[right][snapback]265568[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I agree with that. I never said anything about congress getting involved. But if that were my child and I saw that she was reponding to people and the fact that she wasnt dead I would bring it to court. Especially if i saw the slightest motive for my son-in-law to want her dead.

But even that isn't what im talking about. I still dont belive that a feeding tube consitutes life support. It's a necessity. When people are in the hospital after major surgery they get feeding tubes. Its food and water. She was not able to get it on her own, so it was provided for her. Taking away food and water is starvation. At this point i understand why the courts got involved because some people such as myself believe that it's murder to take away a feeding tube from someone who cant eat on their own.

It's just my opinion, everyone is entitled to one.

[25thcelica]

ok I am going to get flamed for this but whatever. no one here excpet akimbo and me knows how this works. look my grandfather who was my father who rasied me had alseimers and in the end when he was at the hosptial they had to do a test to see whether he could feed himself or not ok. and he fail so you know what me and my family had to do? what we had to go thourgh? my grandmother who has been married with my grandpa for over 65 years said no? I agreed when I was walking down in the hospital and I saw some one with one of those things in them. Do you know how much pain that caused me thinking that my father would have to be like that. NO HELL NO. what this guy did was wrong. it should have been done along time ago. towards the end YES my grandpa could still move and smile and do other things but to have him connected to that thing no way in hell. he was taken to a hospice home give an iv and morphine toi dull the pain and then he went to where he was no longer in pain. I am crying as I write this so don't pity me cause I don't need it cause he would he mad at me if I did so as far as people given what sould have been done unless you even have a clue as to what this situtation is like well it is a free country and I respect all opinions give and I will not flame on anyone cause of the way the feel about this just my .02


Fernando

[TheReader]

Although I respect the above posts, I believe that this whole situation is based on whether the right to die was a real wish of Terry rather than whether the right to die is a good or bad thing.

As such, my view is that this situation is not an euthanasia issue, but rather, one of parents' mistrust and the husband's real motives.

Because one thing is for sure, if they both love Terry, they would both want to follow her wishes.

TheReader.

This post has been edited by TheReader: Apr 2, 2005 - 9:26 AM