View Full Version : The feeding tube
Schoulayer
03-22-2005, 11:46 PM
Whats your opinion on this?
Personally I think the husband is within his rights, but I think it was a poor decision to remove the feeding tube before the legal proceedings came to a conclusion.
Ennoozunu
03-23-2005, 02:13 AM
I think that they should just let her die some other way if they are going to let her die(injection or something) because letting a person starve will just make them suffer more.
This whole thing shouldn't even be in the news its not information that the everyone needs to know. Its about 1 person and no one else.
narratorxx
03-23-2005, 05:53 AM
i remember reading an article saying that the lady had it in her will, or whatever legal document you use for situations like thing--that she wanted to be dead rather than be in a coma. the husband was about to follow her wishes, but her family stepped in. there shouldn't have to be legal proceedings, if what i read is true. i think the gov. has some big balls to be steppin in to a situation like this, i mean seriously they got other shit to worry about...i mean congress really gets their ass moving when it means votes, or taking some 'moral' stance...
she's brain dead, so she can't feel the sensation of starving...after the brain's dead, nothing else matters. a lot people are saying that doesn't matter, cause she's breathing and her heart beats, but that wouldn't be possible without the machines. i'm guessing the video clips are pretty old, i mean she's been in this state, since what 1990...15 years of basically standing on the brink of death...can't that be considered cruel and unusal torture?
what i hate is the argument that we're intervening in "god's plan" by removing the tubes, and what-have-you. but they don't ever seem to consider that putting them in the first place was intervening in "god's plan". what i hate even more is that the whole "god's plan" thing is just a matter of convenience for these people, it means shit when it's not needed, after that, who gives a ****.
as for it being on the news, i can lean both ways...yes it is personal and none of anyone's business. but also the decision will set precedent for similar situations that occur afterwards. anyone now can point to this case, as 'the case', or to the bill passed by congress...
here's an article (http://www.sptimes.com/2005/02/25/Tampabay/In_Kansas_recovery__h.shtml) that should better explain that keeping her 'alive' is/will be fruitless...
kinonai
03-30-2005, 06:49 AM
She is very lucid, and it is plain murder. It's all 'legal'....but murder none the less. I suspect he is hiding something, but some say the fact that he wants her cremated(sp?) is proof he isn't. Me? I think he's bluffing. He probably is going to 'let the family' put her in a grave in a place they choose at the last minute as a 'sympathy' thing. Or, he is gambling...there is a chance the corpse would not be examined even if he does have her cremated(sp?). Either way...he's hiding something. Even if he did cause her to be this way though...there is really nothing they can do to him. I think you have only something like 4 years to take care of that, and it's been over 14.
AKA: PUT THE DAMN FEEDING TUBE BACK IN, YOU BASTARDS!
--added--
There have been many witnesses to her trying to speak. She follows people with her eyes...she smiles and raises her eyebrows. There have been doctors that say that she is lucid...but "she's brain dead" (sarcasm). Also there was NO living will; they are going by the husband's word alone on that one. Because of her brain damage, she cannot move correctly and cannot form words with her mouth. When her lawyer said "If you can just say 'I want to live', this will all be over. We won't have to remove your feeding tube" (not word for word), she responded with "Aaaahh" (obviously trying to say "I"). Then she finally screamed so loud that the people in the hall (including the bastard husband) could hear it. I am sorry people...justify it in your minds however the hell you want, but it's murder. Killing helpless people who don't want to die is WRONG.
Pipp-ORK
04-01-2005, 01:14 AM
ESPECIALLY since they just STARVED her! That's inhumane! >_< If they were going to let her die, then thay should have at least made it a QUICK death by use of drugs. If she was still respondent, then they should have left her alone. That's my opinion, anyway...
narratorxx
04-01-2005, 05:15 AM
^^ i agree: a quick death would've been better than starving...but they've already ruled that out because assisted deaths are illegal--kevorkian is serving time right now, right?
as for her condition: spinal fluid was spilling into her brain, causing much atrophy--irreversible damage, it'll keep gettin worse not better...
as for seeing her and juding, aside from doctors, a layman will see and hear whatever he/she wants to see...
and here's a question, do you honestly want to exist in a persistent vegetative state for 10-15 years or more...
i mean what's the point. let your parents and friends grieve, and get over you--rather than giving them some fruitless hope
Pipp-ORK
04-01-2005, 06:33 AM
Yeah, I guess...But STARVING someone? I mean, c'mon....PETS are treated better than that when they're dying. They're given the needle. I still can't believe that they just starved her, though...
joogla
04-12-2005, 02:52 AM
This was a personal matter pure and simple. The govt had no place in this especially the Republicans whose ideals include indiviudal choice and not federal govt interference. She was diagnosed by many doctors as braindead. A doctor who has no formal training or experience cannot say that she is not based on video evidence, even if he's in charge of the Senate. If she is braindead, this topic is moot. If she is not braindead, she is severely crippled and would suffer for the rest of her life. They already kept her alive for 15 years, whatever your opinions you have to agree with the fact that god giveth life and god is the only person who has the power taketh away.
nighthawksw
04-14-2005, 06:31 PM
you kno what i think? i think it's pathetic that the world is so worked up over this. True, it's a sad case, but the father and mother are taking things too far. The government took the matter too seriously. People live and die everyday, and this circumstance wasn't an exception. The circumstances were painful, but there are people in rural towns living through other painful experiances all the time. I'm not saying the situation is unimportant, however it's not so important that it should even become a controversy here. It was a family matter, and i think it was pathetic that the parents even took it to court.
Hinatetsu
04-16-2005, 01:22 AM
The parents took it to court because they loved their daughter enough to try not to let her starve to death. I'm sure that when you have children you'll understand. If someone tried to kill MY kid by starving them, there would be h*** to pay - no matter how old my kid is.
Why this is such an issue? I am currently a nurse and see many people in worse situations than that woman was in. If the government can justify letting this woman starve to death - and letting the husband (who quite frankly, no longer wants the responsibility) get away with it then who's to stop this from happening in an epidemic all over the country.
Pretty soon we're going to have people evaluating paitents and determining that these people no longer have a "quality of life" so they don't have the right to live anymore. It's already starting, I've seen it. And it's the saddest thing in the world. That's why I think the "nosy republicans" (I am a republican) interfered. True, we don't like to mix the government and people, but sometimes we have to do what's right, even if it means to interfere in personal business.
"People live and die everyday, and this circumstance wasn't an exception. The circumstances were painful, but there are people in rural towns living through other painful experiances all the time."
Um...that's kind of close minded. We have to do what we can to help the people who are in front of us. We can't just be like, "Well, it happens, tough luck." and go on our merry little way. We can only change the world one person at a time.
Would YOU want to starve to death and have everyone look on saying, "Well, he/she's braindead so it's kinder this way" all the while your internal organs are ceasing to function?
Kiechi
05-14-2005, 08:31 AM
What is a feeding tube?
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.