Is it really too late to save her?
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 17,288
Likes: 39
From: Nashville
What does it cost to keep her alive? Ballpark? I would assume $8k per month for them to feed, change her, bathe her, etc.........
$8kx12 x 13 years = $1.25M. I don't think she will ever recover, and she is really not "living".... I thought the Gov't should have stayed out of it.
$8kx12 x 13 years = $1.25M. I don't think she will ever recover, and she is really not "living".... I thought the Gov't should have stayed out of it.
Registered User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 7,337
Likes: 3
From: Los Angeles, Miami
I'm disappointed by the actions of my state legislature and governor.
She may be alive in the technical sense but she is not truly alive in the sense of functioning. Let her die. Why keep her alive and allow her to suffer more for years to come?
She may be alive in the technical sense but she is not truly alive in the sense of functioning. Let her die. Why keep her alive and allow her to suffer more for years to come?
Registered User
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mav
I'm disappointed by the actions of my state legislature and governor.
She may be alive in the technical sense but she is not truly alive in the sense of functioning.
I'm disappointed by the actions of my state legislature and governor.
She may be alive in the technical sense but she is not truly alive in the sense of functioning.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 682
Likes: 0
From: Orlando
In an ideal world, everybody will have a will before they get into PVS, he or she will not have a "change of heart" when his/her spouse goes into PVS etc, etc. Well, unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world.
Having said that, I think the purpose of this bill is to protect a disabled person in a similar/identical situation as Terri (i.e. disabled without a will, whose legal guradian has obvious, to me at least, "conflict of interest" BUT has a WILLING party to care for her/him regardless of his/her medical condition). Needless to say it is a very specialized and narrow portion of the law that nobody cared to look in detail...until now. So is it really just another useless law that tell us how to live or die? IMHO, filling up a "loop hole" like this is the DUTY of the lawmakers. If you have done your homework (i.e. your will, and other necessary paperworks and such), I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Quality of life? Yeah, I wonder about that sometimes...especially when I have a bad day at work, I just want to yell out, "dang, it just ain't worth it!" The next day? Somehow, I'm up and running just fine. My point is, it is such a relative thing to each individual, I don't see how anyone can be audacious enough to believe that he/she has the ability or right to "quantify" or "judge" someone else's quality of life! Why even try?
Having said that, I think the purpose of this bill is to protect a disabled person in a similar/identical situation as Terri (i.e. disabled without a will, whose legal guradian has obvious, to me at least, "conflict of interest" BUT has a WILLING party to care for her/him regardless of his/her medical condition). Needless to say it is a very specialized and narrow portion of the law that nobody cared to look in detail...until now. So is it really just another useless law that tell us how to live or die? IMHO, filling up a "loop hole" like this is the DUTY of the lawmakers. If you have done your homework (i.e. your will, and other necessary paperworks and such), I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Quality of life? Yeah, I wonder about that sometimes...especially when I have a bad day at work, I just want to yell out, "dang, it just ain't worth it!" The next day? Somehow, I'm up and running just fine. My point is, it is such a relative thing to each individual, I don't see how anyone can be audacious enough to believe that he/she has the ability or right to "quantify" or "judge" someone else's quality of life! Why even try?
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,962
Likes: 7
From: San Fernando Valley, CA
I think the definition of brain dead is being confused here.
"Brain dead" as the common slang means retarded or stupid.
Brain dead in the medical sense means there is no sign of activity in the brain measured as electrochemical signals. All that's left is the involuntary nervous system keeping the heart and lungs going.
A vegetative state means just that, a vegetable. A severely retarded or stroke victim is not "brain dead". Get the definitions straight.
"Brain dead" as the common slang means retarded or stupid.
Brain dead in the medical sense means there is no sign of activity in the brain measured as electrochemical signals. All that's left is the involuntary nervous system keeping the heart and lungs going.
A vegetative state means just that, a vegetable. A severely retarded or stroke victim is not "brain dead". Get the definitions straight.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 682
Likes: 0
From: Orlando
Ok. PVS, retard, slow, "brain dead," call it what you want...it really doesn't matter IMO. All her family is saying is "we'll take care of her" regardless of what "state" she is in. I personally don't see anything wrong with that. But then again I could be wrong.
BTW, I hear that Michael Schiavo and his lawyer has forbidden her family from seeing her after re-attachment of feeding tube. I think it really adds that wholesome, trusty, good-boy image he already has. Well, actually their visit was extremely limited from the day one of the "dispute." Go figure.
BTW, I hear that Michael Schiavo and his lawyer has forbidden her family from seeing her after re-attachment of feeding tube. I think it really adds that wholesome, trusty, good-boy image he already has. Well, actually their visit was extremely limited from the day one of the "dispute." Go figure.