[extropy-chat] Thoughts on Schiavo

[Samantha Atkins]

On Mar 27, 2005, at 3:40 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>>> The sole legitimate purpose of government is to help individuals
>> defend
>>> themselves against force or fraud. If they are incapable of doing
>> so,
>>> they must be the ward of another individual, or the state, which
>> must
>>> be held responsible for any force or fraud that befalls them.
>>
>> Her husband is such an individual.As others pointed out he spend
>> years clinging to hope.
>
> The only hope I have heard him express is that she was going to die
> sooner on her own. Before he claimed she wante to die, he was witnessed
> by multiple nurses asking "When is that bitch gonna die?"

After n years of this torment I would not be surprised by such a 
comment.


>
>>  as others pointed out there is no money that he is selfishly
>> attempting to do her in for.  He finally came to the point of
>> letting go.  By rights it was his sad decision to make.  Why are his
>> rights being ignored?    Why are you here heaping aspersions and
>> contempt on this man you do not know?
>
> The guy spent half the money on attorneys rather than her care. What
> does that say to you? That spent half of her money on convincing the
> state to kill her for him.

Since there was nothing left to do it says that he has had to fight 
simply to exercise the right that it looks like he had to say enough is 
enough.

>
>>
>>>
>>> Contrary to claims by some here, Terri never was witnessed by
>> anyone
>>> but her husband to have expressed a desire to not be sustained in
>> the sort of condition she is in, and even he never mentioned such a
>> desire until she was a good ten years into her current condition.
>>
>> None of that is at all uncommon.
>
> Maybe not uncommon, but it still isn't of sufficient legal weight to
> justify killing someone. You certainly can't send someone to death row
> on such a flimsy case.

Killing someone is your baseless interpretation.  The guy hung on for 
three years beyond the point that medical consensus said it was 
hopeless before attempting to finally let go as he claims his wife had 
wanted.  This is hardly indicative of some murderous scoundrel like 
what you are attempting to paint.


>
>>
>>> As there
>>> were no other witnesses, and no signed contract in the form of a
>> living
>>> will, the default choice should be to sustain her life and provide
>> as
>>> much therapy to improve her condition as possible, therapy that her
>>> husband has steadfastly denied her, if only to determine what her
>> true intent is.
>>
>> For what purpose?  She is not here.  She has been gone a long time
>> now.
>
> How do you know this? Has any attempt ever been made to repair? No. Has
> any attempt been made with monitors of brain wave activity? I have not
> seen such online.

While i am not a doctor the NEJM article on the case cinched it for he 
along with what I do know of our current knowledge of the brain.  Are 
you claiming NEJM is part of a plot to murder Schiavo?  It would not 
surprise me after some of your other comments.  If not then what allows 
you to still imply this condition is treatable and insist that murder 
is being committed if the state stops the support of an empty shell?

>
> In fact, I have seen online some images on the imminst.org forum of a
> person with similar brain damage whose tissue revived after treatment.
>

Well it is amazing that you have such expertise as to make a call from 
your armchair that this case is so much the same.

> My mother was in a coma for a month and a half, and when she came out
> of it she was in similar condition: she could not speak, could barely
> move, she had almost entirely lost her memory of her life since
> childhood and when she was able to speak after several months of
> intensive speech therapy and round the clock attention, was convinced
> she was married to a different man named "Frank" and that we were not
> her 'real' children, and when she came home she was convinced it was
> not her home. It took an immense amount of work to bring her back to
> her normal self. I didn't work for 8 months solid outside of caring for
> her.
>
>

I now understand why this is so important to you and sympathize.  
However your mother was not in PVS for years and you cannot draw direct 
parallels.

>
>
> Once again, I am brought to the conclusion that a number of list
> members here are suffering from a severe lack of dynamic optimism.
> Unfortunately, I don't know how to cure that either.
>
>

There is nothing dynamic or optimistic about beating a dead horse or 
force-feeding a flat-lined patient.

- samantha