Reply With Quote
I'd like to listen even if I don't agree.
Let it out!
i agree, but the whole Dr. Kevorkian thing got everyone so riled up i doubt it would be allowed....even though i think it should beWouldn't some sort of painless lethal injection be much more humane than starving her to death? It could take her TWO WEEKS to die.
I'd like to listen even if I don't agree.
Let it out!
It sounds terrible, but starvation for very ill people is one of the better ways to go. See this article for an example.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/21/health/21dying.html
and there you go.
I think those affidavts may have swayed me.
Show me examples of where they create laws instead of interpreting laws. I listen all the time, as long as you come with something more than rhetoric.
I'm sorry, this just sounds far-fetched to me.10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI [urinary tract infection]or fluid buildup in her lungs, colds, or pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled even, hoping that she would die. He would say something like, "Hallelujah! You've made my day!" He would call me, as I was the nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out "I'm going to be rich!" and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died, which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among other things.
For those married in here..who would you want to have the final say?
Your spouse or your parents?
I would hope they would be in agreement on the decision.[/cop out]
If not, my spouse.
My spouse. Till death, or she pulls the plug, do us part.
Spouse. But then again, my parents and spouse are in total agreement.
My spouse. Till death, or she pulls the plug, do us part.Was that part of your wedding vows?
How do you know this?
There is no living will...it is all hereay....when she dies, he recieves more than $3 mil.....the husband has kids by his mistress while his wife suffers and can do nothing....it is all about the $$$$$ he will pocket. I have heard that doctors have test that could possibly help her and yet nothing is done....c'mon people see the light.
If there was a living will, this would be a moot point.
Think about it....if we let this happen to an animal/pet.....you would be charged with cruelty yet you can purposely starve this woman?
I bet if we starved Charles Manson....he would deserve it......there would be an uproar.
But there is NO living will so it IS a moot point.
I think the Spouse has the legal right and this has gone on long enough.
I haven't followed this story that closely, but why does he get 3 million? Life insurance policy?
Yes......it is a life insurance policy.
I wonder if they'll pay out.
This what insurance is for and usually someone benifits from it.
That is why they are called the benificiary.
But I don't know who took out the insurance policy but that is why people take out insurance.
The problem here is from what I understand he was assumed legal right AFTER her accident....the rest of the family does not seem to be included in anything regarding her well-being.
Say you are injured in a similar manner....do you want you family unable to have a say?
I have heard that he did not want any medical intervention at all from the begining.....she would already be gone if the courts had not intervened.
One of my problems with this whole thing is that I have heard that several doctors have said she never recieved all the test she could/should have......the longer they wait the harder it will be to help her......they have said the tests should have been done years ago.....the husband denied them because he was "guardian". This case IMHO, is just like abuse to the elderly.
Those who say nothing should be done are practically guaranteeing a death sentence to any re ed/disabled individual......this is a horrible precedent.
I did know that. I have life insurance also.
I'm wondering if they'll pay out because of the cir stances of this case. I wouldn't be surprised to see the insurance company fight it.
The cir stances in which he recieving the $$$$ is su ious......he was basically cheating on her even though she was still alive.....his "love" for her is totally insincere....or else he would not have had children with another woman while his wife was in the hospital clinging to life.....if he really cared for her well-being he would be faithful.....remember "til death do us part"?
It doesn't mean unless you can't prevent it because you are near death or suffering in some way.
I understand about the insurance but the cir stances is all wrong...all avenues to save/help her have not been exhausted.....he IMHO is just leaving her for dead.
Like I said, if we were to do the same to an animal or pet, we would be charged with cruelty.....so now this lady's life is less than a pet or animal of some sort......we bend over backwards to help newts and such live....but when you are able to help a living human being who happens to be struggling for existence.....then forget it? She is breathing on her own, her heart beats with no outside help....so you advocate to pull the plug? What about those who are struggling with diabetes and are seemingly near death....you want to "pull the plug" then even if they "think" is is the best thing to do.....they may not be able to make clear decisions in their state.....do you think noone should say anything?
There are many laws...some good, some bad....that come out helping an individual.....the miranda rights come to mind....roe vs. wade.....i am sure there are so many others to name.
ltns cheryl
I guess I just wouldn't want everyone else, especially congress, getting into my personal affairs. Everyone can say anything they want but it doesn't mean my right as a spouse should be denied.
I'm not saying her husband is a Saint but I know some friends who have tragically lost someone and received a hefty insurance payment and moved on. Some even bought a bigger home? Should they have felt guilty about spending the insurance money?
Being an awful husband and human being is not against the law.
well, obviously the tenacity that he is fighting with must show you that there is SOME reason his convictions on this are so strong, possibly the wishes of a loved one. . .
He has already been offered millions of dollars and turned them down. So life insurance is a moot point.
Actually it is not...the offer (1 mil I believe)....was less than the insurance money (3 mil+) he would pocket.....this tells me it is almost all about the $$$$. If he really cared he would accept other medical possibilites and tests that have been brought forth.....all options have not been exhausted....even if they have been I still think something should be done for her.....I just don't think the tube should be removed.......this sets an awful precedent for other cases of those unable to speak for themselves......life is too precious to discard this way.
That along with his scruples of having children even though she is still alive.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
