LOL: Terris Father turned off life-support for his own mother
 

Holy shit these people are scum

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...077219,00.html

Bottom paragraph:

Sig spot

Jon

Of course, he needed her bedroom empty for his pool table

ironic :disgust

Ouch so much drama about her

don't cha think?

The mother was at then end of her life and was on life support, Terri is young and is not on life support. BIG DIFFERENCE!!! :winkwink:

Terri is not on life support ?
Are you serious ?

The retards on the left and on the right do not understand the principles of this case and do not know the facts and could not even comprehend them :2 cents:
If Terri Schiavo had a written living will or if there were witnesses from both sides, then there would not be no media frenzy.
Here, we have a case where a "doubful" husband is given 110% of the benefits of the doubt.

She can breath on her own.

anybody who thinks this poor lady should be left suffering is a fucking sick individual... let the poor bitch die in peace... shit..

feeding her thru a tube = life support
without it she would die.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL , stfu , idiot !! !!

And you are?

As everyone can tell she can live on her own, she is doing it right now. She is disabled, she can't eat on her own she has never had therapy. Without food you die and that goes for anyone.

How about Tom Delay cutting off his father's life support?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...home-headlines

The Republican Party has cornered the market on hypocrisy.

Tip: Never believe anything from Guardian Unlimited...

"There was no way [Charles] wanted to live like that. Tom knew ? we all knew ? his father wouldn't have wanted to live that way."
Again, if the Schiavo case was a case where everybody agreed then there would be no story.
In the Schiavo case, only the husband side agrees.

someone who thinks you are a pseudo intellectual

Oh she can ? Why is she dying then ?

Don't be stupuid.

Him the only difference i see is that the old lady would most likely have only suffered through a few months before she died, whereas terri could suffer YEARS before she dies..

Life support deals with the respiratory system and heart compressions. You have basic life support, meaning you give someone mouth to mouth and pump their heart to keep the blood circulating, you have advance life support where you have a machine pump the heart and push air into the lungs. Terri is not on life support. She is disabled.

so you mean to say Terri can live without machines attached to her ? ?

didn't know that :2 cents:

Dude, I am not a pseudo nothing, nor do I pretend to be anything more than a regular guy. But unlike most of the anonymous trolls on here, I try to read about events or stories before expressing myself. :2 cents:

They are feeding her thru a tube to support her life, therefore she's on life support.


Main Entry: life-support
Pronunciation: -"s&-pOrt, -port
Function: adjective
: providing support necessary to sustain life; especially : of or relating to a system providing such support <life-support equipment>

Because she can't feed herself. She is disabled. We have people who have multiple scoliosis who can't feed themselves, mentally retarded people who can't feed themselves, and we are educating them and feeding them.

I am not saying she can improve I am just saying she is not on life support. You don't have to be a smart ass we are just discussing something.

Every single case is unique.

stating things like this :


makes me think you are full of yourself,

who are you o wise one that you can comprehend it and we the illiterate eggheads just cant grasp it :321GFY

Sorry Loryn, you are wrong on most points in this post.....

If she is is being fed and kept hydrated she is on basic life support. Andvanced life support, which I assume you are refering to, is artificialy keeping a patient breathing. It dosnt have anything to do with the cardiac system in anything but an emergancy situation, and is only performed for a few mins at a time.

let me get this straight, she will die if they remove the system feeding her, but she is not on life support ?

i don't know whether to laugh of cry :helpme

Basic life support (BLS) comprises the elements: initial assessment, then airway maintenance, expired air ventilation (rescue breathing), and chest compression. Basic life support implies that no equipment is employed; where a simple airway or facemask for mouth to mouth ventilation is used, this is defined as "basic life support with airway adjunct".
The purpose of BLS is to maintain adequate ventilation and circulation until means can be obtained to reverse the underlying cause of the arrest. It is therefore a "holding operation", although on occasions, particularly when the primary pathology is respiratory failure, it may itself reverse the cause and allow full recovery. Failure of the circulation for three to four minutes (less if the victim is initially hypoxaemic) will lead to irreversible cerebral damage. Delay, even within that time, will lessen the eventual chances of a successful outcome. Emphasis must therefore be placed on rapid institution of basic life support by a rescuer, who nonetheless should follow the recommended sequence of action.

Do you understand the medical terms are different than everday life terms?

Thats like saying anyone under the age of 2 is on life support.
Are infants on life support becasue the cant feed themselves?? Idiot.

You are an illeterate retard, I think everyone here knows that from reading the pearls coming out of your little brain.
Now, go play with Buster and Bubba.

Whether or not she is on life support or not, her brain has dissolved into liquid. She is incapable of thought, emotion, pain, joy...anything. She is, for all intents and purposes, a dead person. Her heart just happens to be beating. Noone wants to live that way. Noone.

Wrong.
The thing people and the media is pissed off is that the hospital is letting her starve to death.

That part you dont get.

Thats initial life support in an emergancy situation. In an ongoing situation (like the one we are talking about) Basic Life Support is any action that is supporting life.

Also Advanced Life Support does not support cardiac output as you stated. Except during certain operations where the heart is bypassed mechanicly.

How does it feel to get up in the morning and think to yourself, "95% of the people on Earth are smarter than me"

Moron.

If she had to be assisted on breathing with the feeding tube which would be a set of therapies then yes she would be on life support. I am just saying what I read about it. She does not have a urinary catheter. she pees in the bed pan. She breaths are her own, her heart beats on her own, she is not on dialysis. You don't have to be a fucking ASSHOLE it's called a fucking debate. You can make your points I can make mine.

When our pets (dogs/cats) are in terminall pain we are allowed to put them out in with out letting them suffer through pain.

Our criminals have a choice of a painless leathel injection.

But a normal human being has to be started to death.

All good considering your part of the 5% that arent

Media are not pissed at the fact that she is being starved to death, only FoxNews is, other media are perfectly ok with that.
I am pissed at the fact that her demented husband who obviously has left her many many years ago to redo his life (which is perfectly normal given the circumstances) is still legally her guardian when he should have given the guardianship to her parents. That I truely do not understand.

Any technology that keeps you alive to compensate for your bodily inadequacies is "life support".

I think this is a proper place to say this...

http://www.warp2games.com/cant3.jpg

She doesn't know she is being starved to death. She is incapable of feeling hunger. The part of her brain that sends the signal of hunger to her stomach does not work.

Im shocked at how you are turning this into a red states vs blue states issue.

She is a human being being started to death.

Either way i think we could all probably agree that starving her to death is evil and cruel.

If we know she will die by not feeding her , we could at least make it quick and painless.

I dont claim to know all the facts or rules, but the girl doesnt look all that bad, she doesnt look like she needs "full" life support or is suffering in any ways by keeping her alive. I dont see what the husband doesnt just let the parents take care of her. ( other than if you knew in your mind your wife had told you to pull the plug you would have to )

Now i hate to move to the touchy subject of money, but the family will eventually run out of money , and that means the burden will eventually fall on US the taxpayer to support her, and i just can't see the justice in paying to keep her alive while kids right here in the u.s.a. are going to school hungry with inadequate health care.

So why not put a bullet in her head and end it. I mean we are klling her anyways.

Yet they seem to have no problem with the many people, that have alot better chance at a normal life, starving each and everyday...

If your wife told you , " please pull the plug if i ever reach a vegetative state like that "

would you turn over rights to her parents if you knew they would keep her alive , regardless of if you were divorced or not ?