Re: That's not an arguement Brassman -- Albany MSNBC Refugees Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Thursday, March 24, 06:56:13am
Author: Bear
Subject: Re: That's not an arguement Brassman
In reply to: Brassman 's message, "WE DON'T STARVE CONVICTS OR ANIMALS TO DEATH...THE NAZIS DID" on Monday, March 21, 09:55:56pm

My father suffered complications from a massive stroke and it took him six months to pass away. The brain swelling put him in a coma-like state. Our decision was to have him go under another probably fatal brain surgery or cut life-support. Considering that he barely survived the first brain operation we decided to pull the feeding tubes and stop providing water. Yes, my family made the decision to essentially starve my father to death. I can't imagine anyone who ever loved another person taking that decision lightly. I would rather have my father alive and sick then dead, but though his body was here his life, his dignity was gone. Though he had signed a DNR (Do Not Recesuitate) this was sort of a gray area. Also, my father's second life was the one to make the decision. It was her call and I supported her on it. Yes, her call. She was married ti him and that was the core of his family. Just like Terri Sciavo made a new family with her husband. Michael is her family and he has the right to make the final call.

I would rather have my father alive, but in the end such actions as removing feeding tubes are the only recourse we have when the body becomes useless and our essential identity and dignity as humans is gone. Comparing people who have to take such action Nazis only polarizes the discussion and solves nothing.

In the end, it was the right thing to do.

We had to consider my father's values and in the end my other family members agreed with my father's second wife and myself.

>Before you defend this MONSTER (PIECE OF SUB-HUMAN
>DEBRIS)
>please read SOME facts...
>
>Terri never had a living will or official DNR document.
>
>Emergency room doctors have testified to seeing
>bruises on Terris body. Micheal Schiavo had previous
>run-ins with law enforcement for spousal abuse.
>
>Michael Schiavo has authority to make all decisions
>for Terri Schindler Schiavo because he is her
>court-appointed guardian, not because he is her
>husband.
>
>Michael not only seeks to remove Terri�s feeding tube.
> He also continues to deny consent for Terri to take
>food by mouth, or even to have a swallowing test.
>
>Dr. Ronald Cranford, who testified on behalf of
>Michael in the case to remove Terri�s food and fluids,
>said that patients like Terri can take food by mouth.
>
>Cranford has said that he would consider spoon-feeding
>to be "medical treatment."
>
>Cranford has said that spoon-feeding is denied because
>it "would be totally inconsistent" with what was
>wanted (e.g. the patient�s death).
>
>For more than three years, Michael has refused to
>allow Terri to be taken outdoors to feel fresh air,
>sunshine or a cool breeze.
>
>Michael continues to suppress media access to
>videotapes that clearly show Terri responding to
>others.
>
>In 1992, Michael filed and won a malpractice case in
>which a significant award was made for Terri�s
>rehabilitation and therapy. The award was based, in
>part, on expert testimony that she would live a normal
>life span.
>During the time he was seeking the malpractice award,
>Michael never indicated that Terri would want to die
>if she were severely disabled.
>
>Michael has refused to permit any of the money from
>the malpractice award to be used for Terri�s
>rehabilitation or therapy. Instead, most of the money
>was used for lawyers Michael hired to help end Terri's
>life.
>
>Not long after Terri's injury, Michael melted down her
>wedding and engagement rings to make a ring for
>himself.
>Michael has moved on with his life. He is in a long
>term intimate relationship with another woman with
>whom he has two children.
>
>Terri�s family -- her parents, her brother and her
>sister � has begged Michael to let them care for
>Terri. He has refused.
>
>Terri�s family -- her parents, her brother and her
>sister � has begged Michael to let Terri have a
>swallowing test. He has refused.
>
>Terri�s family -- her parents, her brother and her
>sister � has begged Michael to give Terri the
>opportunity to take food by mouth. He has refused.
>
>...why do CONVICTS GET THE BENIFIT OF A SECOND, THIRD,
>FOURTH ETC...HEARING/OPINION AND EVEN THEN WE DON'T
>STARVE THEM (or animals)TO DEATH???!!!???
>
>Look at her video on her website and see if YOU could
>condemn her to a HORRIBLY PAINFUL DEATH. She is brain
>DAMAGED not brain DEAD.
>
>Speaking as a PERSON born with difiguring birth
>defects...all people have worth and value even if we
>don't understand what that may be....I'm sure her
>parents do.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]