Judge Greer may have made 'fatal' mistake...
A criminal convicted of capital murder is granted clemency or a stay of execution. Why can't Terri be granted the same as someone sentenced to death? I know many have thought of this, also, but I have not found ANY answers.
Terri is INNOCENT, and does not deserve a death sentence. And now, we read that it may be due to an error on the part of Judge Greer.......
I have previously written about Karen Anne Quinlan on Mon Dec 20, 2004. Karen collapsed on April 17, 1975, and was on a respirator (which is TRULY being kept breathing by a machine... ) and her parents asked the courts to have that machine removed. At NO time did they ask for her to be starved or dehydrated. The respirator was weaned off, and Karen continued to breathe on her own.
For the next nine years, Karen Anne lived without any machines. Karen died a natural death on June 11, 1985. Karen's case is often pointed to by proponents of Terri's death as precedent.
However, at NO TIME did Karen's parents EVER try to remove food and water from Karen, nor did they EVER think that this was appropriate. Karen was fed until Karen could not tolerate the food/water any longer when she was truly dying. (I personally do not know if they decided not to treat the pneumonia she died from, and am not sure I would be able to find this information. As to my thoughts/feelings about that aspect, it would completely depend on what her health and condition was at the time of the pneumonia, etc)
One of Terri's friends had testified in court about a conversation that she and Terri had had about Karen Anne Quinlan. Her testimony was dismissed by Greer because he thought Karen had died in 1976 when the courts allowed the respirtator to be discontinued.....
That error of his, in any criminal court would be enough for a new trial... what happens in civil court? In this case, because it involves a decision for someone's death... it should matter HERE, also.
See the entire article about this news............ and pray.....
"Right is still right if nobody is right,
and wrong is still wrong if everybody is wrong,"
Archbishop Fulton J Sheen
author of The Life of Christ
LIFE IS PRECIOUS
FROM CONCEPTION
TO NATURAL DEATH.
CHERISH IT!
PROTECT IT.
posted by WI Catholic @ 3/03/2005 09:47:00 PM
3 Comments:
So what if she had indeed said she did not want to live like that to her husband in 1989? People do change their views. My views were not the same in 1976 as they were in 1989. Should she be allowed the choice how to end her life? Unfortunately, if I can be so presumptous as to identify your position, you would say no. Medical technology is the only thing keeping her alive. One hundred years ago we would not be having this conversation. So let me ask you this. If in the next few years we develop more medical technology that would keep her alive for the next say 200 years, then, I believe your viewpoint would be we must do it. Sorry, I don't see it. Let me decide, if I can, when to be with my maker.
Terri was not dying. Are you saying that any child born brain damaged should be starved to death? Are you saying that anyone with disabilities has to die just because they are not living YOUR idea of a perfect life?
Terri was not dying. To starve her to death is something that would put you in jail if you did this to any animal. Terri is not an animal. I am a nurse who has taken care of cognitively disabled children and adults for more than half of my life. Life is precious from conception to natural death.... NOT starvation.
>>How do you define natural death? Is it sustaining life through machines and feeding tubes?
Natural death does not involve starving someone until they die, nor denying fluids to them until they dehydrate to death. When someone is DYING, we continue to offer nourishment in any way that they can take it. Terri swallowed her own saliva... Terri was denied further swallowing tests, and the newer treatments available to help retrain her to swallow pureed foods and thickened liquids.
>>If this was 1905, she would be considered dying because the medical field would be unable to keep her alive.
This wasn't 1905. And again, at NO time in 1905 would she have been denied nourishment. None. NADA.
>>What happened was a natural death.
What happened was death by starvation/dehydration, not a natural death.
>>But the main thing I was addressing was, if Terri had indeed told HER HUSBAND that she did not want to live in that manner, did she have the right to make that decision.
We will never know that Terri had said this to anyone. There is no point in even surmising about her 'possible desires'.
>>Would all of this have been avoided in your mind if she had indeed written down her wishes?
An advanced directive that does not go against Catholic teachings is an easy directive to follow. It maintains the dignity of the person as it recognizes that death is a natural process. At NO time is anyone forced to stay on machines to maintain life (respirator/ventilator, dialysis, etc. ) However, NOURISHMENT is not denied to any person in the way it was with Terri.
MANY people have had tubes removed and been fed as they could tolerate by mouth. Many have had that tube weaned as they learned to tolerate more nourishment via mouth. Many only need the tube for supplement, in order to get enough calories.
But to remove a feeding tube and give NOTHING is killing that person, NOT 'letting them die'. Huge difference.
There is NOTHING artificial about formula... or Ensure, Jevity, etc which is what those on tube feedings receive. There is nothing 'keeping her alive' other than what keeps YOU alive, utopian. Food and water, air and shelter. Terri was alive. She was denied two of the four essentials in order to make sure she died. Terri did not die naturally. Terri was killed.
As a nurse, I have cared for many who have died over the years. I would never hasten a death by injection or starvation. I would not have opted to remove Christopher Reeves' respirator, either. I would have stood by his wife in that decision, not his mother's.
But under NO circumstances would I participate in dehydrating/starving anyone to death. Ever. When a person is dying, it naturally begins to not be able to assimilate food and fluids. The person themselves is no longer able to tolerate much at all, but we offer cool liquids, clear liquids, food, etc until the person has become non-responsive. Even then, moist swabs are used to cleanse their mouth, keep them comfortable. That is NOT the death Terri experienced.
Huge difference.
Post a Comment
<< Home