Terri Schaivo and People Deciding On When It's Time To Die
I'm fairly conficted on this, but given the facts of the case I think I'm on the side of allowing her to die.
I can sympathize with her parents, holding onto hope that Terri might recover, in spite of the fact that no one has ever recovered from a persistent vegetative state. Had Terri been in this state for a few months, or even less than 3-5 years, I'd be more firmly on the side of the parents.
However, it's been 15 years.
It's doubtful that Terri is doing a whole lot of suffering...she's in a persistent vegetative state.
What is a Persistent Vegetative State: "A condition in which the patient is unable to speak or follow simple commands and does not respond in any psychologically meaningful way. The transition from coma to a vegetative condition reflects changes from a period of no response to the internal or external environment (other than reflexively) to a state of wakefulness but with no indication of awareness."
So...Terri doesn't respond to anything in a meaningful way. Does this mean she's physically unable? I don't think so...from what I've seen, it looks like she's able to move...I don't think she's paralyzed. It sounds like she's mentally gone - a vegetable.
If Terri is in there and lucid - and this is what we must assume - how long do we wait for her to give a sign? How long do we subject her to the solitary confinement of her mind? "Normal" people go insane after a few months of solitary confinement.
She didn't leave any sort of instruction, so all we have are other people to make the decision. Her parents want to keep Terri's body alive, her husband doesn't.
There are allegations of wrong doing against the husband, but there's not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges. Given the publicity level of the case, the length of time, and the dogged persistence of most investigators and district attorneys, my guess is that they all tried to somehow connect Terri's husband to her condition. Their inability to do so speaks volumes.
So...who's connection are we going to value? That of her parents, or that of her husband?
Her husband wants the feeding tube removed, allowing Terri to die, to put an end to her imprisonment. For a spouse to see their husband or wife die is terrible. To see them suffer is just as terrible. People will say he's doing it for money, and/or to cover up a crime.
Her parents want the feeding tube in place, hoping that she'll eventually give a sign that Terri is in there. Terri is their daughter. To those with children, probably the most terrible thing that can happen ever happen is to see your child's funeral. To see them suffer is just as terrible. People will say Terri's parents are wracked with pangs of guilt over allowing their child to die, being selfish in keeping her alive to avoid that guilt.
At what point does is the suffering so great, that the loved ones would rather attend the funeral than go about their lives knowing the suffering that their child or spouse is going through? At what point will they simply want closure? How long should one hold out hope against all odds?
Both sides need to ask: Would you want to live or die if you were in a similar situation? Imagine being trapped in your own body...no...in your mind...with no ability to interact with the outside world. You can't blink, move a finger, eye, or anything else on your own volition. Maybe you can see and hear, maybe you can feel pain and hunger...maybe not.
Do you want to live this way? Do you want your child or spouse to live this way? Do you feel its up to a person other than yourself to decide?
I can sympathize with her parents, holding onto hope that Terri might recover, in spite of the fact that no one has ever recovered from a persistent vegetative state. Had Terri been in this state for a few months, or even less than 3-5 years, I'd be more firmly on the side of the parents.
However, it's been 15 years.
It's doubtful that Terri is doing a whole lot of suffering...she's in a persistent vegetative state.
What is a Persistent Vegetative State: "A condition in which the patient is unable to speak or follow simple commands and does not respond in any psychologically meaningful way. The transition from coma to a vegetative condition reflects changes from a period of no response to the internal or external environment (other than reflexively) to a state of wakefulness but with no indication of awareness."
So...Terri doesn't respond to anything in a meaningful way. Does this mean she's physically unable? I don't think so...from what I've seen, it looks like she's able to move...I don't think she's paralyzed. It sounds like she's mentally gone - a vegetable.
If Terri is in there and lucid - and this is what we must assume - how long do we wait for her to give a sign? How long do we subject her to the solitary confinement of her mind? "Normal" people go insane after a few months of solitary confinement.
She didn't leave any sort of instruction, so all we have are other people to make the decision. Her parents want to keep Terri's body alive, her husband doesn't.
There are allegations of wrong doing against the husband, but there's not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges. Given the publicity level of the case, the length of time, and the dogged persistence of most investigators and district attorneys, my guess is that they all tried to somehow connect Terri's husband to her condition. Their inability to do so speaks volumes.
So...who's connection are we going to value? That of her parents, or that of her husband?
Her husband wants the feeding tube removed, allowing Terri to die, to put an end to her imprisonment. For a spouse to see their husband or wife die is terrible. To see them suffer is just as terrible. People will say he's doing it for money, and/or to cover up a crime.
Her parents want the feeding tube in place, hoping that she'll eventually give a sign that Terri is in there. Terri is their daughter. To those with children, probably the most terrible thing that can happen ever happen is to see your child's funeral. To see them suffer is just as terrible. People will say Terri's parents are wracked with pangs of guilt over allowing their child to die, being selfish in keeping her alive to avoid that guilt.
At what point does is the suffering so great, that the loved ones would rather attend the funeral than go about their lives knowing the suffering that their child or spouse is going through? At what point will they simply want closure? How long should one hold out hope against all odds?
Both sides need to ask: Would you want to live or die if you were in a similar situation? Imagine being trapped in your own body...no...in your mind...with no ability to interact with the outside world. You can't blink, move a finger, eye, or anything else on your own volition. Maybe you can see and hear, maybe you can feel pain and hunger...maybe not.
Do you want to live this way? Do you want your child or spouse to live this way? Do you feel its up to a person other than yourself to decide?
posted by cookies at 7:26 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home