Vegetative patient Scott Routley says 'I'm not in pain'

[Nova]

Always felt something was very wrong with the decision made in this case.

Okay, I'll say it: has anyone noticed that except for those with strong religious agendas, one rarely hears a MAN say he has a problem with the resolution of the Schiavo case?

The case seems to tap into some very strong feelings (fears?) that women have, perhaps because by the time the feeding tube was removed, Mr. Schiavo was in another relationship and basically had a new "wife in waiting".

Personally, I can't think of anyone I would want to make such a decision BUT my husband. Not my parents, certainly, and not a judge. My husband knows me best. And if he has a new partner waiting in the wings, more power to him! Why would I want my husband to be alone?

 

[Nova]

It seems if this fella can understand and respond, then HE should be the person to be asked whether HE wants to continue living or not. It should be HIS choice, not the opinion of others who, after all, are really just projecting their OWN preferences onto a helpless and voiceless victim.

Also, among the seriously ill, "dignity" is often perceived differently, especially if their will to live is strong regardless of what they "look like" to onlookers. Sometimes the terribly ill simply make others uncomfortable, embarrassed, or squeamish, leading some to want to end their OWN discomfort by pulling the plug on the ill person.

This man clearly communicated he was not in pain. I think it is just as likely that he lives in mortal fear that "others" will pull the plug on him as it is that he "wants to die because his life isnt worth living" anymore. I would NEVER make that assumption on his behalf.

You are assuming that the MRI results mean what the testers hope they mean. Unless the patient wakes up and confirms that he knew what he was being asked, there's still a lot of testing to do before we take the coma victim "at his word".

 

[LinasK]

Okay, I'll say it: has anyone noticed that except for those with strong religious agendas, one rarely hears a MAN say he has a problem with the resolution of the Schiavo case?

The case seems to tap into some very strong feelings (fears?) that women have, perhaps because by the time the feeding tube was removed, Mr. Schiavo was in another relationship and basically had a new "wife in waiting".

Personally, I can't think of anyone I would want to make such a decision BUT my husband. Not my parents, certainly, and not a judge. My husband knows me best. And if he has a new partner waiting in the wings, more power to him! Why would I want my husband to be alone?

Because he may have injected her with insulin to put her into a vegetative state, he didn't allow any cognitive therapy to be attempted on her, the tests were at least 6 months out of date, and he may have murdered her to get onto his new relationship, and... he may have bought off the judge. I followed this case. I recall there being some history of him abusing her...

 

[Gypsy Road]

Okay, I'll say it: has anyone noticed that except for those with strong religious agendas, one rarely hears a MAN say he has a problem with the resolution of the Schiavo case?

The case seems to tap into some very strong feelings (fears?) that women have, perhaps because by the time the feeding tube was removed, Mr. Schiavo was in another relationship and basically had a new "wife in waiting".

Personally, I can't think of anyone I would want to make such a decision BUT my husband. Not my parents, certainly, and not a judge. My husband knows me best. And if he has a new partner waiting in the wings, more power to him! Why would I want my husband to be alone?

Hubby and I JUST had this conversation. I told him what my thoughts are and that I would want HIM to live on! I couldn't image him having to take care of me that way - although he would do it gladly and out of love, I would not want him to live out the rest of his life having to change my diapers and feed me, or deplete our life savings just to keep me on a machine. I know it would be a very hard choice for him as it would for me if I had to make that decision for him. I honestly don't know if I could pull the tube from my husband - I love him so much, but if that's what his wishes were - well, I would have to consider - it would be heart wrenching and an ever hard choice to have to face. I understand and respect other people's religious beliefs, but for me - I think about times before we had machines to keep us alive...people would just die after a severe brain injury. They didn't have machines to keep us alive, so God just took us (or whatever you believe). Now we have these man made machines that keep us alive - although we aren't really living. And now instead of God making the decision - we make it. I realize if you believe, that he actually makes the end decision, but now you are part of the equation. Hope that makes sense. I'm not good at putting things into words at times.

 

[MNlady]

You make perfect sense Gypsy Rose. Make sure you and your husband make out Living Wills, please. Don't leave it in the hands of others to decide for you. Yes, it's heart wrenching but the alternative is IMO utterly horrifying.

People who are talking about with holding nutrition being inhumane ~ usually they are on IV feeding anyway so aren't "eating" and also, when the body shuts down there is no hunger as we know it.

I have a Living Will filed at our local hospital and with my primary care doc. Which reminds me that I need to make sure my sons know where my copy is just in case those others are filed deeply and aren't readily accessible. :waitasec:

 

[Sonya610]

You make perfect sense Gypsy Rose. Make sure you and your husband make out Living Wills, please. Don't leave it in the hands of others to decide for you.

Yes. Another reason to have it in WRITING is because even if your husband or other members of your family know your wishes and try to abide by them all it takes is ONE family member to get hysterical, claim there is hope, be unable to accept death and typically the other members will give in to pacify the hysterical member.

 

[TrackerSam]

I didn't know all the details about the Schiavo case, but I just read at Wiki (I know...not reliable) that Judge George Greer issued an order granting the petition for authorization to discontinue artificial life support for Terri, and in his order - the court found that Terri Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state and that she had made reliable oral declarations that she would have wanted the feeding tube removed.

My question is - how can that be? How and when did she make those declarations if she was in a vegetative state? Anyone want to chime in? I don't mean to derail the thread, but when I read that it didn't make sense.

As I remember it, it was a claim made by her husband who had a girl friend he wanted to marry.

 

[Confusion]

I don't understand your logic. Nobody is saying anyone who wants food should be denied it. Being forced to eat is no different from being forced to breathe.

As I said, I would consider it to be assisted suicide (that means it's my opinion, not that it would be legally). If a depressed person refused to eat while in a psych ward, I'm sure they would be forced to have some nourishment - whether by eating or by IV.

As it is now, doctors can legally remove artificial life support, If most people are not on a respirator, they can live for a long time; if a respirator being removed results in death, it is keeping the person alive artificially. If anybody goes without any form of nourishment indefinitely, it will kill them, so feeding someone is keeping them alive, but not artificially.

As I said, unless and until assisted suicide is made legal, I don't approve of removing a feeding tube. If a person can say they want to stop eating/being fed if they're in a vegetative state, why not when in a coma, and why not when they're depressed and suicidal but physically healthy?

 

[SurfieTX]

I'm glad he isn't in pain, but I think being aware of everything around you but not able to communicate or move sounds like an absolute nightmare.

Have you ever seen the movie Johnny Got His Gun? It's about this very thing.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It seems if this fella can understand and respond, then HE should be the person to be asked whether HE wants to continue living or not. It should be HIS choice, not the opinion of others who, after all, are really just projecting their OWN preferences onto a helpless and voiceless victim.

Also, among the seriously ill, "dignity" is often perceived differently, especially if their will to live is strong regardless of what they "look like" to onlookers. Sometimes the terribly ill simply make others uncomfortable, embarrassed, or squeamish, leading some to want to end their OWN discomfort by pulling the plug on the ill person.

This man clearly communicated he was not in pain. I think it is just as likely that he lives in mortal fear that "others" will pull the plug on him as it is that he "wants to die because his life isnt worth living" anymore. I would NEVER make that assumption on his behalf.

I would urge everyone that wouldn't want to live that way to get a living will with a DNR. I have one. It truly isn't fair to leave the decision for loved ones to make.

I've made my decision abundantly clear and had it put in writing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm glad he isn't in pain, but I think being aware of everything around you but not able to communicate or move sounds like an absolute nightmare.

If I believed in God, heaven and hell.... What you describe would be hell.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wfgodot]

You are assuming that the MRI results mean what the testers hope they mean. Unless the patient wakes up and confirms that he knew what he was being asked, there's still a lot of testing to do before we take the coma victim "at his word".

Agreed. These sorts of amazing results seem to issue forth when its time to call for more funding.

Let's not re-write those medical textbooks just yet.

 

[OneLove]

IIRC (and I may not), the judge's conclusions were based on what Mr. Schiavo said his wife had told him before she became incapacitated. The judge was basically saying he believed Mr. Schiavo.

This is true. There not only were never ANY witnesses to this 'conversation' Mr. Schiavo claimed, but their marital relationship had been a disaster, very contentious with reports of domestic violence, infidelity, AND Mr. Schiavo already had another significant woman in his life. What a nightmare for Terri's parents. And that Mr. Schiavo would not even allow them to hold their daughter's hand and speak words of love and comfort to her as she died alone was nothing short of horrendous. My guess is that Lady Kharma will have a tight grip on Mr. Schiavo for many lifetimes to come.

 

[momtective]

Respectfully snipped

A Canadian man who was believed to have been in a vegetative state for more than a decade, has been able to tell scientists that he is not in any pain.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20268044

Well if he can tell them he's not in pain, I wonder if he can tell them to leave him the HE double L alone and let him go to his eternity. I bet they haven't bothered to ask him "do you want to continue to live like this?" :doh:

 

[Linda7NJ]

This is true. There not only were never ANY witnesses to this 'conversation' Mr. Schiavo claimed, but their marital relationship had been a disaster, very contentious with reports of domestic violence, infidelity, AND Mr. Schiavo already had another significant woman in his life. What a nightmare for Terri's parents. And that Mr. Schiavo would not even allow them to hold their daughter's hand and speak words of love and comfort to her as she died alone was nothing short of horrendous. My guess is that Lady Kharma will have a tight grip on Mr. Schiavo for many lifetimes to come.

Not to rehash the entire Schiavo fiasco ...I think it would have been nice if her parents were given custody/guardianship of her. I felt really bad for them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nova]

Because he may have injected her with insulin to put her into a vegetative state, he didn't allow any cognitive therapy to be attempted on her, the tests were at least 6 months out of date, and he may have murdered her to get onto his new relationship, and... he may have bought off the judge. I followed this case. I recall there being some history of him abusing her...

Linas, I don't think any of us should make charges like "he may have bought off the judge" without some very specific evidence.

You say the tests were out-of-date. Was there some evidence to suggest her situation had radically changed during those six months? Not that I can recall.

"He may..." "He may..." "He may..."

Unless you can prove any of that, I don't see how the judge could allow the speculation to influence his decision.

 

[Nova]

Hubby and I JUST had this conversation. I told him what my thoughts are and that I would want HIM to live on! I couldn't image him having to take care of me that way - although he would do it gladly and out of love, I would not want him to live out the rest of his life having to change my diapers and feed me, or deplete our life savings just to keep me on a machine. I know it would be a very hard choice for him as it would for me if I had to make that decision for him. I honestly don't know if I could pull the tube from my husband - I love him so much, but if that's what his wishes were - well, I would have to consider - it would be heart wrenching and an ever hard choice to have to face. I understand and respect other people's religious beliefs, but for me - I think about times before we had machines to keep us alive...people would just die after a severe brain injury. They didn't have machines to keep us alive, so God just took us (or whatever you believe). Now we have these man made machines that keep us alive - although we aren't really living. And now instead of God making the decision - we make it. I realize if you believe, that he actually makes the end decision, but now you are part of the equation. Hope that makes sense. I'm not good at putting things into words at times.

Well said, Gypsy. I do not take human life casually; I am staunchly opposed to the death penalty, for example. But our physical bodies are not "us", in my view, and keeping the shell alive at all costs becomes inhumane at some point. I hope my husband never has to make such a decision because I know it would be agonizing for him.

And THAT's why I have a Living Will that takes the matter out of his hands, at some point.

 

[Nova]

Yes. Another reason to have it in WRITING is because even if your husband or other members of your family know your wishes and try to abide by them all it takes is ONE family member to get hysterical, claim there is hope, be unable to accept death and typically the other members will give in to pacify the hysterical member.

Yes, indeed. I can't remember all the details, but after I had some arterial blockages cleared (I'm fine now, thanks), I asked why I needed a Living Will. "After all," I said, "my gay partner is finally my legal husband; isn't that what we've been fighting for, the right to have him make decisions when I can't?"

She proceeded to explain in some detail all the situations where a hospital might be forced by law to ignore my husband's account of my wishes.

Bottom line: a living will not only relieves the pressure on the spouse, it may be essential to keep a court or hospital from overriding what your spouse says you want.

 

[Nova]

As I remember it, it was a claim made by her husband who had a girl friend he wanted to marry.

Although technically accurate, I don't think that's a fair statement, Sam. Mr. Schiavo stood by his comatose wife for years. It's not as if he casually tossed her aside for a younger model as soon as she went into the coma.

 

[Nova]

As I said, I would consider it to be assisted suicide (that means it's my opinion, not that it would be legally). If a depressed person refused to eat while in a psych ward, I'm sure they would be forced to have some nourishment - whether by eating or by IV.

As it is now, doctors can legally remove artificial life support, If most people are not on a respirator, they can live for a long time; if a respirator being removed results in death, it is keeping the person alive artificially. If anybody goes without any form of nourishment indefinitely, it will kill them, so feeding someone is keeping them alive, but not artificially.

As I said, unless and until assisted suicide is made legal, I don't approve of removing a feeding tube. If a person can say they want to stop eating/being fed if they're in a vegetative state, why not when in a coma, and why not when they're depressed and suicidal but physically healthy?

Confusion, we are both expressing our moral opinions. The law actually varies from state to state.

But I still don't see the moral difference between forcing someone to breathe and forcing her to eat.

By all means, serve her three meals a day. But if she can't feed herself, medical science deems her situation irreversible, and she doesn't show other signs of life (controlled movement, speech, response to external stimuli, etc.), then I don't understand the moral distinction you are making. (Nobody is suggesting a quadriplegic should be starved to death because he can't hold a fork. But such a person shows various other signs of life.)

To me, at least, mental illnesses are not irrelevant, but they are so different I can't really draw comparisons to a comatose patient.