Having been away from home and very busy with work, I've not had the chance to say as much as I would've liked about Terri's final days.
For me, the division that stands between those who wanted Terri dead and those who did not was most clearly marked by an act that summarized the divide.
For days we heard the death culture preach that Terri's final days would be pain free, that she would not suffer from the withdrawing of food and water.
Anyone who has fasted, whether it be in response to a doctor's orders prior to surgery or as an act of spiritual discipline, is aware that discomfort is common, most especially when water is withheld. Usually this sort of fasting rarely goes on for much longer than a 24 hour period.
Terri died of starvation and deyhdration after nearly 14 days.
Those who desired to see Terri live were rooted in the mindset that she was being killed, that she would suffer, and that the doubts as to her condition were reason enough to err on the side of life.
Those who desired to see Terri die were adament that this was what she desired, that her condition was irreversible, and that removing her feeding tube and denying her food and water would be painless.
On Easter Sunday, Terri was administered morphine.
I'm not aware at this writing as to who ordered that treatment. But for me, it speaks volumes.
Someone in charge of her care (Michael?) was thinking that the death culture experts who expressed confidence in the painlessness of Terri's death might be wrong. Doubt as to whether or not this was true led to the decision. The morphine was, in my view, an attempt to err on the side of compassion.
Unfortunately, that reasoning was short-lived, and the mindset put forth by those who think like George Felos prevailed. The 'life-giving' thing to do, in their minds, was to kill Terri Schiavo. And make no mistake about it, Terri Schiavo was killed by those who think themselves compassionate and 'life-giving'.
Severely retarded people, Alzheimer patients, and the elderly who are unable to feed themselves are the next victims.
Thank God for morphine.












Rick - If you are interested, or trust the source, here is what HFA says about the withholding nutrition and hydration: Even those with total bowel obstruction who had been unable to retain any oral fluids and who voluntarily declined intravenous fluids do not complain of thirst or hunger. There is a side effect of starvation and dehydration in which one's metabolism changes and the resulting elevated level of ketones produces a mild sense of euphoria, so that hunger and thirst are not the problem we would imagine. This same phenomenon has been well documented in the self-imposed starvation of Irish prisoners in Northern Ireland who went on strict fasts to cause them to die, if possible, on certain Irish holidays. Once starvation begins, the ensuing metabolic shift eliminates the sense of hunger. The body feeds at first on fat reserves, and later on protein.
It is this sort of information that underlies the bio-ethical support for withholding nutrition in those persons with advanced illness whose greatly impaired quality of life would not be improved, but only prolonged, by supplemental (intravenous or cut-down) methods of delivering nutrition and hydration. In no way is the withholding of food and fluids comparable to the methods or rationalizations employed by Dr. Kevorkian.
Note: Please realize that since we do not know the details of every case we are only speaking in generalities.
Source: http://www.hospicefoundation.org/endOfLifeInfo/nutrition_hydration.asp
Posted by: anj | Saturday, April 02, 2005 at 02:49 PM
Anj,
Terri was not, as the article references, "in the final phase of illness".
Terri was not a "dying person".
Terri did not suffer from "an advanced illness".
Terri was killed, outright and with malice by proponents of the death culture and by a 'husband' ready to live a life he'd started with a new 'wife' and kids absent the distraction of his old 'wife'.
To in any way portray what happened here in the positive is to be a partner in Terri's murder.
Feel free to do so.
I will not.
Posted by: Rick | Saturday, April 02, 2005 at 06:33 PM
In case anyone is reading this near the anniversary of Terri's death, please be aware that the above comment by anj is ridiculous. The Northern Ireland political hunger strikers reported horrific effects of starvation; in fact the horror of starvation was their way of making a point: "His eyes were constantly in pain; he could barely see. His skin ached. He had to be rubbed down with cream every few hours and had to sleep on a waterbed to get any relief from the agony of his decomposing skin."
(Source: http://www.inac.org/irishhistory/hungerstrikes/chapters/23)
Since these reports may be biased due to politics, please also look up Kate Adamson and her hellish experience with going without food and water due to a medical problem.
Not eating because you're naturally dying is painless, but if you aren't already dying, it's horrific. To better understand the difference between painlessly avoiding food because you are naturally dying and being painfully forced to starve to death, read this article which cites several doctors:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/370oqiwy.asp?pg=2
Posted by: Christy | Saturday, March 18, 2006 at 08:11 PM
In case anyone is reading this near the anniversary of Terri's death, please be aware that the above comment by anj is ridiculous. The Northern Ireland political hunger strikers reported horrific effects of starvation; in fact the horror of starvation was their way of making a point: "His eyes were constantly in pain; he could barely see. His skin ached. He had to be rubbed down with cream every few hours and had to sleep on a waterbed to get any relief from the agony of his decomposing skin."
(Source: http://www.inac.org/irishhistory/hungerstrikes/chapters/23)
Since these reports may be biased due to politics, please also look up Kate Adamson and her hellish experience with going without food and water due to a medical problem.
Not eating because you're naturally dying is painless, but if you aren't already dying, it's horrific. To better understand the difference between painlessly avoiding food because you are naturally dying and being painfully forced to starve to death, read this article which cites several doctors:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/370oqiwy.asp?pg=2
Posted by: Christy | Saturday, March 18, 2006 at 08:12 PM
If starvation is supposed to bring about mild euphoria, why is everyone so preoccupied with world hunger?
Posted by: Leslie | Sunday, March 19, 2006 at 12:13 AM