21-03-2005 22:11									#121
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH AFAIK the ruling was based upon the removal of "treatment" (based upon court acceptance of evidence that she would not have wanted to live under these conditions). Providing food and water is not "treatment" however. The removal of food and water to an individual under these conditions is euthanasia and no different than suffocating her with a pillow.

This woman can't feed herself nor can she drink without assistance- that assistance is treatment. A feeding tube is no different that providing oxygen- both are cases were a basic function has to be substituted medically.

	21-03-2005 22:22									#122
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

This is the law, for all to read. I shall bold those sections I find most disturbing:

quote: SECTION 1. RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida shall have jurisdiction to hear, determine, and render judgment on a suit or claim by or on behalf of Theresa Marie Schiavo for the alleged violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution or laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. SEC. 2. PROCEDURE. Any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo shall have standing to bring a suit under this Act. The suit may be brought against any other person who was a party to State court proceedings relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo, or who may act pursuant to a State court order authorizing or directing the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. In such a suit, the District Court shall determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act, notwithstanding any prior State court determination and regardless of whether such a claim has previously been raised, considered, or decided in State court proceedings. The District Court shall entertain and determine the suit without any delay or abstention in favor of State court proceedings, and regardless of whether remedies available in the State courts have been exhausted. SEC. 3. RELIEF. After a determination of the merits of a suit brought under this Act, the District Court shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights of Theresa Marie Schiavo under the Constitution and laws of the United States relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. SEC. 4. TIME FOR FILING. Notwithstanding any other time limitation, any suit or claim under this Act shall be timely if filed within 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act. SEC. 5. NO CHANGE OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States. SEC. 6. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related-- (1) to assisting suicide, or (2) a State law regarding assisting suicide. SEC. 7. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION. Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills. SEC. 8. NO AFFECT ON THE PATIENT SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1990. Nothing in this Act shall affect the rights of any person under the Patient Self- Determination Act of 1990. SEC. 9. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS. It is the Sense of Congress that the 109th Congress should consider policies regarding the status and legal rights of incapacitated individuals who are incapable of making decisions concerning the provision, withholding, or withdrawal of foods, fluid, or medical care

So in essence Congress is telling the Federal courts to ignore what went on in State's Court and disregard their rulings and findings. Its absurd.

	21-03-2005 22:25									#123
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by GePap This woman can't feed herself nor can she drink without assistance- that assistance is treatment. A feeding tube is no different that providing oxygen- both are cases were a basic function has to be substituted medically.

So your position is that anyone who cant feed themself is being "treated" and that such "treatment" (sustenence) may be removed under certain court-defined circumstances. Are you telling me that you dont see the potential problems with that?

	21-03-2005 22:26									#124
	Tired of ads?

quote: That would be a violation of the Full Faith and Credit clause, would it not?

No, it'd be a violation of the principle of res judicata (once a case is done, it's done... no retrying on the same facts). Full Faith and Credit is between states.

	21-03-2005 22:28									#125
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Also in the law:

quote: Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills.

It's incredibly unconstitutional (violates the seperation of powers). How can they get away with such claptrap is beyond me.

	21-03-2005 22:31									#126
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Its pretty clear that it's a piece of rubbish and will be tossed as soon as it's challenged.

	21-03-2005 22:31									#127
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH So your position is that anyone who cant feed themself is being "treated" and that such "treatment" (sustenence) may be removed under certain court-defined circumstances. Are you telling me that you dont see the potential problems with that?

No, not really. Most people who can;t feed themselves can communicate their wishes, and thus still make decisions. BUt people in vegitative and commatose states are different, and then it becomes an issue of the expressed prior whishes of the patient or the rights of the legal guardian.

This has been in the courts for 7 plus years- the feeding tube was first ordered removed in 2000. This has been litigated extensively, and no, no "precedent" has been set at all, except by Congress.

	21-03-2005 22:38									#128
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Thanks Imran, I knew the concept - res judicata - but I could not remember the technical term. Please keep posting the technical info on this, it helps the thread stay focused.

	21-03-2005 22:58									#129
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Also in the law: quote: Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills. It's incredibly unconstitutional (violates the seperation of powers). How can they get away with such claptrap is beyond me.

Simple. The Yankees won the damn war. Us Southerners kept telling ya'll, but ya wouldn't listen.

	21-03-2005 23:37									#130
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Plato - that's what I find scary about the neocons and their allies, people like DeLay, Gingrich, and Rove. They make it all about winning.

Democracy is based not only on institutions, but on processes. In the push for primacy, and the unfettered power to reshape the country in a way they know is good for it, they are willing to dismantle and attack those processes that protected them when they are out of power.

That puts democracy at risk. Remember, Hitler used a loophole in the Weimer constitution to seize power. I AM NOT comparing the Republicans to the Nazis. What I am saying is that if you start tearing downt the processes, in enough time you have dismantled the foundation of democracy, and you find yourself in the first crisis suddenly loosing the freedoms we hold so dear.

Look at the various cases coming out of 9/11 and The Patriot Act. Before you say - but see, the checks and balanced worked - look at the neocon strategy to put idealogues, not justices, into the courts. If you had all nine justices killed in a terror attack, and Bush got to unilaterally nominate all nine under the current system - how far would you trust the courts to uphold your freedom?

	21-03-2005 23:50									#131
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Tuberski Wedding vows say "til death do us part", not, " til your wife is in a vegetative state."

When you have PVS you are pretty much dead in every way that matters.

	21-03-2005 23:55									#132
	Got spare money?

Neocons don't have a domestic strategy (I don't know why this has to be continually pointed out) shawn. So I fail to see what the theory (as bollocks as it is) has to do with this thread.

	22-03-2005 00:11									#133
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap No, not really. Most people who can;t feed themselves can communicate their wishes, and thus still make decisions. BUt people in vegitative and commatose states are different, and then it becomes an issue of the expressed prior whishes of the patient or the rights of the legal guardian.

At a guess I would say that there are many 10's of thousands of people in this country who cannot feed themselves and are incapable of making any decision about their situation. In addition to the cases of mental retardation of various types, all one need do is look into any nursing home to find victims of alzheimers, other dementias, and age. If food is defined as 'treatment' then there is nothing stopping any guardian (including the state) claiming it to be 'the wishes of the patient' and removing such 'treatment'.

quote: This has been in the courts for 7 plus years- the feeding tube was first ordered removed in 2000. This has been litigated extensively, and no, no "precedent" has been set at all, except by Congress.

Legal precedent is set when a legal decision is made. If a court made that decision then the precedent was set at that time. That doesnt mean, however, that the govt couldnt define that removing food under similar conditions is (at best) euthaniasia.

IMO, we have to either accept euthanasia (or not) as a society. Court derived definitions of sustenance as 'treatment' is merely sidestepping the issue. Allowing the courts to decide these issues is cowardice.

	22-03-2005 01:04									#134
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

This is so odd....
If Bush would put this same amount effort into saving the troops lifes....I wonder?

	22-03-2005 01:31									#135
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Dissident Do you actually listen to his show? No.

Of course not, why would I? His website is usually full of propaganda, lies, and blatantly biased stories. His credibility is ZERO

quote: You just go by what commie liberal websites tell you to say.

are you turning into Fez? Actually I used to read his website. After a while, I just got sick of his bullshit.

quote: He has a good show. you should have heard it today. He's against all this goverment intervention (both this case and in baseball).

oh boy, an anti-government nutjob... Now what redeeming value does his show have?

quote: And yes I'm a democrat. But I'm not a person who closes his mind to what the other side has to say. Occasionally conservatives are right about some issues.

I have never come across a political group that is fundamentally wrong on so many issues. One wonders if they are purposely being dense. I don't close my mind to what they have to say... absolutely the opposite. The reason I vehemently oppose everything that is Republican is BECAUSE I HAVE listened to their views and opinions.

	22-03-2005 01:34									#136
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

DinoDoc - they have a very definite agenda, which they published. While they are focused on international factors, they have both domestic aims, i.e. smaller government - plans to achieve it - "Starve the beast" - and compromises they have had to make to achieve it. The Moral Majority.

Note I don't believe they are trying to deliberatelyl down democratic institutions or processes in this country. They, and many of those leading them, are determined to win whatever the cost. They are too short-sighted to see the cost. Note that certain liberal constituencies are just as bad, i.e. I don't want PETA running my life any more than the Moral Majority. The difference is that the Moral Majority exercises de facto veto power in non-incumbent primaries in most Republican primaries - I am a registered Republican, by the way who votes in the primaries - while PETA is at most on the far fringes of the Democratic party, and does not get to write over half the party platform (did you read the last two Republican Party Platforms)?

If I'm wrong - then why on earth did the Republicans in Congress, and President Bush, stick their damn nose into this while ignoring established legal procedures, as helpfully posted by Imran - you know, the man who defends Scalia (not exactly what I would call liberal). However, Imran tries very hard to be consistant, and realizes how far reaching and dangerous this is. Why won't you acknowledge that this shows the true colors of the current Republican powers at the national level, and it is just as dangerous as some of the liberals in the 1960's, IMHO more so, but I will admit I have not closely stuided the latter as I was a mite bit too young to watch politics then.

BTW, I have to go to bed, so I'll check the posts later. I work graveyard shifts.

	22-03-2005 01:35									#137
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH At a guess I would say that there are many 10's of thousands of people in this country who cannot feed themselves and are incapable of making any decision about their situation. In addition to the cases of mental retardation of various types, all one need do is look into any nursing home to find victims of alzheimers, other dementias, and age. If food is defined as 'treatment' then there is nothing stopping any guardian (including the state) claiming it to be 'the wishes of the patient' and removing such 'treatment'.

Being mentally retarded in never treated the same as being commatose or vegetative. Such people are assumed to be incapable of making the right decision, BUT they are still concious and capable of doing something- so the assumption, rightly, is that unless they say so, they must be kept alive- and since they can;t really make sucha decision, they are kept alive.

Someone who is comatose or vegetative is not even concious. They are in a whole nother legal category. And in this case there is testimony that the patient asked not to be kept in such a state. The courts have found the claim to be valid.

I see no worthwhile parallel between the two situations.

quote: Legal precedent is set when a legal decision is made. If a court made that decision then the precedent was set at that time. That doesnt mean, however, that the govt couldnt define that removing food under similar conditions is (at best) euthaniasia.

The Court accepted the statement that the patient did not want to be kept in such a state and evidence that her state is permanent. Such rulings have occured many times before. The only thing special about this case has been the Schindler's family's adept use of the media and its ability to muster politically connected interest groups to back its losing court case.

pQUOTE]
IMO, we have to either accept euthanasia (or not) as a society. Court derived definitions of sustenance as 'treatment' is merely sidestepping the issue. Allowing the courts to decide these issues is cowardice. [/QUOTE]

No, its American jurisprudence based on the laws passed by the people of the states who have jurisdiction over this civil matter.

	22-03-2005 01:45									#138
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos So Terry is the same thing as a murderer?

Is cruelly executing people to satisfy one's warped belief system the same as cruelly keeping another person alive solely to satisfy the same belief system? Yes it is. It all amounts to cruelty in the name of justice. Noone seems to care what this poor woman wanted except her husband.

I can see your struggling, these are complex ideas, but do try and keep up.

	22-03-2005 02:09									#139
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Ok im going to say this and then hide behind a wall to get away from the water ballons that will be thrown at me I think the state judgments didnt take into consideration the resultsof their actions i could be in the future. lets forget terry schiavo for a minute. this if not further reviewed could be harmful for situations that may be similiar. For example doctors are not perfect they could be wrong Suppose a person is diagonised like terry, there needs to be ample time to allow this person to recover or try to recover. Under the states decison they have opened the door for a guardian to prematuraily pull the plug. Drs are human and can make a mistake. Im not in any way saying this applies to terry but isnt likely that this could happen?

	22-03-2005 02:18									#140
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Judging by all the legal hoops her husband has had to jump through to fulfil her wish? no.

	22-03-2005 02:20									#141
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Tuberski I still think loving husband is a joke. While I don't blame him for having a girlfriend and children with said girlfriend, it doesn't mean he was right to do it. Wedding vows say "til death do us part", not, " til your wife is in a vegetative state." ACK!

well if the state would just let her die, it wouldnt be an issue.

	22-03-2005 02:24									#142
	Inflate your Upload Space

I dont think anybody realizes this case isnt just about terry anymore. Its about what is to come with future people in the same situation.

	22-03-2005 02:25									#143
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

the law shouldnt be changed. the law is being upheld the way its supposed to. you just dont like it.

	22-03-2005 02:34									#144
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I don't think her feeding tube should be removed. That is cruel too. No winners in this case.

	22-03-2005 02:37									#145
	Remove this text

I will say for me the only problem I have with this is that you are now putting power in the hands of people that may not have the best interst in mind of the person who is in a positon such as this women .

	22-03-2005 02:39									#146
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse I don't think her feeding tube should be removed. That is cruel too. No winners in this case.

Why is it cruel? She is PVS... she feels no pain and the end result is the same.

	22-03-2005 02:39									#147
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

the law figures that the husband does have the best interest in mind. imagine how many more legal fights will arise because of **** like this.

what if the situation is reversed?

would you object so strongly?

	22-03-2005 02:46									#148
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: they have both domestic aims, i.e. smaller government

That's wierd, because other 'critics' have said that a Neo-con 'domestic agenda' is more trusting of big government than regular conservatism (some right wing critics have called neoconservatism's 'domestic agenda' as really being socialism). Goes to show that neoconservatism has no domestic agenda, and the opponents want to assign it one based on what their most hated neocon believes in the domestic sphere, even if two neocons believe in vastly different domestic policies.

---

Oh, interestingly enough FOXnews' legal analyst went on and said this law Congress passed is blatently unconstitutional.

	22-03-2005 02:46									#149
	Tired of ads?

I am not just talking about terry schiavo. I am talking about other people that could happen upon this same occurance. I.e My husband some how hurts me and puts me in terrys condition, he only wants me out of the way. Pulling the plug is in his best interest not mine.
Btw I believe she should be able to die of those were her wishes, I dont agree with how they are going about killing her. Granted at this time there is no other solution. But I have also stated why does the husband keep figthing the family why doesnt he just divorce wash his hands and move on. What is he trying to prove?

	22-03-2005 02:49									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

mrs tubes... HE IS TRYING TO FOLLOW TERRI'S WISHES THAT"S WHY HE DOES NOT JUST WASH HIS HANDS AND MOVE ON