Will Terry Schiavo be killed ?

Originally posted by bbarr
Why do you think that Terri Shiavo is still alive? Seriously, Ivanhoe, what reason is there for thinking that the body we see on T.V. and in the papers [b]is Terri Shiavo?[/b]

My apologies for my intromission, Bbarr.

But can you make us wise?

AFAIK, her brain cortex is almost destroyed, so she cannot exhibit any cognitive behavior. But the brain is way too complex. And the "suffering" sensor neurons are located elsewhere in the brain...

So, is it morally correct to suspend her life? Will you do it without knowing for certain that you are not causing her a deep pain?

Only wondering...

Political connotations appart, medicine doctors are playing the stupid game of "Im God" They know little, if anything, about brains functions.

My regards

-J

Originally posted by kirksey957
Ivanhoe, I can assure you that this nurse no longer works with her and if she did, she would be immediately fired for violating patient confidentiality. In fact, if this is the case, she violated HIPPA regulations and her company could be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars.

She used to work with Terry Schiavo.

But sometimes Kirk preventing the killing of someone requires courage and the breaking of regulations.

Let us assume she, this nurse, spoke the truth, and we don't have any reason to assume otherwise, then she did her duty as a responsible citizen.

I could now write a rant filled with moral indignation about you putting regulations and money above the life of a human being, but I will desist from doing that, because I want to assume this was not what you intended .......

Originally posted by CrazyLilTing
My apologies for my intromission, Bbarr.

But can you make us wise?

AFAIK, her brain cortex is almost destroyed, so she cannot exhibit any cognitive behavior. But the brain is way too complex. And the "suffering" sensor neurons ...[text shortened]... little, if anything, about brains functions.

My regards

-J

"Suffering" sensor neurons? Are you claiming that there are sensor neurons the firing of which are sufficient for the conscious experience of suffering, even in the absense of a cerebrum? If so, can you provide some evidence for this claim, 'cause I'm very interested in reading it. Nothing I've read in either cognitive psychology or neurology or in the reports and affidavits relating to PVS generally or Schiavo in particular suggests that suffering of any sort (or even conscious experience) is possible in the absence of a cerebrum. What I have read is that even in the absence of a cerebrum a PVS patient may engage in reflexive body movements in the presence of stimuli.

Originally posted by ivanhoe


But sometimes Kirk preventing the killing of someone requires courage and the breaking of regulations.

If a priest hears a confession of murder, should he run to the police?

Originally posted by ivanhoe

She used to work with Terry Schiavo.

But sometimes Kirk preventing the killing of someone requires courage and the breaking of regulations.

Let us assume she, this nurse, spoke the truth, and we don't have any reason to assume otherwise, then she did her duty as a responsible citizen.

I could now write a rant filled with moral indignation ab ...[text shortened]... will desist from doing that, because I want to asssume this was not what you intended .......

Let us assume she, this nurse, spoke the truth, and we don't have any reason to assume otherwise, then she did her duty as a responsible citizen.

I hope you are joking; "we don't have any reason to assume otherwise"??????????????????????????????? Funny, she never bothered to mention this in the 10 years of litigation that have been going on! This is so ridiculous that even someone as stubbornly fanatical about the issue as you MUST know she's spouting total BS to get some attention and/or because of her own personal beliefs. You can't actually take this "witness" seriously, can you?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Let us assume she, this nurse, spoke the truth, and we don't have any reason to assume otherwise, then she did her duty as a responsible citizen.

I hope you are joking; "we don't have any reason to assume otherwise"??????????????????????????????? Funny, she never bothered to mention this in the 10 years of litigation that have been going on ...[text shortened]... cause of her own personal beliefs. You can't actually take this "witness" seriously, can you?

Not only that, but her reports have not been backed up by any other reports from other care-givers. You would expect that over the past 15 years any number of orderlies, nurses and doctors would have reported the utterance of 'mommy', 'help me', and 'pain'.

Originally posted by bbarr
Not only that, but her reports have not been backed up by any other reports from other care-givers. You would expect that over the past 15 years any number of orderlies, nurses and doctors would have reported the utterance of 'mommy', 'help me', and 'pain'.

Isn't the basic line: If she's alive then she needn't be fed? She'll wake up and want to feed herself?

If she doesn't wake up and feed herself....well....so be it?
I mean...I wouldn't let the woman starve over 2 weeks, I'd give her a lethal injection...

Originally posted by bbarr
Not only that, but her reports have not been backed up by any other reports from other care-givers. You would expect that over the past 15 years any number of orderlies, nurses and doctors would have reported the utterance of 'mommy', 'help me', and 'pain'.

If this were true, and I highly doubt it. The injustice to terry shiavo would be even greater then it is now.

Nyxie

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
If a priest hears a confession of murder, should he run to the police?

An interesting question. If you want you can open a new thread on this new subject.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Let us assume she, this nurse, spoke the truth, and we don't have any reason to assume otherwise, then she did her duty as a responsible citizen.

I hope you are joking; "we don't have any reason to assume otherwise"??????? ...[text shortened]... efs. You can't actually take this "witness" seriously, can you?

Maybe she is lying No1, but please let's not all fall for the No1-doctrine "My opponents are all lying and I am speaking the truth"

Maybe the reasons Kirk gave stopped her from telling the truth.

I would like to know more about this statement before dismissing it beforehand. One thing we don't know is when she stopped working with Terri.

Originally posted by ivanhoe

An interesting question. If you want you can open a new thread on this new subject.

Then I assume you'd encourage kirksey to do the same in response to the issue you posed to him.

Originally posted by ivanhoe

Maybe she is lying No1, but please let's not all fall for the No1-doctrine "My opponents are all lying and I am speaking the truth"

Maybe the reasons Kirk gave stopped her from telling the truth.

I would like to know more about this statement before dismissing it beforehand.

That is hardly my doctrine, but it is an unfortunate fact that many people who disagree with my positions are sooooooooo fanatical about it that they are willing to resort to falsehoods. Personally I believe in Truth and Reason.

Originally posted by bbarr
Not only that, but her reports have not been backed up by any other reports from other care-givers. You would expect that over the past 15 years any number of orderlies, nurses and doctors would have reported the utterance of 'mommy', 'help me', and 'pain'.

You dismiss her before there has been any serious investigation. Of course there are questions about this statement, but I prefer the facts rather than speculations.

Remember what Kirk said that talking about Terri's situation could have serious repercussions for nurses, other care-givers and the companies involved.

Originally posted by no1marauder
That is hardly my doctrine, but it is an unfortunate fact that many people who disagree with my positions are sooooooooo fanatical about it that they are willing to resort to falsehoods. Personally I believe in Truth and Reason.

You should choose less fanatical opponents, no1. It might save you a lot of headaches.

Originally posted by bbarr
"Suffering" sensor neurons? Are you claiming that there are sensor neurons the firing of which are sufficient for the conscious experience of suffering, even in the absense of a cerebrum? If so, can you provide some evidence for this claim, 'cause I'm very interested in reading it. Nothing I've read in either cognitive psychology or neurology or ...[text shortened]... e of a cerebrum a PVS patient may engage in reflexive body movements in the presence of stimuli.

Please, forgive my ignorance, but why do you claim that we have to be "concious" to feel pain? Apples and oranges.

This may not be in the books you have read, Bbarr. but there are dedicated neurons that drives the feedback of "pain" impulses that causes the body to react.... elementary Watson.

As far as I know, Terri has reflects (reflexes?)

Could you explain me how those reflexes doesnt cause a physical pain. if she would react to er, well, suspending her vital needs?

By no way Im attacking you. I wish to know what is your opinion, and hopefully to learn some things you know and I don't know.

With the due respect

Julia