Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Question, Dr. Sanctimony.
|
Keep in mind that this was a reply to Wonk's statement that I supported "The Procedure" when I supported the Iraq war. There is a huge distinction. And, yeah, it's one I'll be sanctimonious about.
Quote:
Who is "the right person" to say that Terry should die in this situation? Most would say Terry. Indeed, the courts and the law say both that Terry is the right person, and that she has said so --best anyone can determine.
It seems as if you think her parents should be allowed to keep her empty shell of a body alive even if it were contrary to her wishes. I disagree.
Or is it that she should be maintained indefinitely even if there is "clear and convicing" evidence of her wishes so long as some family members don't buy it?
Look -- there are many levels of problems here. One of the big ones is that her parents and siblings will never let her go -- due to religious belief or otherwise. I think that a big part of the reason they refuse to countenance this passive euthanasia is because they view any suggestion that Terry would want it as equivalent to her committing suicide -- a mortal sin in the Catholic tradition.
It would not surprise me if they'd have tried to fight this even if she had a living will or DHCPOA. For gods sake, her brother was quoted two days ago as saying Terry "remined alert" -- ALERT!! -- after 15 years in pvs. It is important to view this in that context as well.
|
She's, at best, a petri dish. She's not coming back. That's a given.
A petri dish has very little sense of dignity. Any "dignity" resides solely in the egos and thoughts of her survivors.
Given all of that, I keep coming back to, where's the harm here? If they kill her, there's definite psych/emotional harm to her parents. If they keep her alive, there's harm to . . . her dignity? No, there's harm to someone else's conception of her dignity - which means, to me, the harm is to the person who decides to feel harm, there's harm to the person who is so invested of winning in this process that they will see her continuation as a defeat.
This was a hotly contested case, insofar as determining her "wishes" goes. Her parents obviously don't accept her husband's testimony. I think this is understandable. I doubt I would still think that in the presence of a DPOA.
There's a lot of comfort derived by people here in the following of the checklists. I think it's a nice easy way to not think of the underlying subject. Why not simply hand her over to her parents and walk away?
