I know that that was why the court ordered that Terri Schindler Schiavo be executed by dehydration, but what about Dr. Kavorkian? Didn't he do prison time for doing the same thing?
Try this website:
http://www.terrisfight.org/
2006-07-19 14:11:29 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If "letting Terri die" was not murder, then what would it be considered if a parent with a new born baby decided to let the baby die by not feeding the baby or giving the baby hydration? Would that be considered murder?
2006-07-19 14:16:24 · update #1
Do you think that an insurance company should be able to decide when it is time to pull the plug on you? I think that's who would benefit financially from doctor assisted suicide becoming legal.
2006-07-19 14:22:22 · update #2
Don't you think that the size of your brain would shrink in size considerably if you die of dehydration?
2006-07-19 15:46:55 · update #3
Last time I checked, a brain dead person would have to be hooked up to a machine. Terry was not hooked up to any machine to assist in breathing. There was no plug to pull.
2006-07-19 15:51:27 · update #4
When? The minute you enter the US hospital system, you've started the suicide process.
2006-07-19 14:16:26 · answer #1 · answered by Jack Meoff 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Terri Schindler Schiavo was brain dead, those other ones were people with viable life, doctor assisted suicide still is not legal, forcibly kept alive beyond human compassion should not be legal. Terri Schiavo was fatally denied due process because all the appellate courts, state and federal, relied wholly on the rigid misunderstanding of the central facts of the case by one Florida Circuit judge, George Greer.
2006-07-19 21:45:52 · answer #2 · answered by Voodoo Doll 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Dr. Kevorkian actually killed his patients by administering drugs so they wouldn't feel the pain. Terry Schiavo just died on her own, the doctors just did not intervene to save her. Lots of people have a "No Heroic Measures" in their living will. This means that doctors should not do everything possible to keep them alive if they are so far gone that they would not be able to recover and live a normal life again. Terry Schiavo was this kind of patient, and her husband claimed that she would have wished that no heroic measures be taken, but her parents argued differently. This is why it's important to have a living will.
Dr. Kevorkian's patients on the other hand, were fully aware of their surroundings, but suffering in horrible pain. Maybe dying of cancer or renal failure, which would eventually kill them, but even without intervention of medicine, a cancer patient can survive in horrible pain for a while. Too long for some, and so they wanted to just have it be over instead of prolonging the pain and inevitable death. Dr. Kevorkian helped them end their pain. It's controversial, but I don't think that anyone who is healthy and not suffering from an incurable illness should be able to judge those who are in pain day in and day out, confined to a bed and on their painfully slow way to dying.
2006-07-19 21:19:37 · answer #3 · answered by Stephanie S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oregon passed their Death With Dignity Act in 1994, and it was legalized in 1997.
As far as Terri Schiavo is concerned, I would recommend that you review the autopsy results that showed that her brain was "grossly abnormal and weighed only 615 grams (1.35 lbs.). That weight is less than half of the expected tabular weight for a decedent of her adult age of 41 years 3 months 28 days. By way of comparison, the brain of Karen Ann Quinlan weighed 835 grams at the time of her death, after 10 years in a similar persistent vegetative state." (Autopsy report)
2006-07-19 21:33:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, its not.
Her case was NOT about Dr. assisted suicide. THe fight was over whether her parents or her husband had the right to terminate her life support. Her Husband was ruled to have that right, and He chose to terminate.
It is NOT an issue of suicide, but final wishes and legally who is responsible for who carries them out. If you are married, your spouse has that right, unless you have legal documents that state otherwise.
You are mixing apples and oranges.
It was not murder because she was brain dead. She was dead in all aspects with the exception her heart was still beating. Her brain had no function, none at all.
2006-07-19 21:16:03 · answer #5 · answered by sweetie_baby 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i don't know about the dr. kavorkian case, but the Schiavo case was a mercy "killing", it let everyone who used to be in her life move on. Her parents needed to accept that she was not coming back, and wish her into whatever afterlife they believe in, and her ex husband needed the closeure to move on with his and his new wife's life.
2006-07-19 21:16:25 · answer #6 · answered by R-Girl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Terri's case was more about power of attorney. I don't believe human euthanasia has been legalized. I hope it never is.
2006-07-19 21:15:11 · answer #7 · answered by The Apple Chick 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it's not the same thing. They let Terri die, they didn't kill her.
2006-07-19 21:14:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
he did it without the permission of next of kin usually and administered drugs that killed the people , far more humane than letting them die of thirst. sad isnt it
2006-07-19 21:15:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋