Artificial feeding-Terri Schiavo

Nurses General Nursing

Published

I posted this here becaue I think this subject is something that we as nurses deal with on a regular basis.....Many many people state that they have a big problem with the feeding being stopped "allowing her to starve to death" The Vatican says " To starve her to death is pitiless" Most everyone agrees that it is one's right to refuse to initiate artificial feeding but somehow this situation "is different" How? The patient "starves to death " in both cases-so why has this one galvanized the WORLD? My husband read me a quote from the Bible -forgive me because I can't remember it in detail-it was something along the lines that a woman marries and leaves her father's house and her husband becomes her family....My husband is my POA I hope no-one in my family questions his motives -He KNOWS exactly what I want....I can't question her husbands motives-I know that some suspect foul play and state the results of a bone scan support this...That bone scan was obtained 53 months after she went into her coma-after her body suffered the effects of her eating disorders for a number of years.... Her present level of responsiveness does not pertain to this matter IMHO-she CAN'T eat naturally--she did not ever want to "be kept alive like that " and she can't state otherwise at this point...So- #1 can someone PLEASE make me see why this case is" DIFFERENT" and #2 How do YOU support your patients and their loved ones when they are agonizing over this decision? ONe thing I always ask is "Did your loved one ever give you any idea of what they would want if something like this happened" and if they did then I advocate that stance for that pt as much possible.......I believe that death is the last great trip we'll go on and we should PLAN it as much as possible.The greatest GIFT we can give to our loved ones is an itinerary...........

there's an obvious distinction that you choose to neglect. terri only has brain stem reflex and that's not enough to sustain life. but more importantly, terri decided that pvs is a state she did not want to exist with. if only the schindler family would humanely accept her wish the agony would have been over long ago.

assuming the quotes are factual, they still need to be taken in context. there's alot of agony in this and it's not easy for anyone. who knows what any of us would do or say after this many years of nonsense.

i place more importance on the validity of the umpteen unanimous court decisions that fly in the face of your quotes. obviously, the courts have analyzed the issue far deeper than any of us have time to.

bioethics is clear in this regard. in a nutshell, it's not the schindler family's decision.

1. ms. schiavo is alive. that much we know. michael schiavo has consistently blocked any ability to do a full, complete, and impartial evaluation of her rehabilitation potential. let me kindly suggest that neither of us knows whether she has only brain stem reflex. let me further suggest that even if that's all she has, ms. schiavo was still capable of life. any of us reading this would die without food or hydration. the feeding tube is only that: a means of delivering food and hydration. this, of course, begs the bigger question of whether she is capable of swallowing. michael schiavo has also blocked evaluation of that potential.

2. as far as ms. schiavo's wishes, there is no witness to them, except for michael schiavo. interesting that someone who allegedly felt so strongly about this issue never mentioned it to anyone else: parents, siblings, friends, priest, etc.

3. i take the quotes in context. when any man consistently, over a long period of time, and to various individuals, calls his wife a "*****," expresses pleasure that she might soon be dead, and happily says that her death will be the cause of his being rich, then let's assume he means what he says, and take it seriously.

4. i've seen so many dumb court decisions that i find it difficult to place faith in them. we as a country and society routinely reverse court decisions, and often completely disagree with what were previously thought to be important court judgements. for example, in dred scott (1857) the supreme court decided that americans of african descent were not citizens, not "persons" under the law, and could not expect protection from the federal government. none of us would agree with this outrageous decision. court opinions are simply not written in stone.

jim huffman, rn

Stevielynn

Yes I do know what hospice is for so has see been terminal for 15 years? And if her parents truly loved her would they be able to watch her in this vegatative state for so long. Her husband is the one who truly loves her and wants her to be in peace and not on display like her parents want.

The debate is over, the feeding tube will remain out. There was a constitutional issue here that was settled. That being said, I hope we all say a prayer for her parents today and everyday, it is never easy to lose a child, but this will be very, very difficult for them to endure.

I find it strange that celebrities have made statements regarding how horrible her death would be without really understanding what it would really entail. I have lost respect for some of the publicity seekers who spoke without knowing the facts of how she will probably expire.

Remember, I have kept my opinion to myself, it would surprise some you to know it, but I do have sympathy and concern for all involved.

I do hope the spouse and parents can have private, meaningful visits with her before she slips away, I doubt the press will allow this though, and will wait like the vultures they are for one more headline. :scrying: :crying2:

_____________

Yes. We need to pray. We need to pray for our country.

I have been reading through here and I have read about how Terri's husband should have the last say in this because he is her husband.PLEASE don not tell me that you believe all husband are the right choice to be doing this!I was in a relationship that was hell on this earth and I would have been dead in a moment if he could have done it in a quiet way that he could justify.I hope my duaghter meets Mr.Wonderful some day but if he turns out to be an ugly frog you can bet I will take over and protect her.Yes,I believe there are good points on both sides but if it just can't be agreed on then Terri's husband should let go of his marriage and go on with his life.If he has children with another women he has no place having a say anymore.He gave up his marriage when he went to bed and had children with someone else.He then gave up the right to have a say about this.HeIf he had to go on with his life he can do it legally too.

I'm not saying spouses get to decide no matter what. But, barring any illegal acts and when they are in agreement with doctors, it's their decision. If your daughter marries a frog, then that's her choice. You don't get to be her decision maker forever because you are her parent. Sorry, that's just the way it is. It may not be ideal, but it's the system we have. There are a lot of jerk spouses and jerk parents out there.

Would you feel the parents should get to make the decision if it was the other way around? (I mean if the parents wanted to remove the feeding tube and the husband wanted to keep it in).

Specializes in er, pediatric er.

She has a brother-in-law who says she expressed to him the wish to not be kept alive artificially. There are other witnesses

1. Ms. Schiavo is alive. That much we know. Michael Schiavo has consistently blocked any ability to do a full, complete, and impartial evaluation of her rehabilitation potential. Let me kindly suggest that neither of us knows whether she has only brain stem reflex. Let me further suggest that even if that's all she has, Ms. Schiavo was still capable of life. Any of us reading this would die without food or hydration. The feeding tube is only that: a means of delivering food and hydration. This, of course, begs the bigger question of whether she is capable of swallowing. Michael Schiavo has also blocked evaluation of that potential.

2. As far as Ms. Schiavo's wishes, there is no witness to them, except for Michael Schiavo. Interesting that someone who allegedly felt so strongly about this issue never mentioned it to anyone else: parents, siblings, friends, priest, etc.

3. I take the quotes in context. When any man consistently, over a long period of time, and to various individuals, calls his wife a "*****," expresses pleasure that she might soon be dead, and happily says that her death will be the cause of his being rich, then let's assume he means what he says, and take it seriously.

4. I've seen so many dumb court decisions that I find it difficult to place faith in them. We as a country and society routinely reverse court decisions, and often completely disagree with what were previously thought to be important court judgements. For example, in Dred Scott (1857) the Supreme Court decided that Americans of African descent were not citizens, not "persons" under the law, and could not expect protection from the Federal government. None of us would agree with this outrageous decision. Court opinions are simply not written in stone.

Jim Huffman, RN

Specializes in Case mgmt., rehab, (CRRN), LTC & psych.

In the early '90s, Michael Schiavo testified tearfully in front of a jury that he needed a lot of money to keep his wife alive. They sided with him.

Now he wants her dead....

I'd want to die rather than live in a vegetative state; however, his motives are questionable.

Specializes in Case mgmt., rehab, (CRRN), LTC & psych.

Aren't nurses supposed to behave nonjudgmentally? Hmmm.... :stone

It seems as if everyone has passed judgment in this heartbreaking saga.

Specializes in Med-Surg, Trauma, Ortho, Neuro, Cardiac.
Aren't nurses supposed to behave nonjudgmentally? Hmmm.... :stone

It seems as if everyone has passed judgment in this heartbreaking saga.

It's important for us to behave nonjudgementally when we nurse and leave our judgements at the door and treat everyone with dignity and equality. I think nurses do a fantastic job of that.

We're human, though and we're going to make judgements, but we gotta leave it at the door. :)

She has a brother-in-law who says she expressed to him the wish to not be kept alive artificially. There are other witnesses

______________

Yeah. Her brother in law is Michael Schiavo's sisters husband.

The other witnesses are all relatives of the husband.

Aren't nurses supposed to behave nonjudgmentally? Hmmm.... :stone

It seems as if everyone has passed judgment in this heartbreaking saga.

____________

I didnt know I was required to leave my humanity at the door.

If I saw a man raping a woman, am I supposed to sit there and watch? I wouldnt want to judge or anything.

If I saw a person strangling a child, am I supposed to sit there and watch? I wouldnt want to judge or anything.

In the early '90s, Michael Schiavo testified tearfully in front of a jury that he needed a lot of money to keep his wife alive. They sided with him.

Now he wants her dead....

I'd want to die rather than live in a vegetative state; however, his motives are questionable.

Could it be in the early 90's he still had hope that she might recover?

Here is what I thnk about this whole thing.

I do not know what her husbands motives are, but her parents want to take care of her. They will completely take her care out of his hands all he has to do is divorce her and go on with his life. (Which he obviously has already done). Problem is Terri never left a living will so we do not know what she may have wanted in this battle. I do not for a minute think that a feeding tube is a heroic measure. I have patients who have feeding tubes for years and years. The mere fact that she has lived this long with only a feeding tube tells me she has the will to live. So who am I to say we should starve her of food and water.

So I would have to say I am on the parents side.

+ Add a Comment