vegetative state

[Speculating]

I live very close to this situation. Regrettable, I have endured the facts of this case over and over again through the preceding 13 years. The problem is you can't just pull the plug after thirteen years. If your going to do the deed, you have to do it relatively quickly months not years later. I applaud her husband's love and commitment, but it isn't going to happen. Thirteen years is an awfully long time to tie up a hospice bed. The husband should (in my opinion) give it up, and let her parents take her home. I agree this is certainly no way to live. If it happens to me and you walk by my room please put a pillow over my head. The facts are: we all know how parents are when it comes to their babies, and giving them thirteen more years with her has just strengthened that bond. Unfortunately your SO's word isn't good enough - it's got to be in writing.

[BlueKat]

Would anyone want to be kept alive in this situation? I think not. It's not a life at all. I don't mean to sound cold hearted or anything but this is also a drain on the health care system that is overloaded as it is. We can't take proper care of those who really need it. The cost of health care is unbelievably high. More out of pocket costs, etc. Reality Check.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Originally posted by Speculating

The facts are: we all know how parents are when it comes to their babies, and giving them thirteen more years with her has just strengthened that bond

I agree it's way to late. I'm glad the parents bond was strengthened with their child, but that's a very selfish act IMOH. I know it's hard to let go of a child. I see that all the time, especially when I worked in neuro. I took care of a ventilated 16 year year old with a functioning brain stem after an MVA. Mom said child came to her in a dream asking her to everything to save her and that would be fine, get up and walk one day. Sad to see. But the power of parent-child bond knows no limits, people need time. Never a good situation. We all want to do everything on that .000005% chance they'll get up and walk one day.

[CseMgr1, ASN, RN]

Originally posted by 3rdShiftGuy

I agree it's way to late. I'm glad the parents bond was strengthened with their child, but that's a very selfish act IMOH. I know it's hard to let go of a child. I see that all the time, especially when I worked in neuro. I took care of a ventilated 16 year year old with a functioning brain stem after an MVA. Mom said child came to her in a dream asking her to everything to save her and that would be fine, get up and walk one day. Sad to see. But the power of parent-child bond knows no limits, people need time. Never a good situation. We all want to do everything on that .000005% chance they'll get up and walk one day.

It's a tough call, all right. Makes you wonder for WHOSE benefit the decision was made, though, to restart her feeds: Her parents, or Jeb Bush's?

[Katnip, RN]

I sitll don't understand how the governor fits into this. Just what right does he have to interefere?

[Hellllllo Nurse, BSN, RN]

Originally posted by sjoe

"vegetative state "

Oops. I thought this thread would be about Mississippi.

That's the first time I have laughed out loud while reading these forums in a loooong time.

Thanks, sjoe.

[sanakruz, ADN]

Cybercat-

my understanding of jebs involvement has to do with the fact that he filed an amicus brief with the court at the behest of the womans parents who had a right to life organization assist with an injunction to remove the pts GT.

I read that the RTL felt that this woman could benefit from rehab: be fed by mouth, bowel trained etc, which the husband had agreeed to have withdrawn at an earlier date.This hope and slim chance that she would recover was the basis for the injunction.

Why didnt the parents just take her home and care for her the way they wished? Thats the part I dont understand. Nor do i understand why her husband is being called a "fornicator " and murderer

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

As was already mentioned, there is a lengthy thread with lots of info about why the husband is considered an #$%@# but here is just one article that was posted there. Also, check out Terri's parents website . . . and they are Catholics and so was Terri and don't believe in euthanasia, plus Terri never vocalized her wishes, which is why the long years of fighting.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith090503.asp

another article about Jeb Bush:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith090503.asp

[TennNurse]

Originally posted by sjoe

"vegetative state "

Oops. I thought this thread would be about Mississippi.

Not nice, sjoe.

Was there a reason for this comment or were you just stereotyping?

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Originally posted by cyberkat

I sitll don't understand how the governor fits into this. Just what right does he have to interefere?

He was asked to intervene, I'm not sure by who, but Operation Rescure was one of them. The people who are primarily calling on him to save her are very conservative and would remember in the next election, and probably voted for him to get there. He's going to try to win the next election since he has one more term. It's purely a political move on his part. A prudent govenor would have followed the court's order and stayed out of it, but that might have been a political backlash he wasn't willing to gamble on. Now he can say he did everything to "save" her.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Originally posted by stevielynn

As was already mentioned, there is a lengthy thread with lots of info about why the husband is considered an #$%@# but here is just one article that was posted there. Also, check out Terri's parents website . . . and they are Catholics and so was Terri and don't believe in euthanasia, plus Terri never vocalized her wishes, which is why the long years of fighting.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith090503.asp

another article about Jeb Bush:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith090503.asp

Steph is that magazine the National Review, isn't that a bit biased, slanted to the conservative side? Is that fair to present the case like that?

[purplemania, BSN, RN]

There are several problems with this case. One is that we only have hearsay that it was her wish not to be in this state. Another is that her parents insist she does communicate, even verbally with grunts, etc. and by following you with her eyes and smiling or frowning. If we allowed every person in this state to die of dehydration and starvation that would be a LOT of children and old folks too. She is not on a vent. In many ways her condition is much like Stephen Hawking. Does the state have the right to decide who lives/dies? That could get real scary. Is her husband acting out of sympathy or self-interest? Could you stand your child to die of intentional starvation? Lots of issues here and none are easy. I feel for all concerned.