The Popes casket.

Page 4 of 6  

Jason Quick wrote:

with
One
keeping
seemed
rather
pains
procedure, and I

The predecessor to the modern feeding tube was the esophagastomy, an opening through the neck into the esophagus that allowed food and water to bypass the mouth. It was developed over a century ago to allow people with severe facial injuries to receive food and water.
The stomach tube now used is actually a simpler procedure which is one reason it has become the standard.
For Terri Schiavo seminal issue was not how difficult or expensive it was to keep her body going, the seminal issue was "What was it that was being preserved?" Most of our disagreements are disagreements as to the facts, not the principles.
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the
argument
Interesting that the Greek/Roman tradition, as well as the Orthodox Jewish, regards breath as life. Anima , Latin for soul/life/breath, derives from the Greek anemos - wind or breath. If they can breathe, they are alive.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George wrote:

Well, science progress. Must be a terrible fact to many, but it still remains true.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, fluid isn't brain, Doug.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Of course I understand that. The medical question is the degree of cognitive function that she had remaining. Then there's the ethical question: is it right to deprive a living human being of sustenance, based on that person's level of cognitive function?
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

While there is certainly some room for debate, when the overwhelming majority of one's cerebral cortex is missing, including most all of the relevant bits that handle speech, thought processes, etc., it would not be at all unreasonable to conclude that there's nothing going on up there, correct?

Certainly, if they express a wish to not exist in that state. I would argue that we have a duty, in fact, to honor a person's wishes inasmuch as possible. That of course is the crux of the issue, really - what did she want, and when did she want it? If her wishes were not in fact expressed while she was, uh, interactive, should the spouse be allowed to determine the course of action in any case? My take is that in the absence of any reasons to restrict spousal rights in this situation (i.e. evidence of abuse, pending divorce, etc), the spouse should have a nearly absolute right to decide what goes.
And as for the abuse suggestions that have been made - the sort of physical trauma that it would take to put someone into the state Terri Schiavo was in would be immediately evident to a doctor, I'd think, and Michael Schiavo would've had his rights restricted long ago.
Jason
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Perhaps; but then we come to the second question:

Apparently you don't consider shacking up with another woman for seven years, fathering two children by her, to be sufficient reason to restrict the husband from making such decisions? Doesn't seem to me that he was too interested in behaving like a spouse.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. Think about it for a second - why on earth wouldn't the man just have divorced her, and left her to the care of her deranged parents?

Well, you know, if I were in his position, I'd be dating at least. Maybe he's a shit-heel, I dunno, but AIUI he *did* spend a few years trying to get her in better shape, and when the attempts failed to bear fruit, he moved on. From what I read, it's not like he was out whoring around four nights a week. He simply had let go emoitionally, and was being thwarted in his attempts to carry out what he believed her wishes to be. I think it's a hideous position to be in, really.
Consider the scenario - your wife, after some massive brain hemorrage thing, has checked out. The doctors are telling you that she'll never recover to any state of consciousness, but that with a feeding tube she could live for decades - to use a callous phrase I read, she'll essentially be "organic furniture.". You're in your late 20s, just entering the prime of life.
Ask yourself this: if her mom and/or dad were possessed of some character flaw - say, Dad had a gambling addiction - would that be grounds to *not* give them control? What if Mom was an alcoholic, or Dad was a philanderer?
Jason
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jason Quick wrote:

seven
Which means they moved in togeher eight years after Terri's demise.

the
have
Depending on State law, that might not get him off the hook financially. I don't know one way or the other.

to get

moved
Or maybe the Schindlers are. Maybe all of them or none.
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

haven't
Yep, or what purported to be. Showed fluid where the brain used to be.
I see blood intruding in MRI/CT fairly often, so if they were hers, she was bad off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Miller wrote:

...
At least what were purported to be on one of the networks--I don't recall which one, but w/ commentary by a neurologist who (if I got the credits correct) had examined her case earlier. To me, assuming they were both genuine and not doctored (so to speak) and I have no reason to think they were, it didn't even take an expert to see there was functioning brain mass of any consequence remaining--the cranial area was mostly solid indicating fluid, not brain tissue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have. And I've looked at a _lot_ of brain scans. It's an axial view through the area where the cerebral cortex should be. The ventricles (fluid-filled spaces, kind of butterfly shaped) have expanded nearly out to the skull, showing that where previously there had been cerebral cortex, there was nothing but cerebro-spinal fluid. The cerebral cortex is what makes you you, the brain stem handles lowest level controls such as breathing, digestion, pumping of blood - the cerebellum handles voluntary motion. (oversimplified but basically accurate).
The scans I saw were CT scans. They showed the metal which precluded an MRI scan. A nuclear scan would have been very telling - since you couldn't do MRI (due to the metal), a nuclear scan would have been the next best thing to see biochemical activity in the brain. The radio- pharmacuticals will tag areas of biological activity. Holes in a brain nuclear scan are a dramatic way to see damage in fuction, which is useful in addition to damage in structure as a CT will show.
Not having been in that situation, I can't say, but I would think I would have insisted on a nuclear scan to show presence or absence of activity in the very damaged parts of the brain.
Dave Hinz (worked in engineering on medical scanners for about a decade)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Hinz wrote:

Were these the scans from 1996?

would
activity
I too am troubled by the lack of more recent or more thorough imagery. (assuming that indeed the most recent scans are nearly 10 years old)
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duane Bozarth wrote:

Whoa! You mean people have logical minds? Could have fooled me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Miller wrote:
wrote:

brain
higher
released, then

beat,
respiration and

It is a matter of fact, not conjecture, that heartbeat and respiration are brain stem functions.
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Was teaching a class of EMTs-to-be one night and used evolution of the organ to help understand the brain and the sites for various functions. Had a couple of sour-lookers out in the class, so I checked with some of the others. SDAs apparently don't accept evolution. Stem is really the first electrical center, and takes care of almost all autonomic functions. Somatic higher, then some senses and sensibility on top.
When I gave the evolution of the mammalian heart as a key to understanding the various electrical paths, they looked sour again, but the rest said it made things easier to understand....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Howdy,
I am a psychologist by trade, and often teach folks certain aspects of Freud's theories. I start by explaining that theories are best understood as "tools" rather than "truths", and, as such, should be assessed in terms of their utility rather than their veracity.
When someone tells me that they don't "accept" Freud (or as in your example, "evolution") I hear it as if they had told me that they don't accept "chisels" or "glue." (Whew, with that, we are back On Topic.<g>)
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

the organ

Had a

the
Some people don't accept chisels or glue, or don't accept particular chisels or particular glues, meaning that they won't use them, consider them to be unsuitable for a particular job, or have some other material or philosphical objection.
Which I daresay is a perfect extension of your analogy.
In Science, which may or may not include psychology, I have had correspondence from psychologists who deny that psychology is a Science, a theory is useful if it may be used to generate testable hypotheses. Scientists 'believe in' theories whose predictions are then confirmed by subsequent experimentation or observation.
This is where Religion usually parts from Science. Most of the hypotheses generated by Religions are untestable, or when tested, the outcome is unobservable by the living.
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10 Apr 2005 12:32:22 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net wrote:

Well, no...
They may indeed choose not to use them, but that is rather different from "acceptance" and that was precisely my point.
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

If they have a philosophical objection, as opposed to a practical one it's pretty much analogous to rejecting evolution on religious grounds, no? (e.g. Roy Underhill autographed a book for me with "Just say no to power tools." A vegan might not use hide glue, and so on.
If they have a practical objection then it is pretty much analogous to rejecting Freud's theories on Scientific grounds, no?
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.