travelinwifey

Yes, Patrick that's exactly what I'm saying. He said it in the lawsuit in order to get more money.

I personally feel the man has low moral character. This is an opinion. Maybe he he had some sort of spiritual awakening after the court case was settled, but I doubt it. In the mean time the facts show that he lied at some point in order to get money.

There is much more about this case such as how an early 30 something woman ended up with a loss to oxygen in her brain causing this vegitative state in the first case. I have no personal knowledge of what happened to her so I can't comment.

snowrooster

I'm not judging you at all. I'm sorry you had to deal with a difficult situation. Imagine if while you were going through that, complete strangers from around the country were attacking your morality. I don't know what is in Michael Shiavo's heart and all the links, media coverage, and tirades from strangers isn't going to change that. Somehow you are convinced you can see into his soul - truly amazing. I'm not a religious person, but isn't there a saying about casting stones?

annesherrod

Rave - I actually read all the posts. A slow morning here. Talking to my husband through Skype who is in Syria right now.
He will be home before Easter thank goodness.
Eve - We are same age, and I too have to think for a moment, OK....42, 43...
Oh who cares I feel like I am 23!!!
NO Rants..... at the moment

JJ5

Re the living will etc. I've been told by several nurses, my own doctor, and also one lawyer, that if you are unmarried in my state, it "works" a big percentage of the time, but that it is not always a total guarantee that you will not be treated long term with "heroic measures". It is because of the time frames involved. If a stroke or some other "event" happens very quickly and then you are revived, but are brain damaged- you will probably still "live" with what you have. In my state, you need to go to just a couple of long term facilities to see this. In the state of emergency, and without (and sometimes even with-depends on the doctor and witnesses) a spouse actually present, they are obliged to perform methods to sustain you. That is without a "do not recessitate" order standing. For very young people especially, they are not going to have any DNR order standing. I have a friend and former co-worker who has been in facility for 15 years also, and she was in her 30's when the massive stroke occurred. She has very little cognitive ability, but rarely does have evidence of some. She does not feed herself or move much. She needs lots of manipulative care, but her muscles are still atrophing and it is just horrible. But when force feed, she does swallow. This can happen with a terrible physical accident also, like a car wreck. That's why you can get all the notary additions you need and still in some cases,if the right doctor is not there at the right moments, you still may not really get your real choice. I just know this specific woman would not have wanted this either, but elderly parents are central in this case also. Ever time she gets infection or anything they use IV antibiotic etc.

As for St. Patrick's green- it has been huge in Chicago regardless of who is mayor. When Harold Washington was Mayor he still dyed the Chicago River Green and lead the parade in green and top hat. We have two parades, one downtown and one on the SouthSide that is really the huge one. And not everybody thinks of it as just another thing to do. And it was never obligatory, wearing green. But I was, as an individual made miserable on that day for years
when I was small, because I was not Irish.

We have one faculty member who is brillant, speaks 7 languages, and wore Orange at school Thursday (university). And made it a point to tell everyone about Irish politics and the fact that they were neutral in WWII, among other things. (Read the European thread if you really want to see some bigotry, bias on this issue.) She is never shy about advertising her positions, but in many ways and this is one, the accepted methods surrounding many holidays when I was growing up in the 50's- would not be pc today.

travelinwifey

Snowrooster, my husband's morality has been attacked in a frivolous lawsuit in which we won after 4 years of legal proceedings. The man not only suid my husband for $2 million dollars but for $4 million dollars from the hospital as well. It is a long story but we hired a private investigator showing hours of tape where this man suffered no injuries. Thankfully the jury agreed, but not after 4 years of a man who works 80 hours a week having to waste many more hours thinking about and defending the case.

The story about my Grandfather is a horrific one. My father lived for 9 months in a completely vegitative state because the nurses in his assisted living care community called for an ambulance. At that time there was a law (there still may be) that when an ambulance is called all measures must be set fourth to recessitate a person. My grandfather had been suffering from Alzheimers for 3 uears. We knew after a while that grandpap was not coming back so we had to petition the court to have his life support removed. It was a very sad situation and I know how families suffer when this happens.

I am not trying to see into this mans soul but I am reporting inconsistencies in his actions. I have reported an opinion, and again the powers that be will be the judge if there is a heaven and hell.

So that's a good portion of my life story. I hope we call a draw Snowrooster and put the discussion to rest

snowrooster

I am truly sorry for the difficult situations you've encountered. My parents were the victims of a frivilous lawsuit as well by a neighbor. The neighbors thought my parents shouldn't let it harm their friendship since most of the money they were sueing for ($100,000 of $106,000) would be covered by insurance. My parents lawyer offered to settle at one point (my mom was so stressed out and just wanted it to be done with) but the neighbors refused. They ended up getting nothing!!!

I don't know Michael Shiavo - he may very well be an evil man. I think I'm annoyed more with the folks attacking him and using his wife for political gain, but that doesn't seem to be you. Anyway, I was thinking that I've cast few stones in Kobe Bryant's direction (don't know him, but I'm quite sure he raped that girl) so perhaps I shouldn't be so hard on you (thought as a prof athlete he does put himself in the spotlight).

So have a nice weekend. Here is my new

Rant: We're supposed to go to an Easter Egg Hunt and it looks like it's about to pour.

Far less controversial, don't you think?!?

travelinwifey

Oh, I feel so much better Snowrooster. I guess sometimes I can be blunt. I apologize.

Have a great weekend

My new rave/rant would be that we are trying to plan a 50th wedding anniversary for the inlaws.... talk about different ideas

PamSF

I think it is always compassionate to err on the side of providing some pain relief. Having watched many people die over the years and now working a great deal on palliative care, the "organism" responds in a variety of ways, many of them simply physiological.

PamSF

(sorry, it posted too soon) I sit on the Ethics committee of a large medical center. We are often faced with difficult and very complex situations. This case is particularly disturbing. The attempt of the US government to involve itself it nightmarish!

And, at the risk of being flamed, I personally do not think the attempt by the government to involve itself is about her right to die vs live but much more about abortion.

ronkala

Pam you are so right. The government has no place in this issue, but once again this administration is forcing itself into our private lives..

starrsville

Amen to that.

What happened to the "less government" approach. In the past few years the government has tried to get into bedrooms, classrooms and now hospital rooms.

While you have a right to your opinion, I don't think you have a right to legislate your opinion into law in order to take away my rights. That invasion is neither needed or appreciated.

JJ5

I think that the issue of "big" government is a big inconsistency with this administration and the Republican Party in general at this time- because that is not a conservative nor traditionally Republican "plank" to their support base. Quite the opposite. Yet, I don't see the Democratic party living up to a "less" government approach either in any aspect, and certainly not in family or health laws. Nor have they ever in the last 50 years.

I'm not sure that this is about abortion as much as most left-leaners on this board think it is, but more of a strongly moralistic approach to almost everything in general- that it seems many who think of themselves as having a liberal affiliation, just do not "get". Although "of" a religion or not, many, if not most of you think these moral dictates are almost always relative and intrinsically personal. The other side does not. Neither did our founding fathers, nor any but a very small percentage of our ancestors, for the most part. They really were not called the ten suggestions, but the ten commandments. And almost all religions had this stricture base in some form- the big guidelines or "play" plan for homo sapiens to live with him/herself and with the source of life. And they believed those strict dictates were the essence of law, even if they didn't always have actions that "jived" with this belief system.

I'm not saying that I don't agree with you, and I do strongly oppose more laws, especially with regards to this kind of obsessive reckoning. But by linking the connection in the way you have, I don't think you really understand their ideals of belief (which many of them do live by) and the "moral relativism" that you embrace and they just don't.

starrsville

Say what?

I have no idea what you are trying to say. But, if you are saying that our founding fathers would have approved of and supported what is going on right now, I would respectfully disagree.

Refer to the Jefferson Bible.