Appeals court to consider Schiavo request
Wednesday, March 30th, 2005 at 11:15 pm
I thought the Schiavo case had been settled, but I guess not:
Appeals court to consider Schiavo request:
In a rare legal victory for Terri Schiavo's parents, a federal appeals court has agreed to consider their request for a new hearing on whether to reconnect their severely brain-damaged daughter's feeding tube.
"Severely brain-damaged" is putting it lightly. How about devoid of all cortical function? Basically anything that makes a human unique (i.e. memory, emotion, intellect, and all other higher functions) are gone, with no hope of regaining them. This 2002 CT scan shows massive atrophy (shrinking) of the brain, that even I, as a medical student with 1 neuroimaging lecture under my belt can diagnose it.

Media Credit
The individual Terri Schaivo actually died many, many years ago with the death of her cerebral cortex. All that is left is a shell of automatic reflexes…
In other news, Vermont is looking more and more attractive, so the same thing doesn't happen to me.
Email to Friend
Permalink
Filed under:
Sonja Says:



do you think it has cost a lot of money to keep her alive all these years, or is it not really that much food/machine cost? (not that i´m advocating killing people because it´s too expensive t keep them alive!..but then again it´s not really killing, since they are basically dead without the machines…so letting them die I guess is better put..)
Yes, health care in the US is expensive, on the order of thousands of dollars a day for hospitalization. However, she is the recipient of a multi-million dollar malpractice verdict (for not diagnosing her eating disorder, which lead to the electrolyte imbalance, heart attack, and eventual brain death) which is supposed to be used for her care.
In my view, she has been dead for the last 15 years, and her parents have been selfish in that they wanted to keep her “alive” for their own emotional needs. While I empathize with the parents, withholding nutritional support is just recognizing that a meaningful recovery is not possible, and allows her parents to finally have closure.
In reference to your other argument: there are some ethicists that would agree with you. From a purely utilitarian point of view, this patient is in a persistent vegetative state (having no cerebral function), and has no meaningful chance of recovery. Therefore, it would be wrong to waste resources to keep the patient biologically functioning (but not alive) for 15 years, for no purpose other than the emotional needs of the parents. Those financial, and other, resources could be better utilized by treating patients who actually have a chance at getting better.
Wow, didn´t know that about the ED - but that´s not really the hospital or doctor´s fault for not diagnosing it is it? I mean, if she wanted it to be diagnosed, then she would have been…I´m sure she knew she had a problem and if she told the docs everything, then they probably would have been able to diagnose it, or? Did she have anorexia? Sounds like this family must know the ins and outs of the legal system by now!
I’m not really too sure of the details of the malpractice case - I think the argument was that the doctor should have known something was wrong if the electrolyte balance was that screwed up…
I just read in Stern that it was a Kalium deficiency that caused her heart to stop - but I´m not sure what Kalium is in English and since I´m at an internet cafe wasting valuable money, I´m not gonna look it up and hope that you do and let me know
Kalium = Potassium