Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: terri schaivo tears. march 31st her death.

Expand Messages
  • Thomas Morey
    Yes, Judith. It is a real sad day, for sure. Not only are those who knew her and loved her, especially her parents, shedding a tear, they are in tremendous
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, Judith.

      It is a real sad day, for sure. Not only are those who knew her and loved her, especially her parents, shedding a tear, they are in tremendous grief right now, something in which you and I can't relate to or experience about Terri. However, there is a multitude of people who didn't know Terri, and love life, like yourself, who are shedding tears because of what Terri represented to all Americans.

      Although Terri is now gone from this world, the onset of her severely limiting condition 15 years ago, her struggle against this greatly limited condition ever since, and her shameful death means so much more than you and I can even imagine, or understand what kind of impact for good her life and her death will have, on our American culture. One of our ancient fathers of the Christian faith, Justin Martyr (who also later was killed for the cause of Christ our Lord, hence the derivation of the word "martyr", which originally meant "witness"), said (although I don't remember it verbatim) in effect that those who are murdered in the name of the Author of Life, the spilling of their blood becomes the seed of faith in the ground of the hearts of all those who are witnesses of their lives, as well as of their unjustifiable and cruel deaths. In a sense, Terri is a Christ-like figure for us as well, since her death does resemble, (albeit by means of the contemporary and sophisticated
      American judicial process, and the "highly advanced" practice of medicine and technology) these shameful deaths of the ancient faithful. Her death will inevitably mean life in the future for so many.

      The impact her story will have on our society will make it quite difficult for anyone, including secularists, to deny. She will be an abiding "witness" to the whole issue of the evils of euthanasia, highlighting the position of those who hold to a quality of life philosophy of who dies and who lives for what it is, a culture of death constructed by a foolish, dark, and morally bankrupt secularist philosophy of life, and how much more unappealing to the masses it will become. In turn, this will have a great effect on the American judiciary, as those judicial candidates of the various local, state and federal courts, who happen to hold to a pro-life position, will even more often be elected than they are now, rather than those who eventually become leftist activist judges. All other institutions of American society, such as our many colleges and universities, will indeed experience for good at least some repercussions because of the salient and shameful manner in which she died, which
      is the product and end result of a secularist philosphy of life. It does appear that that is why she had to die, because it was God's predetermined plan so that many would shed the secularist scales from their eyes, and begin to see, and believe in the Author of Life through this debacle of American justice.

      Can you now see with your eye of faith God's hand, what would otherwise appear to be a purposeless, tragic death with the eye of the flesh, in allowing her death in this horrific fashion?

      I hope and pray that you can and will.

      Blessings,

      Tom

      Btw, your subject line is real good, because it does indeed effectively encapsulate your message. Way to go, Judith! However, usually any words that describe one's emotional state are better left in the body of your message, such as the words "tears", "smiles", and "arrrgh", since they are subjective in nature, and do nothing to describe and encapsulate the subject or topic of your message, which are most often objective in nature.

      And, oh yes, look at the following reprinted article from the Elliot Institute. Boy, does it lend light on to the subject!
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      In memory of Terri Schiavo, who died from planned negligence on March 31, 2005, we reprint the following commentary.

      Below the commentary, we also offer an important recommendation for legislation that would guarantee resumption of mouth feeding whenever feeding tube assistance is withdrawn.

      BE KIND TO "VEGETABLES"

      By David C. Reardon, Ph.D.

      Jackie lies motionless, incapable of smiling, or crying, or responding to a gentle touch. She is seemingly dead to all that is around her. Her doctor has diagnosed her as being in an irreversible "persistent vegetative state" (PVS). She is only a "vegetable."

      Yet she breathes. She sleeps. She can swallow spoon-fed meals of broth and nutrient "shakes." She may live for thirty years like this. Never laughing. Never crying.

      She is a "vegetable." But she is also a mother. Her children mourn for her. They want her with them, but not like this. Someone suggests that by withholding food and water they would simply be letting nature take its course. Certainly she would not want to live like this. It would be an act of charity to let her die, they say.

      On the other hand, when is the last time you did something charitable for a carrot? A vegetable cannot suffer. So how can death put a vegetable out of its misery?

      If she is human enough to suffer, then clearly she is a person, not a "vegetable," and she deserves all the love, care, and respect due all persons. Even like this, she has still been created in the image of God. Are we too blind to recognize anything God-like in her passive silence? Her patient endurance? Her calm acceptance of an undisclosed, divine Will?

      By withholding food and water, Jackie, like anyone else, will die. But since she is incapable of appreciating the generosity of this refusal to feed her, it is not charity for her sake. At best it is an act of charity toward the family which grows weary at her side. At worst, it is an act of selfishness on the part of a society which does not want to share in the cost and inconvenience of sharing her family's burden of care.

      When faced with any moral quandary such as this, we must constantly ask ourselves, "What is God's will in this?" Is He somehow shaping her soul, purifying her, preparing her for her day in heaven? Can something be going on behind those sightless eyes, something beyond the knowledge of man?

      Or is God perhaps using this soul as an instrument of grace for shaping the souls of those around her? Is He using her to call forth compassion, patience, endurance, and love from her family, her caretakers, her society?

      By causing her to die through our neglect, are we interfering with God's Will for her? Or are we rejecting His Will for us? Are we rejecting an opportunity to practice sacrificial love?

      What would Jesus do if He were standing at her side? Would he not reach down, take her hand, and call on her to awake?

      In fact, to those not blind to God's healing hand, this is exactly what Jesus does. According to a recent medical study of 84 PVS patients, over 52% of the patients recovered within one year. After three years, 58% had regained consciousness. After extensive review of the data, researchers were unable to identify any reliable way to predict who might recover and who might not. In other words, every PVS patient has a chance of recovery.1

      According to Dr. Keith Andrews, Director of Medical and Research Services at the Royal Hospital and Home, PVS patients "are not being allowed to reach their optimal recovery because they are not offered the opportunity of rehabilitation programs. . . . The experience of our Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit is that nearly all of those patients admitted in PVS are suffering from under nutrition... and have developed deformities which further inhibit recovery." According to Dr. Andrews, "Rehabilitation for these patients has not been tried and found wanting; it is wanted but, too often, not been tried."

      By starving our PVS patients to death, are we not denying God the opportunity to work miracles? Are we not denying Him the glory and thanksgiving that is His due?

      Six weeks after Jackie lapsed into a coma, six days after her family followed their physician's advice and asked a court to authorize withholding of food and water, Jackie woke up. Today, she is fully recovered.

      Anyone who has seen Robert DeNiro in the film "Awakenings" will appreciate how joyful and awe inspiring such awakenings can be. Truly they are instruments for shaping souls. If nothing else, they teach us humility, reminding us that we have only the faintest understanding of the workings of the human mind, much less the Divine mind.

      Perhaps we need to be like children, for they often see more clearly than "sophisticated" adults. I am thinking especially of the homeless youth who carried his brother into Boy's Town. If this brave lad had instead been seated at the side of his PVS mother, he may have uttered these simple words for the ages: "She's not a vegetable. She's my mother."

      Originally published in The PostAbortion Review 5(2) Spring 1997. Copyright 1997 Elliot Institute. http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V5/n2/vegetable.htm

      1. Levin, "Vegetative State After Closed-Head Injury", 48 Archives of Neurology, 580-585 (June 1991) cited in LIFE AT RISK, 1:( 6) Dec. 1991

      >>> CALL YOUR LEGISLATOR -- The life you save may be your own <<<

      In the wake of Terri Schiavo's death, there will be, and should be, legislative efforts to protect patients who are fed with feeding tubes from being summarily starved to death.

      As often as not, patients who are placed on feeding tubes are capable of swallowing. The reason they are given "assisted feeding" through tubes is primarily because hand feeding is a time consuming task for the staff in long-term care facilities. In other words, it is easier and cheaper to feed the minimally conscious through a feeding tube. It also reflects the assumption that the patient can't enjoy his or her food, so way bother passing it over the tongue? On the more noble side, use of a feeding tube allows the nursing staff to verify that the calorie intake is at the level proscribed.

      One of the dangers of using feeding tubes is that the muscles used to swallow may atrophy for lack of exercise. Thus, some patients may not be immediately able to swallow without difficulty if assisted feeding through a tube is stopped. Thus, the feeding tubes may produce the iatrogenic disease (a condition arising from medical treatment) of an inability to swallow. Therefore, removal of feeding tubes should always be accompanied by a period of physical therapy designed to retrain the complex coordination of muscles used in the swallowing process.

      In Terri Schiavo's case there is considerable evidence that she was still able to swallow soft foods, such as Jello. But once the death march was begun, her ability was not even tested, much less given a chance to improve. Instead, under the orders of the her husband (who was also the common law husband of the mother of his two children), Terri was not to be allowed to receive any nutrition or water orally. In other words, neither the court nor her husband wanted to complicate matters by discovering that she could still swallow. Some say ignorance is bliss. In this case, the pro-death crowd need ignorance as an excuse for starving the dependent to death.

      While it is not inherently evil to put a patient on a feeding tube, it is evil to use the feeding tube over a long period of time and to allow a suppression of swallowing reflexes and then remove the feeding tube and declare, "She can't swallow food! Therefore, this feeding tube is extraordinary treatment. So instead of keeping her alive by artificial means, the ethical thing to do is to let nature take it's course. (In other words, allow her to die because she can't forage for food or swallow it on her own.)"

      Even the pro-death crowd have yet to declare that feeding the minimally conscious with a spoon is "extraordinary care" that can be withdrawn without committing murder by neglect. Instead, they advocate for the insertion of feeding tubes which--at least arguably--is a form of "artificial life support." Once the tube is in, then can this "artificial life support" can be withdrawn to let nature take it's course. This is the game...and in the case of Terri and tens of thousands of others...the deadly game.

      So here is my proposal for legislators. The law should require that in any case where feeding tubes are to be withdrawn, a period of time, say 30 days, must be allowed where the feeding tube is used and rehabilitative efforts at oral feeding must be attempted, and thereafter oral feeding must be provided to the degree that the patient is able and willing to swallow, or even hold the food in his mouth, unless there is a clear and evident choking, distress, and pain. This "attempts to feed by mouth" requirement should even override a patient's living will order not to have any artificial life support, precisely because feeding and hydration is not life support but fundamental life maintenance required be even the healthiest of patients. Starving a person to death by withholding food, even orally, is no different than putting a pillow over a patient's face to deprive her of oxygen.

      Please contact your state legislator and ask him or her to sponsor legislation regulating the withdrawal of feeding tubes to require oral feeding. The debate that will follow will reveal (1) that feeding tubes are preferred for saving money, not for advancing patient's recovery and (2) the pro-death crowd is opposed to mandatory attempts at oral feeding precisely because they ordinary care is not deadly enough. I'm confident that this is a common-sense proposal that most people will support, especially in the wake of the Schiavo case. What will be interesting is to see how the pro-death culture will oppose it.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: judith
      To: .................
      Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 9:07 PM
      Subject: terri schaivo tears. march 31st her death.

      ---------------------------------


      Hi



      I am sure you know that people like Dr Dobson are in tears. Besides me. How are you handling the loss of Terri Schaivo?



      This below was written before her death. It willl give you some idea of what I am experiencing �and now more so after her death except �like every one has said �even Dr Dobson that �a woman didn�t want to die and our govt let her. And what her jerk of a husband is doing to her parents etc. not letting them in there and �I have often wondered why God. Why allow her to die. Etc.? And I fear our nation�I have seen the culter of death ever since I realized that children are dying and so are animals and If you wonder why I bring animals into this is because there is not regard for life of any kind. Parents killing kids like the JW; and criminals killing people,etc list goes on.




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.