I agree that not just Republicans were confused by this story. Jesse Jackson, a man I generally agree with, was for keeping her body alive. But, it was not just a guess that had the tube removed. The people responsible for making the call had enough of the right proof and made the only viable choice.
Lash wrote:
parados-- You may be under the impression that you know all there is to know re this case and what the brain is capable of-- Congratulations. I realize there is a great deal about the human brain and the way it works that is unknown. I'm just not confident enough to end someone's life, based on incomplete information.
There is a difference between complete information and stupidity. The Drs had COMPLETE information. You didn't. Frist didn't. The fact that you don't feel you had enough information in no way changes the facts known by those closest to the case. It is complete idiocy to demand that those with intimate knowledge kowtow to people that either refuse to or are incapable of getting the complete information. It would make as much sense as me stating "I am not confident that you should get above a C in any of your classes."
Teri Schiavo's brain was full of liquid, and her condition was irreversible according to the experts that diagnosed her personally and her xrays. Even the autopsy confirmed what was already known. Some people will continue to argue that we still don't know about the brain; that's true, most people who supposedly have brains still insist Teri Schiavo had a chance to recover - without explaining how that could be done.
By the way, Frist is backing off his statement that Teri was not in a persistent vegetative state. They showed it on the Daily Show. First a clip showing Frist saying it did not look like a PVS to him, then the recent clip showing Frist claiming he never said such a thing.
Too bad Frist was seen on tape all over the world before he recanted, but that's what politicians do. Many get away with it.
parados--
Complete information about the infinite possibilities and/or intricate workings of the brain are not yet available. Therefore, that information was NOT available to the doctors in the Schiavo case.
There are some things that continue to be unknown. Why don't you admit it?
Not all is known about the brain, but a dead one is not such a mystery.
President's Statement on Terri Schiavo
The case of Terri Schiavo raises complex issues. Yet in instances like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life. Those who live at the mercy of others deserve our special care and concern. It should be our goal as a nation to build a culture of life, where all Americans are valued, welcomed, and protected - and that culture of life must extend to individuals with disabilities.
Comment: This prez doesn't seem to care for all the families withouth health insurance, so what the fxxx is he talking about when he says, "...all Americans are valued, welcomed, and protected...?"
A dead brain means the human can't breathe, open eyes, move...
If she's been in that condition, I wouldn't have had a complaint.
Brain dead with reflexive action is not a functioning person, which was her state.
Lash, you've seen this post before.
This was taken before the feeding tube was removed.
You can't just say that "since every conceivable thing is not known about the brain, we can't decide". That's a dodge. The doctors don't need to know every conceivable thing about the brain to know when it is functioning and when it isn't.
The doctors had access to ALL information necessary to make the decision. Again, there was no brain function.
I am just going to reprint
this post to remind us all of what was really being said.
Cycloptichorn wrote:
We know that certain parts of the brain control cognition and thought. We know that Terri doesn't have those parts of her brain any longer.
Cerebrocrat wrote:
Quote:
But there's something being lost in this discussion of brain imaging methods. The fact that an MRI would give a better structural picture of Terri Schiavo's brain does not at all mean that the existing CAT scan isn't good enough for present purposes. I see much serious armchair scan-reading in this thread that signals ignorance of the subject. Let me tell you: if you are sufficiently familiar with brains and brain images, you do not need an MRI to tell you how severely the brain in the pictured CAT scan is damaged, nor do you need to see more slices than the one depicted here. This single image shows a very severely damaged brain. The large "blue blobs" in the middle are ventricles, also present in healthy brains (you can see the two little dark crescent shapes in the brain on the right) that have expanded to such a large size because the overall brain volume is so low. Cranial space that would otherwize have been filled by gray matter is now filled with cerebrospinal fluid. And yes, that's what the blue space is: cerebrospinal fluid that is filling up space left behind by necrotic brain tissue that has been scavenged and removed by the body. The white squiggly things are white matter - connective tracts that have the loose, uncoiled look about them that they do because, again, the grey matter that once compressed them is no longer there, so they "float" loosely in CSF. The gigantic ventricles, expanded white matter, and undifferentiated blue space in that scan all point to the same thing: massive loss of grey matter in the cerebral cortex. You don't need an MRI to tell you that, it's clearly visible in the CAT scan.
It is true that given the poor resolution of this image, it's possible that some cortical tissue has been spared. But that doesn't matter. Whatever wisps of cortex we might be missing in this image are not enough to sustain behaviors that could differentiate Terri Schiavo from any other vertebrate. All the neural equipment you need to do ocular following and emotional responses is subcortical. All the neural equipment you need to be a self-aware, reasoning, behaving human being is cortical. And since i gather this image was made some time ago, the present condition of the brain can only be worse.
There is no way any qualified brain doctor or scientist could look at this image and suggest that significant recovery of function is possible. The fact that we could have all this discussion on the subject is a triumph of politics over science. Tragic for Terri Schiavo, and really for us all.
Cycloptichorn
Again, is there any part of the autopsy which contradicts this report here?
And your complaint means what, exactly?
Cicerone:
I'm not complaining.
Sorry, I meant to address my post to Lash.
She wasn't brain dead. I don't want the terminology to be incorrect.
THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE
Her condition: Doctor explains the 'persistent vegetative state'
Sabin Russell, Chronicle Medical Writer
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
The Terri Schiavo Case
Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman whose husband and parents are battling over whether to let her die or keep her alive, exists in the rare and paradoxical "persistent vegetative state," where neurologists can find a patient to be at once unconscious but alert.
With her cerebral cortex apparently destroyed, Schiavo is almost certainly unable to return to a state of awareness -- that is, knowing who she is and where she exists in time and place.
These are traits, like the faculty of speech, governed by the cerebral cortex, which, doctors say, has died in Schiavo's case.
But she is decidedly not brain-dead.
Her brain stem -- a more primitive and hardy core of nerve tissue that controls her breathing and cycles of wakefulness -- is very much alive, as evidenced by her ability to breathe without a respirator and her open eyes, which can appear to track a moving object.
Defining the differences in these states of being is the work of neurologists such as Dr. Wade Smith, director of the Neurocritical Care Unit at the UCSF Medical Center. He regularly teaches a course on the subject to young medical students, many of whom are entering a lifetime of counseling families on difficult choices of life and death in the midst of trauma and tragedy.
Without her feeding tube or water, and barring legal intervention, Schiavo probably has less than two weeks to live. But in a vegetative state, does she feel hunger, thirst or pain? "As a neurologist, I would say no," said Smith.
A person who is unconscious will feel no more hunger or pain than a patient who has undergone general anesthesia. The awareness functions of the higher brain are no longer a factor. "It is why anesthesia works," Smith said.
But people in a persistent vegetative state will nonetheless react to a "painful" stimulus in a reflexive manner. Pinch, and they will flinch.
A patient in a persistent vegetative state would never be considered a candidate to donate an organ; hearts, lungs, livers and kidneys can be harvested only from the brain-dead.
Neurologists are armed with a long list of descriptors for the varying states of mental being. At one end is brain death, and at the other is consciousness. But in between, the medical meanings can sow confusion:
Because Schiavo's eyes can open, she is, by definition, alert.
With eyes that open and close in accord with cycles of sleep, it even could be argued that a person in a persistent vegetative state can be simultaneously unconscious and awake. A brain scan, however, would show no activity that we normally associate with wakefulness.
A person in a vegetative state is defined as one who is arousable -- which means merely a reflexive response to a stimulus -- but unaware. It is not necessary to wake up to be aroused. If a vegetative state exists for six weeks to three months, it is deemed a "persistent" vegetative state.
A person in a persistent vegetative state is not in a coma. A person in a coma is unconscious, and unable to be aroused.
There is a similar distinction defining stupor. A person in a stupor shows some response to stimulation but will easily slip back into a state where he or she cannot be aroused.
Sleep, strictly defined, is a state of unconsciousness from which a person can be aroused. But there is another halfway state -- somnolence -- where a person can wake up enough to carry a brief conversation before falling back into sleep.
The strange limbo of people in vegetative states poses a dilemma to those who must make life-and-death decisions in the state of full awareness.
"If two physicians sit down and examine a person like Terri Schiavo, there can be a disagreement," said Smith.
In the medical literature, there are no cases of someone recovering from what is defined as clinical brain death, but there are five published cases of "recovery of some sentient function" among patients who were diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state.
Typically, the decisions that are made about the future of people in vegetative states are made by family members.
"Most of these discussions never leave the intensive care unit," Smith said. "That's the way it should be."
---------
My complaint is that in the absence of a living will or her ability to state her wish to die--and in the presence of parents and siblings who begged to take custody of her, she should have been fed and given water. We don't know if she wanted to live. We don't know if her slow death was agonizingly painful.
I don't doubt she wouldn't have improved. She was still human.
Okay, so we agree with "brain damaged." So, your complaint means what, exactly?
It seems that you are asking a rhetorical question, CI. I'm sure it means nothing to anyone other than me.
I don't think they should have stopped giving her water and food. Not under the circumstances that existed.
But, she's dead.
She was brain dead in the functions that matter. Functions that keep the toenails growing or the face moving are useless without those parts.
Lash, Just make sure your family keeps you alive even though you are brain damaged. Tell them to keep feeding you and give you water. Okay?
