CoachChuckDickerson Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 Reality? You just have never experienced love. There's more to that than just "emotions". Truly loving someone becomes a way of life. Part of you understands the "reality" of death, but the majority of you becomes a part of someone else, and they with you. When that gets taken away, it's very disrupting, in practical terms as well as emotional. It's different than losing a parent. I've even had people try to compare it to losing their cat. What sad, sad people. I am sorry for your loss. Everyone deals with loss in their own way and it is not easy, especially when it is somebody you love. However, belittling the losses of others and saying their loss is nothing compared to yours is just ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 I am sorry for your loss. Everyone deals with loss in their own way and it is not easy, especially when it is somebody you love. However, belittling the losses of others and saying their loss is nothing compared to yours is just ignorant. 357115[/snapback] Where did you get that? I said it was different than losing a parent, not less than. And if cats are more important to you than people, especially a spouse or a family member, we have a serious difference of opinion. The "sad sad" part goes with the cats, not family members-if that clears up your confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 Where did you get that? I said it was different than losing a parent, not less than. And if cats are more important to you than people, especially a spouse or a family member, we have a serious difference of opinion. The "sad sad" part goes with the cats, not family members-if that clears up your confusion. 357160[/snapback] I should have included the cat disclaimer. Comparing the death of a cat is definitely ignorant. I can see where you are coming from now, sorry for the misunderstanding and once again, sorry for your loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 I hate to praise the pope's death, but i was very glad that JP2 got sick within 12 hours of schaivo. That swept that useless story under the rug really quick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 14, 2005 Author Share Posted June 14, 2005 Why do you care? Does it matter to you? Lose someone close to you, and see how you feel about their autopsy results posted on the internet, for what amounts to be your entertainment. First of all, sorry for your loss. Second of all, get off your high horse: you're not the only one who has lost someone close to you, and no I don't mean a pet. Third of all, yes I DO care and no it's not for "entertainment" purposes, since I want to know whether the autopsy showed that she was brain damaged to the point of being a "vegetable" and was thus properly allowed to die. Last of all, I wouldn't want my loved one's autopsy results posted on the internet, but I also wouldn't selfishly keep them alive and in the process cause their picture in a vegetative state to be plastered all over the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 First of all, sorry for your loss. Second of all, get off your high horse: you're not the only one who has lost someone close to you, and no I don't mean a pet. Third of all, yes I DO care and no it's not for "entertainment" purposes, since I want to know whether the autopsy showed that she was brain damaged to the point of being a "vegetable" and was thus properly allowed to die. Last of all, I wouldn't want my loved one's autopsy results posted on the internet, but I also wouldn't selfishly keep them alive and in the process cause their picture in a vegetative state to be plastered all over the media. 357891[/snapback] So, how is you knowing going to change anything? You going to bring her back? You going to have people arrested for murder? Have people arrested for abuse? Seriously, how is you knowing going to change one bit of it? I'm well aware I'm not the only person who has lost someone close to me. Happens everyday, doesn't it? That's why I am all for keeping private things private. There's nothing to be learned of value, here. Not all cases are the same. If they were, perhaps. But they're not. Personally, were I her, I would have been immensley grateful to have the plug pulled day one they knew I was in that shape, but that's me. So, what benefit is there for you to personally have information as to whether she was brain damaged to "x" degree or not? And, can that even be totally determined by a post mortum? Once again, you want to know so you can know. There's nothing you can do about it, which doesn't give YOUR high horse knowledge any value, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Where did you get that? I said it was different than losing a parent, not less than. And if cats are more important to you than people, especially a spouse or a family member, we have a serious difference of opinion. The "sad sad" part goes with the cats, not family members-if that clears up your confusion. 357160[/snapback] I'd gladly sacrifice my cat if it would bring back your Darlene. And I'd give up just about everything else to get Nick back. That all said - I assume you were just in your own backhanded way pointing out that what was such a big, freaking, divisive deal mere weeks ago is now...forgotten? Not meaningless...but there are probably many sheepish people out there. Anticlimactic? Maybe. With the emphasis on the sheep part. Or perhaps just that for all we have free will and can make choices, there are some that are made for us an no matter how hard we fight, we can't change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 14, 2005 Author Share Posted June 14, 2005 So, how is you knowing going to change anything? You going to bring her back? You going to have people arrested for murder? Have people arrested for abuse? Seriously, how is you knowing going to change one bit of it? I'm well aware I'm not the only person who has lost someone close to me. Happens everyday, doesn't it? That's why I am all for keeping private things private. There's nothing to be learned of value, here. Not all cases are the same. If they were, perhaps. But they're not. Personally, were I her, I would have been immensley grateful to have the plug pulled day one they knew I was in that shape, but that's me. So, what benefit is there for you to personally have information as to whether she was brain damaged to "x" degree or not? And, can that even be totally determined by a post mortum? Once again, you want to know so you can know. There's nothing you can do about it, which doesn't give YOUR high horse knowledge any value, does it? Sorry GoBiB but there was NOTHING private about this case, and thus the results of the autopsy shouldn't be either. And it DOES give me some value because I believed she was in a PVS and I'm hoping the autopsy showed that, so that if I'm in a similar situation with a loved one, I can use what I've learned from TS' case and make a rational and not emotional/selfish decision on my loved one's part. About the ONLY good that came out of this was the awareness for a need for a living will, so that people's wishes are known to all who need to know, not dragged obscenely into public for all to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Sorry GoBiB but there was NOTHING private about this case, and thus the results of the autopsy shouldn't be either. And it DOES give me some value because I believed she was in a PVS and I'm hoping the autopsy showed that, so that if I'm in a similar situation with a loved one, I can use what I've learned from TS' case and make a rational and not emotional/selfish decision on my loved one's part. About the ONLY good that came out of this was the awareness for a need for a living will, so that people's wishes are known to all who need to know, not dragged obscenely into public for all to see. 357927[/snapback] I have one, and so did my wife. (living will) I suggest them to anyone, so that all of this can be avoided. I also strongly suggest that couples, or whatever relationships are pertinent pre-make their funeral arrangements together. Right when someone dies unexpectedly is not the best time to be figuring that out. The question I still have though, is what two cases are the same? What may have been true is TS's case is not necessarily true in another. The living will should preclude most of that, but think - another angle would be basing TOO much opinion on this case. Wouldn't it be more useful to research through medical/pathology/etc literature several cases? And use a collection of them to form an idea? What if somehow an autopsy showed that she was "marginally aware" on some level? Where would that put your thoughts, when maybe 100 other similar cases might have a totally different result? Once again, were I ever in that shape AND aware...I can think of no greater hell on earth than someone allowing me to live. but once again, that's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 14, 2005 Author Share Posted June 14, 2005 The question I still have though, is what two cases are the same? What may have been true is TS's case is not necessarily true in another. The living will should preclude most of that, but think - another angle would be basing TOO much opinion on this case. Wouldn't it be more useful to research through medical/pathology/etc literature several cases? And use a collection of them to form an idea? What if somehow an autopsy showed that she was "marginally aware" on some level? Where would that put your thoughts, when maybe 100 other similar cases might have a totally different result? All the scans and most of the interviews with TS said she was in a PVS. The autopsy was basically supposed to say that, yes, her cerebral cortex had shrivelled to almost nothing, meaning she had no "higher functions" and was basically in a PVS. They could have simply weighed her brain, compared it to the average weight of the brain of a woman her size, and made the determination that the lost weight was cerebral cortex and determined the percent of atrophy, or something close to that. And yes no 2 cases are alike, but while looking into her case, I also read about other cases, and as I said, think I can make a rational versus an emotional decision should the need arise. Once again, were I ever in that shape AND aware...I can think of no greater hell on earth than someone allowing me to live. but once again, that's me. Same here. And FWIW, I think TS really would have wanted to die and would have been horrified at seeing her face in her state plastered all over newspapers and TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 For anyone who still cares... No evidence of trauma on autopsy Carry on.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 was she poisoned by her husband?? who knows, who cares... The only interesting thing i got from that report was that the dr. concluded that she couldn't have fed herself w/o the tube and that she had no way of recovering. one thing that can't be changed is that everyone involved in this case was scum, except for terri herself. Her husband for having a commonlaw wife and kids and her own parents for dragging her through the media. I wonder what mac bledsoe would say about them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 Ask and ye shall receive! was she poisoned by her husband?? who knows, who cares... The only interesting thing i got from that report was that the dr. concluded that she couldn't have fed herself w/o the tube and that she had no way of recovering. There was also no evidence that she had an eating disorder, which was the theory of why she collapsed (i.e. low potassium from vomiting). Good, I'm glad the autopsy results showed this. She was appropriately allowed to die and is in a better place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Ask and ye shall receive!There was also no evidence that she had an eating disorder, which was the theory of why she collapsed (i.e. low potassium from vomiting). Good, I'm glad the autopsy results showed this. She was appropriately allowed to die and is in a better place. 359405[/snapback] Gotta go see how the freepers craft this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Story on schiavo In short, her husband was right. The parents, as most rational folks suspected, are truly out of their gourds. The woman had no chance for survival, she was blind, could not be rehabilitated, and had the mental capability of a earthworm. Her brain was 1/2 the size of a normal brain, and could not be repaired or rehabilitated due to the severe lack of neurons. This settles it. She was dead even before she was officially dead. Let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Kind of hard to determine if she could have swallowed when she is dead. Don't you think her brain shrunk somewhat when she was starved and dehydrated to death? Why didn't her husband let them do the tests on her? If they showed she was brain dead, then let her die. He wouldn't even let them run the tests. He sure didn't care for her. He started shacking up shortly after she fell ill. Why didn't he divorce her? Just too much is fishy on his part for me to feel that this was all just natural causes for her to end up like she did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Kind of hard to determine if she could have swallowed when she is dead. Not really. Don't you think her brain shrunk somewhat when she was starved and dehydrated to death? No. Why didn't her husband let them do the tests on her? Because people like you would still hate him regardless? If they showed she was brain dead, then let her die. He wouldn't even let them run the tests. what "tests" were not run? He sure didn't care for her. He started shacking up shortly after she fell ill. Why didn't he divorce her? Maybe you should go ask him yourself. Just too much is fishy on his part for me to feel that this was all just natural causes for her to end up like she did. What "natural causes"? Edited: Having responded to this in the first place makes me feel like one of those losers camped in front of her hospice. I should have listened to BiB and just let it go. Next time, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Jeb Bush just won't let it go. Michael Shiavo was off in his recollection over an 11 year period, and Bush thinks that's reason to investigate. TALLAHASSEE, Florida (AP) -- Gov. Jeb Bush asked a prosecutor Friday to investigate why Terri Schiavo collapsed 15 years ago, calling into question how long it took her husband to call 911 after he found her. In a letter faxed to Pinellas-Pasco County State Attorney Bernie McCabe, Bush said Michael Schiavo testified in a 1992 medical malpractice trial that he found his wife collapsed at 5 a.m., and he said in a 2003 television interview that he found her about 4:30 a.m. He called 911 at 5:40 a.m. "Between 40 and 70 minutes elapsed before the call was made, and I am aware of no explanation for the delay," Bush wrote. "In light of this new information, I urge you to take a fresh look at this case without any preconceptions as to the outcome." Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Friday from The Associated Press. In comments in The Miami Herald, he said Terri Schiavo would not have survived if her husband had not immediately called 911. "It's absolutely preposterous," Felos said. "If he had waited 70 minutes she would have been dead." http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/17/schiavo....r.ap/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Jeb Bush just won't let it go. Michael Shiavo was off in his recollection over an 11 year period, and Bush thinks that's reason to investigate. 361132[/snapback] Things must be running really well in Florida. Go big government! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 21, 2005 Author Share Posted June 21, 2005 "It's absolutely preposterous," Felos said. "If he had waited 70 minutes she would have been dead." http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/17/schiavo....r.ap/index.html He SHOULD have waited. It would have been the best thing overall for EVERYONE involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts