Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're right. Only God has the right to decide whether they live or die. That why I say pull these two out of their worldly wheel chairs, drop them off somewhere, and then let God decide their fate.
Are they alive because of our present medical technology? I wonder if the parents should have the right to say no to extreme efforts to save or preserve life of children with low chance of a decent life? I didn't watch the video, I'm not in the mood to cry at work.
Why wait? doesn't seem like you're contributing anything but a load of bs anyway.
THEY ARE IN A HOME! She goes and vistits. She doesn't take care of them anymore. I'm not saying it isn't hard to deal with, having two disabled children, but the only thing shes doing is dishing money for them. I guess shes gotten tired of doing that.
Aaah yes, the fine morally superior person who instantly comes to the budget conclusion without knowing squat about what that mother goes through every time she drives to that institution building her hopes: will one of them have undergone a wonderful progression? Will one of them recognize me? will one of them express joy with their eyes? She arrives only to be faced with the same unresponsive visages of two people barely existing.
C'mon here; you take your pet to the vet and he says it would be a kindness to euthanize dear Fluffy and you don't think twice about it but we must keep these husks alive regardless of pain or suffering caused to them or others.
Sue Rodriguez in Vancouver, Canada suffered for years with Multiple Sclerosis or some other degenerative disease and her MLA for the area tried desperately to have legislation enacted, or even considered, to allow her the choice of a suicide, all to no avail.
She arranged her own euthanasia with that MLA in attendance along with a few others. These poor souls can't do that for themselves.
These poor wretches can't even speak to their wishes any more but we presume to deny their mother knowing what they would wish?
Why wait? doesn't seem like you're contributing anything but a load of bs anyway.
THEY ARE IN A HOME! She goes and vistits. She doesn't take care of them anymore. I'm not saying it isn't hard to deal with, having two disabled children, but the only thing shes doing is dishing money for them. I guess shes gotten tired of doing that.
Your last paragraph is too judgmental and you don't know what you're talking about. First, really think about what it would be to take care of two adults that are brain dead and completely disabled. They have to be lifted and carried in and out of bed and everywhere they go. Their bones can break just from this because they are weak from lack of use. She would also have to stay at home with them and make it her full time job in order to deal with feeding tubes, medications, bathing them and all of it. And where do you get the idea it is costing her money? If there are in an institution it is more likely that the government is paying for it. The best thing to do is to get help as she has and monitor things as best you can.
The person that said that most likely it is the worry about what will happen to them when she is gone, I think is right. If they are in their 40's, she must be 70's or 80's even. Institutions aren't great places and the thought of them there with her gone is a tough one for a parent of a disabled child.
I am the parent of a disabled child myself and I don't know what the right answer is here. Most disabled people find ways to enjoy their life. I don't think this article tells me enough to make a judgment call.
Your last paragraph is too judgmental and you don't know what you're talking about. First, really think about what it would be to take care of two adults that are brain dead and completely disabled. They have to be lifted and carried in and out of bed and everywhere they go. Their bones can break just from this because they are weak from lack of use. She would also have to stay at home with them and make it her full time job in order to deal with feeding tubes, medications, bathing them and all of it. And where do you get the idea it is costing her money? If there are in an institution it is more likely that the government is paying for it. The best thing to do is to get help as she has and monitor things as best you can.
The person that said that most likely it is the worry about what will happen to them when she is gone, I think is right. If they are in their 40's, she must be 70's or 80's even. Institutions aren't great places and the thought of them there with her gone is a tough one for a parent of a disabled child.
I am the parent of a disabled child myself and I don't know what the right answer is here. Most disabled people find ways to enjoy their life. I don't think this article tells me enough to make a judgment call.
We are strange creatures we humans. We obsess over things that we have not personally undergone as though we are imbued with some higher sense of reality than the people going through it.
I would like to know more as well but at the end of the day; I have stood at bedsides while my immediate family members have passed and after every one of them took that last breath, the immeditate thought was the always the same, "their suffering is now over".
When was the last time you attended a funeral or viewing and listened to family members discuss the passing of a loved one to alzheimer's or even a cancer and heard them say "it's a blessing they've passed, their suffering is over". "He/she would not have wished to exist in a vegetative state". Are they all wrong?
The slippery slope that flows from embracing the culture of death.
Yeah and we embrace that same slippery slope when advocating war for any reasons whatsoever. That is somehow acceptable whereas these personal experiences are not?
Yeah and we embrace that same slippery slope when advocating war for any reasons whatsoever. That is somehow acceptable whereas these personal experiences are not?
You are 17, right? Have you taken care of someone in a vegetative state? Do you have any idea what that is like? This mother has been caring for her children in this state state for the last 38 years. Who will care for them when she dies, and not the physical care, but everything else? Or is the fact that they are alive and sitting in some home good enough for you?
No I haven't, and I made it very clear that I feel for her. But I don't think that anyone, even if it's their mother, has the right to say who should live and who should die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Aaah yes, the fine morally superior person who instantly comes to the budget conclusion without knowing squat about what that mother goes through every time she drives to that institution building her hopes: will one of them have undergone a wonderful progression? Will one of them recognize me? will one of them express joy with their eyes? She arrives only to be faced with the same unresponsive visages of two people barely existing.
C'mon here; you take your pet to the vet and he says it would be a kindness to euthanize dear Fluffy and you don't think twice about it but we must keep these husks alive regardless of pain or suffering caused to them or others.
Sue Rodriguez in Vancouver, Canada suffered for years with Multiple Sclerosis or some other degenerative disease and her MLA for the area tried desperately to have legislation enacted, or even considered, to allow her the choice of a suicide, all to no avail.
She arranged her own euthanasia with that MLA in attendance along with a few others. These poor souls can't do that for themselves.
These poor wretches can't even speak to their wishes any more but we presume to deny their mother knowing what they would wish?
Again, you're right I don't know what she goes through. I would probably go crazy. But I think it's ridiculous to be alright with killing your children. And I think it's ridiculous to compare humans to animals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nocontengencies
Your last paragraph is too judgmental and you don't know what you're talking about. First, really think about what it would be to take care of two adults that are brain dead and completely disabled. They have to be lifted and carried in and out of bed and everywhere they go. Their bones can break just from this because they are weak from lack of use. She would also have to stay at home with them and make it her full time job in order to deal with feeding tubes, medications, bathing them and all of it. And where do you get the idea it is costing her money? If there are in an institution it is more likely that the government is paying for it. The best thing to do is to get help as she has and monitor things as best you can.
The person that said that most likely it is the worry about what will happen to them when she is gone, I think is right. If they are in their 40's, she must be 70's or 80's even. Institutions aren't great places and the thought of them there with her gone is a tough one for a parent of a disabled child.
I am the parent of a disabled child myself and I don't know what the right answer is here. Most disabled people find ways to enjoy their life. I don't think this article tells me enough to make a judgment call.
The last thing I want to sound like is judgmental. I was correcting a poster. I don't understand why she would want to euthanize her own children when she's not taking care of them. I don't hold it against her, having them in a home because she isn't young and I doubt she could handle that, I just don't understand it. And they are not brain dead. If they were they wouldn't be able to blink, they wouldn't be able to move they would be in, somewhat of, a coma.
How do you all know that they feel nothing, and see nothing, and hear nothing? Them not responding is no proof, because what if they just can't respond. We don't have any idea what they are thinking or feeling. But I cannot in good conscience advocate her killing them. That said, I do think that what she is advocating for, to be able to give them a lethal injection instead of starving them to death, would be better. But I don't think it should be allowed at all. If this happens it opens a door to a lot of things that will not be good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
