Bush's "pull the plug" law
Despite the wishes of Terry Schiavo, her spouse, and 19 judges in 10 different courts, the nation's Republican leadership has embarked upon a morality campaign, enacting legislation for the sake of a solo patient. Worse, it unravels in a fashion emblematic of Republican hyprocrisy, considering that in 1999, when Governor George W. Bush signed off on legislation that outright overides the patient's family wishes. Incredulously, White House press secretary Scott McClellan flat out lied when defending the Texas legislative act.
McClellan’s statement grossly distorts the nature of the law. The law does not ensure that actions are taken “in accordance with the wishes of the patient or the patient’s family.” In fact it codifies and legalizes the ability of doctors to stop treatment even if it goes against the explicit directive of the patient or the patient’s family.
In fact, here's a case of a Texas Children's Hospital patient that had the "plug pulled" despite wishes of the family. However, for Terry Schiavo, Bush rushed back to Washington to sign, after an emergency Sunday session in the House that went past midnight.
Texas law allows hospitals can discontinue life sustaining care, even if patient family members disagree. A doctor's recommendation must be approved by a hospital's ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient.
Oh, if the family were blessed with wealth, they could, no doubt, secure care somewhere. Perhaps the Republican "culture of life" philosphy only exists for those with enough money.
And the Republicans have the audacity to say they stand for "limited government".
Comments
http://abstractappeal.com/s...
Although, I can’t say I agree 100%, I understand that LEGALLY the Husband is right. His reasons, however, remain suspect to many; I do not know the man or his motives. I don’t want this woman to starve or dehydrate to death. I believe that even though she can’t scream about it her body will suffer greatly. Morally, I hate it. But I feel we must all submit to the LAW. Sometimes laws are wrong, sometimes it takes something like this for people to act to change an immoral law, who knows. If she must die that is sad, However, as a Christian, I think DEATH is the least of our problems as humans, If you believe in an AFTERLIFE, it is merely a NEW BEGINNING, so there is a worse fate for this poor woman and going to be with GOD is not one of them. We can only hope that this would be her decision, we can only hope the husband's motives are truly honorable, we can only hope the JUDGES have truly taken in all considerable options and made their decision on unbiased sentiments. In the end, all of this lays on their head, I have no problems with most of the efforts taken to save her life, either way we will only know when we stand before GOD what is right, all we can do for now is try our best to do what is just, hope for the best but prepare for the worst, on either side you may take considering this case.
"Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin
not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory
was not arrayed like one of these. {12:28} If then God so
clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow
is cast into the oven; how much more [will he clothe] you,
O ye of little faith? {12:29} And seek not ye what ye shall
eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind.
{12:30} For all these things do the nations of the world seek
after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these
things."
p.s.
Before a comment is made such as "way to miss the point" I know my post has nothing to do with your arguments about the Republican's hypocrisy. To me there is a higher problem here than politics. A woman’s life hangs in the balance, possibly the lives of many other disabled peoples as well. When we start to delegate quality of life and use that to decide who lives or dies we open the door to a dark closet of Possibilities.
http://www.terrisfight.net/