Live in a vegetative state or die?

[STOIC]

Take a scenerio where you were married and had children.Then one day god forbid you sustained debilitating injuries in an automobile accident.The most serious injury you sustained is a head injury affecting the bilateral hemisphere of your brain.This injuries significantly impaired your physical and cognitive ability, left you unable to walk, talk and left you depend on colostomy for defection and a gastrostomy tube for nutrition.Your doctor testified that you are demonstrating an ability to carry out some voluntary motor command such as ability to recognize faces and grasp.Before you were involved in this accident you made a statement to your wife/ husband that you do not prefer to be kept in a comma or a vegetative state!.My question to you will be do you have the right to refuse life sustaining medical treatment and if so does the government have the right to exercise that right for you since you are unable to do so by yourself?.Your parents wants you to be alive, they want to take care of you until you are peacefully dead on your own.

** i changed the story of Terry Schiavo so that non American resident can have their say on this issue***

[Haddad]

These are complicated questions that apply to Westerners, not Somalis or Muslims. We have issues that are more important than these questions. In order to answer those questions, we have to be near or the same level of Western lifestyle.

[bilan]

what you mean it does not apply to us,it applies to us 100%, you will find yourself in that situation if somalis ever get the chance to live a medically advanced country,the debate is not about should the patient be killed or not but,does the government has the right to force the terminally ill patient take a life sustaining medication even though there is no hope for recovery. this has nothing to do with western life-style,one day anyone can wake up and be in vegatative state next day. Allah knows the best what is good,i would not want to commit suicide and go to hell,but if there is no hope for recovery, what is the point let the nature take its course.so to answer your question i would not want to live vegatative state for 15 years. in this terry case i do not trust the husband,so i am not really sure if she said it,so he should divorce her and let her parents take care of her.

[Nephissa]

So, How Is Terri Schiavo Supposed To Die?

 

Is she just meant to starve to death? What a heartbreaking case.

[STOIC]

Hadad..I am sad to say this, but you seem to be lacking worldly experience(get out the box).Like many other people in this site you seem to only care about what happens to the Somalis alone(though not a bad thing).The reason that i raised these questions is because i live in the western world and i do care about what is happening around my environ.And as an individual just like you and others i have the right to discuss any issues be it political, religious or social issue.

Bisharo, The latest defeat on Schiavo case came when three judge panel of the 11 circuit court of appeal unanimously denied a request to have the feeding tube reinserted.The Schiavo case is a case that involves legislative versus state, federal versus state integrity, and individual versus government right.

The biggest problem with this kind of legal battle is whether a decision to refuse medical treatment under the particular case , made while competent should be honored when the patient is incompetent.My take on this one will be that a surrogate decision maker should not make a decision for a vegetative individual regardless of his/her decision to waive the right to continue to live.My opinion is purely based on my religous background.Others my view it different depending on their value of individual right.

[GuinaVere]

Me personally if that happened to me I would like not to be on life support or Vegetative state. And think about shiavo is that she was on vegetative state ever since early 1990s I heard. Bisinka

[Strawberry_Xu]

I'm not familiar with that case so I can't comment on that. But (please correct me if I'm wrong) as muslims shouldn't we have to endure any type of illness we have and do everything in our power to stay alive? Isn't making the decision not to have the tube reinserted as unnatural as refusing to eat food, which is akin to suicide?

 

I believe the government in most cases should honour the wish of the patient rather than the parents or the spouse. It is a horrible thing to live in such a state, but in this case, as muslims do we have a choice?

 

I always thought we didn't, but I might be wrong.

[bilan]

Xu i thought you might like to see this

Can the State Intervene to Determine the Life of Individuals?

[Jamilah]

STOIC,

Despite the fact we are non Americans Terry Schiavo's case has been bombarded through the media here in Australia. I really do think she should be kept alive or as you put it in a "vegeatative" state. Inconsiderate of any personal ideas she had prior to the accident regarding euthanasia the fact that her parents are willing to care for her automatically dismisses any other concerns. I think the government do not have the right to interfere since her family do not want her murdered and are prepared to look after her.

 

Salaam

[Nephissa]

She passed away this morning, 13 days after the feeding tube removed.

[Sincere]

Hadaad this definitely affects us, if not now then sooner or later it will. Congress is not ruling on euthanasia in general, but rather this specific case alone. The state/congress lawmakers were not lobbied by disability advocates or her parents but rather by advocates with a “right to life†agenda, primarily conservative religious groups. Albeit this intervention was not based on religion, its being catapulted by the same religious fanatics who are anti abortion, anti-fetal stem cell research, and for religion in government. This is an unambiguous demonstration of the power of lobbying.

 

Saxiib backtrack from your lapse of tunnel vision, and ask yourself, what other absurd law are they going to advocate next This is reminiscent of the patriot act, and the blatant infringement of individual rights. Ask yourself whom does the patriot act primarily affect? Who lobbied Ashcroft to pass that law? how many muslims have been affected by it? (Even thought some of their principles are slightly parallel to Islamic beliefs, you have to be wary of their lobbying and ability to sway legislature)

 

My take on this one will be that a surrogate decision maker should not make a decision for a vegetative individual regardless of his/her decision to waive the right to continue to live.

Stoic let me beg the question, who is to pull the plug, the state? the person is in a vegetative state, incapable of thought, memory, or emotion; the body is merely a shell. Without a valid health proxy that states the prior wishes of an individual, you choose to leave this in the hands of hospital/state? They would not be willing to incur the cost to maintain them. Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t, you will be compelled to make a choice.

[STOIC]

Discreet-1, the state should pull the plug when there is no will left behind because the constituition does not gurantee a right to die neither does it expressly prohibit someone from such actions(for example the Oregon has legalized doctor asisted suicide).If there is a surrogate decision makers(with no will) for example the wife/husband or the parent, there will be mistrust between the two parties.The husband may be intrested in receiving the wifes inheritance while the parent may not best understand the wishes of their children.So if we don't trust both parties intention then the judge should take simultenous role as a judge and a health -care surrogate.Can we trust judges as both surrogate and impartial judge in the case? It will depend on what his stands are!(religious or not religious).This will violate the fourteenth amendment right to a fair trial.So, what do we do now that we don't trust anyone? the state should act by considering the ethical and social ramification of the issue(pass a bill that denies right to die without a will).If the patient left a will it should be honored!.State should take care of the patient hospital care (not that they will be a million Schiavo's out there).I beleive that right to live does not end at birth (what pro-life turn out to be!).

[Viking]

Forgive me stoicist, it's a bit late at night on my side...are you arguing FOR euthanasia?

[STOIC]

Yes if the patient left a signed will that states he does not wish to be in vegetative state!

[Salafi_Online]

As-Salamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa baarakatu

 

Stoic I’m not too familiar with the case, but from an Islamic perspective,If the brain is dysfunctional and can no longer regulate and sustain the body, then the soul has been removed, hence the person is considered DEAD. But these people live in darkness, how can they reach at the truth in their state?