X-Message-Number: 25870 From: "James Clement" <> Subject: Schiavo Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:23:04 -0500 boundary="----=_NextPart_001_01FF_01C52FAB.71F0B280" Living in Florida, we've been hearing about the Schiavo case for a while. The following article from the Orlando Sentinel answers a few of the questions that have been raised on Cryonet. From what I understand, in the absence of a living will, the Court tried to find out what her intention would have been, as well as appointing a guardian to represent her before the Court. In both circumstances, the Court found that she should be allowed to die. To me, the main question is whether we as Cryonauts want the precedent of the Religious Right using the Federal Gov't to override a guardian's judgment (in our case the guardian could be pleading for life-extension or for cryopreservation). IMHO, Politicians cannot be counted on to protect our rights, they are just following their own ethics or what they perceive will get them reelected. Florida is full of Right-to-Lifers and their pandering politicians, who are looking for any opportunity to prove that "all human life is sacred" and therefore must be protected by the Gov't (especially when it comes to unborn fetuses). To allow Schiavo to die would be to set another precedent against their principles, hence the big effort by Jeb & George W. These are the same people and politicians who oppose life extension and embryonic stem cell research. For those of you who are thinking that this intervention by the Congress may help protect them from getting life support turned off - I suggest you at least carry around a laminated miniature living will in your wallet or purse instructing that you WANT EVERY EFFORT TO PRESERVE YOUR LIFE, AND THAT YOU DO NOT WANT A BRAIN AUTOPSY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE! Best regards, James Questions, answers about Schiavo By Robyn Shelton The Orlando Sentinel ORLANDO, Fla. - Here are answers to some commonly asked questions about the Terri Schiavo case: Q: What is a "persistent vegetative state," and how is it diagnosed? A: People in such a state have lost all higher brain function, including the ability to think, experience emotions and understand the world around them. They continue to sleep and wake, open their eyes, breathe on the their own and may make noises and facial expressions. Their brain stems -- the portion of the brain that controls basic functions such as heartbeat and breathing -- continue to function. People in a persistent vegetative state do not track objects with their eyes, blink on command or respond consistently to cues in the environment. Such a state over a period of time is considered persistent. Doctors who examine the same patient can reach different conclusions, but time is the best arbiter. Schiavo has been in this state for 15 years. Q: Schiavo appears to respond to her mother in a video released by the family. Her father said she smiled Monday when he told her that her feeding tube soon could be reinserted. Doesn't that show that she is not in a persistent vegetative state? A: Court-appointed physicians have not been able to document a consistent, predictable response from Schiavo that would indicate that she is aware of her surroundings. Q: Could new technology provide more insight into Schiavo's condition? A: Functional magnetic resonance imaging tracks blood flow to regions of the brain while a person performs certain tasks, but it is not a conclusive test. Schiavo has undergone diagnostic tests, including CT scans and EEGs, which showed her brain's electrical function to be flat, according to court records. Brain scans show that the cerebral cortex, responsible for higher thinking, has suffered severe atrophy and been replaced by liquid. Q: Schiavo's parents and a neurologist who examined her several years ago, Dr. William Hammesfahr, say she could get better with therapy. Would she be helped by rehabilitation? A: Other doctors have concluded that she would not improve with rehabilitation, and attempts at therapy have had no effect. Schiavo underwent more than three years of rehabilitative therapy after her collapse in 1990, and her husband took her to a California center in late 1990 to have an experimental device implanted in her brain in hopes of stimulating activity. According to a court-appointed guardian who reviewed the medical information for her case in 2003, there is no reason to believe that she can recover. Content-Type: text/html; [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25870