I'm actually confused by this: she's awake and conscious. She has the brain capacity of an 11 month old. Why is she not able to swallow food? It's not like this is a DNR issue. Can she be fed? Why is the feeding tube necessary.
From a legal standpoint, it's a question of "Do we give this person a pacemaker?" And of course the answer is yes.
What is really interesting wiht this is that as much as the right to life crew is clamoring on this one, Christian Scientists are aghast that she was ever given a feeding tube in the first place.
This is something other than a DNR situation. If it were me, if I were unconscious and on life-support, Kill me. Let me go. But this is someone who is *NOT* brain-dead. She recognizes her family, she conveys emotion, she is aware and alert, albeit on a horrifyingly basic level. Still, I'm not clear if or how they're *EXACTLY* killing her by removing the feeding tube if other means of nutrition and sustenance are available.
From a legal standpoint, it's a question of "Do we give this person a pacemaker?" And of course the answer is yes.
What is really interesting wiht this is that as much as the right to life crew is clamoring on this one, Christian Scientists are aghast that she was ever given a feeding tube in the first place.
This is something other than a DNR situation. If it were me, if I were unconscious and on life-support, Kill me. Let me go. But this is someone who is *NOT* brain-dead. She recognizes her family, she conveys emotion, she is aware and alert, albeit on a horrifyingly basic level. Still, I'm not clear if or how they're *EXACTLY* killing her by removing the feeding tube if other means of nutrition and sustenance are available.
Comment