Really, is that so? It would be nice if you would include links with your quotes so everyone can verify your source. This has to be split into two parts.<quoted text>
I use arguments that I believe in.
'When you do for the least of mankind, you do for Me'
Part one --
"...nothing in the autopsy was “inconsistent” with a PVS diagnosis."<quoted text>
[C]ontrary to articles stating the autopsy report “supported” the diagnosis of “persistent vegetative state (PVS),” a neuropathology expert today was careful to say that PVS is a clinical diagnosis rather than a pathological one. He added that nothing in the autopsy was “inconsistent” with a PVS diagnosis.
There you have it. The PVS diagnosis is made on a living person, not a dead one during autopsy. During autopsy, when the brain weighs less than half of a normal brain, nothing is "inconsistent with a PVS diagnosis." See how that works, Ink? Your source added nothing new in that paragraph. But, it *seems* they're trying to imply the diagnosis of PVS wasn't quite accurate. And you believed it.
All the areas of Terri's brain that would make these determinations (being aware of her own death), were liquefied. Liquid, Ink. Terri's brain wasn't capable of determining anything.The real elephant in the living room, of course, is whether or not we can really know how conscious anyone labeled “PVS” really is. Several studies have revealed high misdiagnosis rates, with conscious people being mistakenly regarded as totally and irrevocably unaware.
The autopsy also documented significant brain atrophy, and the medical panel called the damage “irreversible.”
This is not the same as saying she had no cognitive ability.
“It’s always seemed to us that PVS isn’t really a diagnosis; it’s a value judgment masquerading as a diagnosis,” said Stephen Drake, research analyst for Not Dead Yet, a national disability rights group that filed three amicus briefs in the case.“When it comes to the hard science, no qualified pathologist went on the record saying she couldn’t think or couldn’t experience her own death through dehydration.”
You keep saying she wasn't terminal. She was terminal because she wasn't capable of providing herself with nourishment by mouth. An artificial device was surgically installed into her stomach to do for her what she no longer could. Removing that artificial device showed exactly how terminal Terri Schiavo was; hence your outrage.
Where's your outrage for that hospital in San Francisco who allowed a patient ordered by her doctor NEVER to be left alone to wander into a locked stairwell and die of dehydration? She wasn't found for over two weeks and so died in a hospital's locked stairwell fully conscious of her ordeal and "experiencing her own death through dehydration." Even though everything I've read claims this is a peaceful death, where is your outrage over this being allowed to happen anywhere ever?