Exactly.She is not being resuscitated. SHE IS DEAD!!
What do you not get about dead?
Forgive my ignorance but if DNR stands for Do Not Resuscitate, wouldn't one have to be legally dead in order for resuscitation to be appropriate, for a DNR to then be relevant? I mean, I see some folks making a stink about "she's dead" and I can't help but think "well dumbass you have to be in a coma or dead for a DNR to apply, and this lady is not in a coma, so thanks for stating the obvious I guess".
It's like people don't know what the word "resuscitate" actually means.
And on top of it, she's NOT legally dead, she's brain dead. She won't be legally dead until a physician pronounces her dead. Until that point, she's legally alive. If she had a living will for organ/tissue donation it would be in-force at this moment because she's still legally alive.
Brain dead is not legally dead. Her pulse and respiration have to stop, and then a doc can pronounce her dead, and then she's legally dead.
.Determination of Death. An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards
If this this were The Loft, you would be correct, but it's not. No such in-depth discussions are expected or required in the open forum. Never have been, never will.
Brain dead is not legally dead. Her pulse and respiration have to stop, and then a doc can pronounce her dead, and then she's legally dead.
Forgive my ignorance but if DNR stands for Do Not Resuscitate, wouldn't one have to be legally dead in order for resuscitation to be appropriate, for a DNR to then be relevant? I mean, I see some folks making a stink about "she's dead" and I can't help but think "well dumbass you have to be in a coma or dead for a DNR to apply, and this lady is not in a coma, so thanks for stating the obvious I guess".
It's like people don't know what the word "resuscitate" actually means.
And on top of it, she's NOT legally dead, she's brain dead. She won't be legally dead until a physician pronounces her dead. Until that point, she's legally alive. If she had a living will for organ/tissue donation it would be in-force at this moment because she's still legally alive.
I don't even know what her statement was, I just think expecting in-depth discussions is unreasonable in the open forum.so you agree her statement is not honest and has no merit, got it, i agree also
I don't even know what her statement was, I just think expecting in-depth discussions is unreasonable in the open forum.
The open forum is the home of the sound-bite argument with a link or two to back it up. If you want a research paper quality argument then you need to go to the True Debate forum or The Loft forum.
By the DP community, not necessarily the Mod team. You don't see anyone getting an infraction for using a well sourced argument, but you don't see anyone getting an infraction for failing to source an argument, either. I'm sure the DP Mods would like to moderate debate instead of fighting.Do I understand correctly? Outside of the loft actual debate is frowned upon?
That explains a lot.
What you said you wanted was..not what i want at all lol
and sound bite with links would be great but it was even that it was completely worthless
...that's not a sound byte. That's a research paper. Links to all relevant laws to many other states and exhaustive review of *confidential* real cases. Even getting that information is a crime and an infraction possibly earning a permanent ban from this forum....to show every single other state you mention doing the same thing and then discuss the characteristics of that case vs. this one,...
LMAO nice try jerry, carry onWhat you said you wanted was..
...that's not a sound byte. That's a research paper. Links to all relevant laws to many other states and exhaustive review of *confidential* real cases. Even getting that information is a crime and an infraction possibly earning a permanent ban from this forum.
That's unreasonable to expect.
You let me know if someone ever actually does all that research for you. It would take me hours to compose such a post, and we're not even battling for the black ribbon. No thank you.LMAO nice try jerry, carry on
You let me know if someone ever actually does all that research for you. It would take me hours to compose such a post, and we're not even battling for the black ribbon. No thank you.
That's fair - but when the individual is incapable of expressing their views/decisions - in this case, the fetus - I'm prepared to let the medical community do what they feel is in the best interest of that individual and not those who appear to have interests other than those of the individual.
Pregnancy does not end your rights.
Except in 35 states.
pregnant women have no rights in 35 states?
links? facts?
Except in 35 states.
We're not talking about what you believe. We're talking about what's real.They can legislate whatever they want - doesn't mean I believe it ENDS your rights.
They can legislate whatever they want - doesn't mean I believe it ENDS your rights.
OJ...you don't need no stinkin facts. When Scatt says something...it's true, no questions asked. Well, you can at least play like everything he says something it's true...it'll save you finger energy.
"Rights" are completely made up and can be created and destroyed at anytime.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?