http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5320234.stm

Isn't science wonderful?  And isn't science also a bastard?  During the Terri Schiavo 'wars' (as they turned out to be) on the TPG, I held pretty firmly, if I recall correctly, that the right thing to do was to euthanise her, or since that was not really on the agenda, to allow her to die as comfortably as possible.  I took this position because of the widely held medical opinion surrounding the case that Ms. Schiavo was totally unaware.

This development can't help but make me seriously reconsider my position.

In cases of 'allowing to die' or active euthanasia, I think it would be an absolute pre-requisite to administer this sort of test first.  To be honest, whatever the results of those tests on another patient, I feel that this puts 'death with dignity' people such as myself in a backfoot, defensive position, and it seems as if the ethical onus is firmly on us to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that a patient has absolutely no awareness or responsiveness.

Yes, Andrew, science is wonderful and so are you!  Yet another example of your open willingness to think a second time if you are provided good evidence to reevaluate an earlier opinion! 

If it makes you feel any better about wishing to euthanize Terry, I don't think this scientific advance would have applied to someone in her condition based on the autopsy results but it is amazing.

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

herofix

I'm impressed - it's rare to find people willing to consider new evidence and admit they may have been wrong.

 
She said: "I can remember when I couldn't respond and it was so scary."

That's just about the most personally terrifying thing I can imagine.

Have you seen the film "Awakenings"?

Devilish

Even if I were aware or had some response in a vegitative state, I'd want to end the misery even more. Who wants to live like that?

R_Flagg