« Terri Schiavo Cremated, Schindlers Denied Autopsy Reviewer | Main | A Growing Collection of Possibilities »

April 3, 2005

Zogby Poll: Americans Not in Favor of Starving Terri Schiavo

Topics: News

Polls leading up to the death of Terri Schiavo made it appear Americans had formed a consensus in favor of ending her life. However, a new Zogby poll with fairer questions shows the nation clearly supporting Terri and her parents and wanting to protect the lives of other disabled patients.

The Zogby poll found that, if a person becomes incapacitated and has not expressed their preference for medical treatment, as in Terri's case, 43 percent say "the law presume that the person wants to live, even if the person is receiving food and water through a tube" while just 30 percent disagree.

Another Zogby question is directly on Terri's circumstances.

"If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.

A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes.

Continue reading ...

Posted by richard at April 3, 2005 8:56 PM

Articles Related to News:


Imagine that---ask a fair question, and you might get intelligent answers.

Maybe the next poll should be: Should michael shiavo and judge george greer be starved to death for their part in Terri Shindler's murder?

I'll bet a whopping 100% of the intelligent responses will be "YES".

Posted by: Tress at April 3, 2005 9:40 PM

Too bad the poll came a wee bit late. I salute them for asking a fair question, but maybe two weeks ago this could have had some impact for Terri. I will say though, that the more I talk to people the more I am starting to hear people speak a bit differently about this case-I keep hearing things like-"well at first I was like let her go but then" and the answers vary. The biggest one is Mike not letting her family in the room at the time of her death-that hit home hard on almost every hardened heart. Everyone can relate to that. Then it leads people to ask,well why didn't he just let her parents take her-you mean he had two other kids and another women? The list goes on and on but the news coverage of her brother and sister not being able to be there when she died-that was a big oops for the Schivo clan if they wanted more sympathy. Things are starting to shift. Good always triumphs in the end.

Posted by: alwayschooselife at April 4, 2005 3:18 AM


I've been wondering what went wrong with the judiciary when I should have been wondering what is wrong in our squirrelly heads. Listen, the justice system was set up for the sole reason of hearing evidence and passing sentence. Period!!! The jury determines guilt or innocence and on the basis of that, the JUDGE determines the sentence. His sentence cannot be more that that mandated by congress. It can be less, but not more.

When we take the case of an innocent to one of these courts, we take them into an arena where the sole power is that of taking life. Furthermore, the guilty are guaranteed a trial by jury, but in what case, EVER, has a jury sat in on the trial of even one of these innocents. Never, because there never was a trial; just a judge doing what a judge does.

And that's my point. Judges do what they were created to do. JUDGES PASS SENTENCE. We are playing this in the wrong ballpark, an arena which virtually guarantees bad results. It is like taking your bad appendex to a butcher, instead of a doctor. A doctor was created to do surgery and a butcher was created to butcher.

This is all our fault!!!

Posted by: mary et. al. at April 4, 2005 8:00 AM