I am a little new on this list so forgive me if this is a dead horse. But I have a question. In light of what is going on in Florida, and all the discussion over it is right or wrong to pull the feeding tube. What is the difference in pulling someone's feeding tube and starving them to death, (which happens ALL THE TIME, it is primarily older folks though) or turning off the ventilator and suffocating them. Why is one acceptable and the other not. The reason I am asking is as a pastor and a healthcare professional, sometimes these two worlds clash. A person with a feeding tube is unable to feed themselves for whatever reason. A person on a vent, is unable to breath on their own, for whatever reason. If level of "awareness" is a deciding factor, i.e. is the person in a coma or brain dead etc. Who decides? Who decides weather a person is "aware" enough to live? Where does LIFE begin? and When does LIFE end? I don't think the answer is as easy as we think. I have seen in both cases patients recover and the extra care is stopped because it is no longer needed. But I have also watched as both measures were carried on for a long period of time only to watch the patients deteriorate and suffer before passing on. I wonder if the woman in Florida was on a Ventilator, would there be an outcry if the "plug was pulled"? Do not misunderstand me, I am pro-life. I believe in letting God be God and letting Him make these decisions. If I am guilty of anything on this issue, I am guilty of being a bit jaded, (for the patients), because of my secular occupation. In BOTH cases you have someone who is alive, in BOTH cases that person dies due to the actions/decisions of someone else. Who decides when it is ok to "pull the plug" and when is it "murder"? If this has already been discussed, you can email me privately with your thoughts or point me to the thread so I can read past discussions. As for the case in Florida, I think what is happening is cruel. But I also think it is cruel to put in a tube, then take it out three or four times like they have done in her case. Chuck Schobert ****** Internet E-Mail Confidentiality ****** The information contained in this communication is the property of CCMH and contains confidential and privileged information intended on for the personal and confidential use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the addressee indicated in the message (or an agent responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, copying or unauthorized use of this message is strictly prohibited. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail.