600-Pound Woman Dies After Being Surgically Removed From Couch

[Juliet]

No because you can only do so much to help someone. The guy did try to rouse her. But by that time the woman was too far gone.

So why hadn't he tried to arouse her earlier? Why didn't he seek professional help, which is the best if not only thing you can do for someone in this condition? By not refusing to let this woman do these things to herself, this guy was downright irresponsible, and ought to be charged with some degree of murder.

Its good that she died. Because from the way it sounds she never really lived. She didn't sit on the couch for six year. She became the couch. She wasn't human. She just sat there for six years and wallowed in her own **** and whatever loathing caused her to choose to become a ****ing couch.

Life just isn't that simple. There are so many things that can degenerate a person into doing things like this to themselves, and it goes without saying that this woman was very severely hurt at some point in her life. It was more than she could handle on her own, so she eventually just gave up. That doesn't make her less than human--sadly enough, this kind of thing isn't uncommon at all. At least her death released her from whatever crap she'd been dealing with.

[Jessie]

You know, Rattan, including a curse word in practically every sentence doesn't make you "cool".

[KirbyKing]

Now I want this woman to have lived so they could have found out just what kind of stuff went through her head...

[Rattan]

Originally posted by Jessie:
You know, Rattan, including a curse word in practically every sentence doesn't make you "cool".

Now the problem with this statemen is that I don't really give a **** if you have a problem with it or not. The next problem is that i'm wondering how the hell you came to the conclusion that i'm trying to be cool by swearing. Does it really matter? Your being annoying so stop bothering me with your little problems.

By not refusing to let this woman do these things to herself, this guy was downright irresponsible, and ought to be charged with some degree of murder.

It wasn't his problem in the first place. The fact that he got involved and was helping her all those years shows he was at least worried about her. She would have died earlier if he hadn't actually done something to help the woman. Give the guy a medal for hosing down and keeping the ***** alive for six years as she slowly kiled herself. Charging him with a murder would get dismissed immediatly as he wasn't Jack Kevorkian and willignly let her kill herself. Some people just don't want to get involved too much.

[Juliet]

It wasn't his problem in the first place. The fact that he got involved and was helping her all those years shows he was at least worried about her. She would have died earlier if he hadn't actually done something to help the woman. Give the guy a medal for hosing down and keeping the ***** alive for six years as she slowly kiled herself. Charging him with a murder would get dismissed immediatly as he wasn't Jack Kevorkian and willignly let her kill herself. Some people just don't want to get involved too much.

What if a mother saw her son drowning in the back yard pool? Should she figure that it isn't her problem, gently suggest to him that he kick his legs, but otherwise just sit on the edge of the pool, drumming her fingers on the rescue tube, "not wanting to get involved too much?" Of course not--that would be asinine, negligent, irresponsible, and would most certainly get her thrown in jail.

The difference between this man and someone who can claim that this situation wasn't their problem is that this man was living right there in the woman's house. Being in such a position, he had more power and responsibility than anyone else in the world to save her life, but he shirked it. Why the hell didn't he bother to seek professional help within the past six years? If you aren't willing to do everything in your power to save a person from dying, then you are content to let that person die. This man, by refusing to get professional help for whatever reason, was not willing to do everything in his power to save the woman. She was slowly killing herself, and he was more willing to let that happen than he was to prevent it. What more does the jury need to know?

[ August 16, 2004, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: Elphaba: Wicked Witch of the West ]

[Super Shy Guy]

Take that, fatty.

[Rattan]

What if a mother saw her son drowning in the back yard pool? Should she figure that it isn't her problem, gently suggest to him that he kick his legs, but otherwise just sit on the edge of the pool, drumming her fingers on the rescue tube, "not wanting to get involved too much?" Of course not--that would be asinine, negligent, irresponsible, and would most certainly get her thrown in jail.

This scenario is poorly chosen. As it is her son it is her responsibility to ensure he lives. Try again later. Sorry Mario the princess is in another castle.

This situation with 600 monster woman is vastly different in that the man had no obligation to get involved as much as he did and he kept her alive. He is the only thing that kept her alive. Try to bear that in mind. Its like a friend I know. Every day he goes to work and along the way passes a homeless guy and gives him a sandwich. He's keeping that get well fed and helping him stave off starvation. But by your reasoning my friend should do everything in his power to make that man pick himself up off the ground and get a job or something. It'd be nice and generous but thats asking for a bit much.

You want to condemn a man for not helping enough. He did what he could. You don't know the situation at all yet you are quick to pass judgement.

In the state she was in perhaps he did try to convince her to get her ass up but she refused and begged him not to bring anyone else in to help her. He honored her wishes and did what he could which kept the couch-woman alive.

That is one possibility. Like I said nobody has enough info. So quit your complaining that the guy commited some sort of sin when you should think that the guy was humane enough to not let her kill herself by sitting on that damn couch until she starved. He ****ing kept her alive for those 6 years as opposed to her killing herself earlier and perhaps holding out for the possibility she would survive and come out of her ****ing couchectimy and actually live. Instead she chose to die and there's not alot you can do about that. He might have his reasons for not doing anything. And unless your a ****ing psychic and know he just didn't care then shut up. He cared enough to keep her fed and clean.

Originally posted by Captain Carter, DEFENDER OF EARTH:
Take that, fatty.

Word.

[Somebody]

You and every other human are hypocrites, Rattan. So I won't hold it against you.

[Rattan]

Guess that would include you right?

She didn't seem to big on living. Why blame the guy for her wanting to die?

[ August 17, 2004, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: Rattan ]

[Phenom]

Originally posted by Elphaba: Wicked Witch of the West:
At least her death released her from whatever crap she'd been dealing with.

Literally.

[Swordmaster Link]

[img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

[KirbyKing]

Originally posted by Phenom Vendetta:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Elphaba: Wicked Witch of the West:
At least her death released her from whatever crap she'd been dealing with.

Literally. </font>[/quote]LOL, despite the morbidity, that was still really funny.

[Rattan]

Trumps my princess in another castle quip. Cheers Phenom. LOL

[DELICIOUS POISON]

Anyone willing to sit on a couch long enough to become literally attached to it deserves to die. End of story.

[Juliet]

This scenario is poorly chosen. As it is her son it is her responsibility to ensure he lives. Try again later. Sorry Mario the princess is in another castle.

L47, I have suggestion for this forum: head it with the definition of the word 'Analogy' in big, flashing text, as people around here seem to have immense trouble with it.

OK--Suppose, if more's your pleasure, that her husband were drowning in the pool, and she chose not to do anything? Is she any less liable? Of course not! The point is, a woman was dying in this guy's house, and he didn't trouble himself to save her. That's negligence in all its glory.

This situation with 600 monster woman is vastly different in that the man had no obligation to get involved as much as he did and he kept her alive. He is the only thing that kept her alive. Try to bear that in mind. Its like a friend I know. Every day he goes to work and along the way passes a homeless guy and gives him a sandwich. He's keeping that get well fed and helping him stave off starvation. But by your reasoning my friend should do everything in his power to make that man pick himself up off the ground and get a job or something. It'd be nice and generous but thats asking for a bit much.

When a person has spent six years lying in their own filth, gaining ungodly weight and doing nothing resembling normal human behavior, feeding them is not going to save them from the infinity of life-threatening conditions that such a lifestyle puts them at high risk for! Anyone with an IQ above 70 knows that. Just as the jury isn't going to be too relieved to know that the pool lady threw her husband a hot dog to keep him well-fed as he drowned.

Suppose it came to your knowledge that your best friend was suicidal, and that no one knew this except the friend and yourself. What would you do? Refuse to get involved in what isn't "your business," or call/get someone to call the suicide prevention hotline?

You want to condemn a man for not helping enough. He did what he could. You don't know the situation at all yet you are quick to pass judgement.

And so are you. You're calling this woman a b*tch, a non-human, "a 600-pound monster," and expletive after expletive. She was not. She was a very broken woman whose own family didn't care to save her from what couldn't have been a more obviously destructive lifestyle. You can't expect a person who suffers from such severe emotional damage to be able to make healthy decisions for herself and the people around her. It was a tragedy, and you're all treating it like a "yo mama" joke. God, if the word "fat" is attached to anything at all, you automatically think it's supposed to be funny. You're acting like a bunch of third graders watching a sci-fi movie.

In the state she was in perhaps he did try to convince her to get her ass up but she refused and begged him not to bring anyone else in to help her. He honored her wishes and did what he could which kept the couch-woman alive.

But that's just it--he didn't keep her alive. Her lifestyle killed her within a very short time. Attending to basic needs--barely doing so, in this case--does not cure a life-threatening condition. And anybody who holds "wishes" in higher priority than human life shows a serious lack of moral coherence, in my opinion. Should the parents of a drug user respect their child's wishes? Should you respect your suicidal friend's wishes? Should we respect murderers' wishes?

That is one possibility. Like I said nobody has enough info. So quit your complaining that the guy commited some sort of sin when you should think that the guy was humane enough to not let her kill herself by sitting on that damn couch until she starved. He ****ing kept her alive for those 6 years as opposed to her killing herself earlier and perhaps holding out for the possibility she would survive and come out of her ****ing couchectimy and actually live. Instead she chose to die and there's not alot you can do about that. He might have his reasons for not doing anything. And unless your a ****ing psychic and know he just didn't care then shut up. He cared enough to keep her fed and clean.

And yet, according to the article, "everyone going inside [the woman's room] had to wear protective gear. The stench was so powerful they had to blast in fresh air." The bottom line is, he didn't care to save the woman's life. Someone was dying on his couch, and he didn't care to save her. If someone doesn't care about human life, what in hell does it matter that "they have their reasons?" They need to be set straight.

[ August 17, 2004, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: Elphaba: Wicked Witch of the West ]

[Super Shy Guy]

You should be put in concentration camps.

[Dylan]

^ They have those for 600 lb. heiffers. They're called "packaging plants".

~Dylan

[Damon King]

Originally posted by Elphaba: Wicked Witch of the West:

OK--Suppose, if more's your pleasure, that her husband were drowning in the pool, and she chose not to do anything? Is she any less liable? Of course not! The point is, a woman was dying in this guy's house, and he didn't trouble himself to save her. That's negligence in all its glory.

What'd you want him to do once she got attached? Use a scalpel and tweezers and peel her fat ass off? Of course not, He couldn't force her to get her flabby ass off the couch, he couldn't do anything there
I mean cmon, the guy had his hands covered in ****, what about when she had the runs, what about when she pissed
HE CLEANED THAT **** UP, he fed her, he did what he could.

Originally posted by Captain Carter, DEFENDER OF EARTH:
Take that, fatty.

LOL [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

[Phenom]

Your whole pool drowning scenario still is a poor one. When someone drowns, its because of a mistake in judgement on their behalf. It's not like your child/husband decided to drown themselves, it was a mistake and thus saving them is basically an obligation for any passer-by, not just their spouse or child or whoever.

In this case, Gigantor decided to sit down and become a vegetable. Even if she did have some serious issues, there are many other things someone could do than plop down on the sofa and simply exist for a half-decade. This guy helped her get by for all those years. At least her death was (marginally) dignified in comparison to drowning neck deep in her own excretion. What should he have done? Hoisted her up off the couch and tell her to get a job? No. Not only would it take herculean strength or a forklift to get her off the couch, but if she's stubborn enough to sit on her ass for five years, than she's obviously ruled out listening to another person, let alone getting a job.

You also cliam he should have got psychiatric assistance for her. Well, if she won't talk to the children and man who have kept her bleak life going for the last few years, chances are some guy who walks in and asks her what's up who she has never seen before isn't going to get through her. Not to mention that at this point she's basically become a sofa. And ladies and gentlemen I am sure we are all fully aware that sofa's cannot talk.

And I don't understand what you mean by "Third graders watching a sci-fi movie". I understand you are taking an attempted shot at our maturity, (which is flawed as well seeing as how we're being realistic not immature) but I don't get the sci-fi part. If you're referring to the lady who fused to the couch, that's not Science Fiction, thats a hybrid of a Horror Film and a Gross-Out Comedy.

[Phenom]

Also, I doubt you'd be willing to even get near a literal pile of **** and clean it up, feed it, and do whatever else you could do to keep it living. More than likely the stench of it would send you running in the opposite direction. Those who cannot do, critique, so stop passing false judgement on a guy who literally lived in a ****hole for five years.