Dick and Rick Hoyt are a father-and-son team from MA who together compete just about continuously in marathon races. And if they're not in a marathon they are in a triathlon - that daunting, almost superhuman, combination of 26.2 miles of running, 112 miles of bicycling, and 2.4 miles of swimming. Together they have climbed mountains, and once trekked 3,735 miles across America.
It's a remarkable record of exertion - all the more so when you consider that Rick can't walk or talk.
For the past 25 years or more Dick, who is 65, has pushed and pulled his son across the country and over hundreds of finish lines. When Dick runs, Rick is in a wheelchair that Dick is pushing. When Dick cycles, Rick is in the seat-pod from his wheelchair, attached to the front of the bike. When Dick swims, Rick is in a small but heavy, firmly stabilized boat being pulled by Dick.
At Rick's birth in 1962 the umbilical cord coiled around his neck and cut off oxygen to his brain. Dick and his wife, Judy, were told that there would be no hope for their child's development.
"It's been a story of exclusion ever since he was born," Dick told me....
Continue reading Team Hoyt's inspiring story at multi'merica.com.
And here's Team Hoyt in action:
[HT: friend Bruce T.; photo courtesy of Team Hoyt]
Thanks, Jill! You made my day! I remember reading about them in People magazine years ago. They are such an inspiration to many.Posted by: Carla at July 18, 2008 7:22 AM
Carla, thanks. Watching the video made my day, too... chocked me up, actually.Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 18, 2008 7:34 AM
I always enjoy a good inspirational cry, being reminded
first thing in the day about how apart from our Redeemer
we are all nothing, but with him we can do so much.
He is the wind beneath our wings!!
The lifter of our souls.
Posted by: lesforlife
at July 18, 2008 8:01 AM
Every judge deciding Lauren Richardson's fate should
be required to watch this video about the infinite value of
every human life.
Living in Boston, I've to seen them interviewed after pretty much every marathon since my childhood. They are big supporters of stem cell research and go to a lot of fundraisers around here. I think they'll end up putting up a statue of them somewhere along the marathon route at some point. =)Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 8:20 AM
Les, or maybe Lauren Richardson should have watched it before she decided to shoot herself up with heroin while pregnant?Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 8:24 AM
Hopefully they see the distinction between adult
stem cell research, which has demonstrated successes
and harms no one, and embryonic stem cell research
which harms tiny humans and pro-lifers
Amanda, you've missed the message!
If we want to avail ourselves of the glorious gift,
we have a Redeemer. We've all made mistakes and
fall short of the Glory of God. That's why He sent us
his son, Jesus Christ.
Lauren is no different. She made a grave mistake but
committed no capital crime for which she deserves the
Her father wants to love and care for her and nurture her
back to health.
Let Lauren Live!Posted by: lesforlife at July 18, 2008 8:38 AM
Well lets not get in to a big discussion about this in a thread about the Hoyts, I'll leave at this (here you go, I'm GIVING you the last word):
- She INTENTIONALLY shot up heroin - it wasn't a "mistake" or an "accident". You can't just go "oops! How did this needle filled with heroin get in my arm??" I agree everyone does stupid and sometimes horrible things. Sometimes the consequence IS indeed death. This is no different from a drunk driver with a child in the back seat crashing in to a wall.
- If it was left in the hands of God, she'd have died the day she overdosed. She is not alive because of the glory of God, she is alive because of the advancement of medical intervention.
- If she had no respect or value for her own life, doesn't that go against EVERYTHING you're saying?
- Yes, her father wants to take care of her. However, you can't "nurse" brain damage back to health, and he's also not paying for this care out of pocket. We are. You don't want your tax dollars supporting abortion? I respect that. I don't want my tax dollars keeping a brain dead heroin user alive who didn't care enough about herself or her baby to NOT shoot up. There are plenty of people out there who actually value their lives who could make better use of that money.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 8:57 AM
Amanda - I've tried to find a relationship between the Hoyt's and embryonic stem cell research, but couldn't. I'm not saying you're incorrect - it's just that there are two kinds of stem cell research - adult and embryonic. When it comes to adult stem cells and IPSC, I'm all for them - when it comes to embryonic stem cells - no go. So far ASCR has produced much more than ESCR, which I understand kill nascent human beings, and end up producing meta-tomas (tumors).
Are you suggesting the Hoyts support ESCR? If so, do you have references to the organizations they support?Posted by: Chris Arsenault at July 18, 2008 9:00 AM
Just have to say that when the Hoyts cross that finish line and Rick throws his arms up in victory, I am moved to tears. I adore the look on his face!! Gotta let my kids watch this too!!Posted by: Carla at July 18, 2008 9:05 AM
Carla @ 9:05 AM - I had to wring my keyboard out.Posted by: Chris Arsenault at July 18, 2008 9:13 AM
I didn't say embryonic stem cell research. I said stem cell research. They are interviewed on the news quite often, and a year or two when the stem cell thing was all over the news, they were asked about it, and the father said he was excited about the possibilities.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 9:14 AM
Amanda @ 9:14 AM - Okay - thanks!Posted by: Chris Arsenault at July 18, 2008 9:15 AM
Please substantiate your claims that Lauren is
"brain dead" and that the tax payers are footing the
bill. Your claim that therapy can't help brain damaged
individuals is obviously incorrect. Sadly, Lauren - like Terri
is being denied therapy, which might make a real difference.
Amanda, I'm with Chris. Either show the Hoyts support ESCR or correctly state they support adult stem cell research. Two totally contrary things. I find your vague portrayal that they support "stem cell research" to potentially have been disengenuous.Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 18, 2008 9:49 AM
Umm... even though I left out "adult" AND "embryonic" as qualifiers because... I DON'T KNOW that they differentiated between the two when they asked? How is that "disengenuous"?Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 9:57 AM
Why did you even bring it up? What were you wanting readers to think? Only you know your motives, but frankly it looks clear you were trying to portray the Hoyts as supporting something they very likely don't.
We on the pro-life side are ALWAYS very clear to state "adult" vs. "embryonic" in discussions of stem cell issues. Only your side omits either of those two most important words, either out of ignorance or as a purposeful attempt to obfuscate the issue. Which were you?Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 18, 2008 10:03 AM
I don't want my tax dollars keeping a brain dead heroin user alive who didn't care enough about herself or her baby to NOT shoot up.
Your tax dollars go to plenty of women who don't care enough about themselves or their children to NOT shoot up heroin ALL the time.Posted by: Elizabeth (Gabriella'sMomma) at July 18, 2008 10:20 AM
"trying to portray the Hoyts as supporting something they very likely don't."
First of all, if I was "trying to portray" something, I would have put "embryonic", no?
Second, LOLOL, According to every single article I found, more than 55% (some polls as high as 68%) of Americans support embryonic stem cell research, with only 24-28% being opposed (lots are unsure). So its actually more likely, statistically speaking, that they do support it.
But thats beside the point, I left out the qualifier because I don't think it was qualified in the interiview. It was a quick little segment on them, as all the news channels do here EVERY year after the marathon. I mentioned it because they usually don't get in to political stuff other than Easter Seals fundraisers, etc, but I clearly remember him answering that question with "I'm excited about the possibilities".
There was no agenda. You and your conspiracy theories.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 10:29 AM
Yeah, I know.... my boyfriend and I were talking about this the other night... that you should be able to opt out of your money going to certain things... like on your tax refund you could check off 1 or 2 areas where tax money goes that you feel VERY strongly about NOT supporting. That way people who were opposed to things like the war could know THEY were not contributing to it, even though plenty of other people still would. And if there was something that Americans across the board felt strongly about not funding - obviously that shows a disconnect with our politicians. I mean, no one feels strongly about not funding ROADS and things like that... but bailing out Amtrack with a few billion every year? Ehhh...Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 10:33 AM
Jill - I think Amanda is pointing out there were no specifics when the topic was brought up in the (TV) news, but she's not in the clear.
Amanda, you initially did say: They are big supporters of stem cell research and go to a lot of fundraisers around here.
so both Jill and I are trying to figure out how you could make that statement and then make this one:
Umm... even though I left out "adult" AND "embryonic" as qualifiers because... I DON'T KNOW that they differentiated between the two when they asked? How is that "disengenuous"?
Either you heard somewhere they were supporters of stem cell research, in which case that's hearsay and should have qualified it as such, or you really don't know, and to make such a statement is blatantly false.
To be fair - I really don't know if the Hoyt's support ESCR or not, or whether their response to a TV newscaster was simply a quick soundbyte which was then "spun". I think people would like to know what the truth is, but on a substantiated basis and not speculation.
Oh for Gods sake.
1. It was on the news when they were interviewed after the marathon
2. The question was something to the effect of "how do you feel about stem cell research?" and the answer was "I'm very excited about the possibilities"
3. Just as there was no qualifier as to embryonic/adult, in the interview, I put no qualifier in my statement. I said they support stem cell research. They do. I didn't say what type. Neither did they. End of story.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 10:48 AM
Opting out of tax money going to PP would be a very good thing, I think. Or NEA dues going to PP.Posted by: Carla at July 18, 2008 11:10 AM
Whoops...I meant to stop after NEA dues.Posted by: Carla at July 18, 2008 11:12 AM
"She INTENTIONALLY shot up heroin - it wasn't a "mistake" or an "accident". You can't just go "oops! How did this needle filled with heroin get in my arm??" I agree everyone does stupid and sometimes horrible things. Sometimes the consequence IS indeed death. This is no different from a drunk driver with a child in the back seat crashing in to a wall.
Haven't you ever foolishly done something intentionally that you look back on as a mistake? I have done that dozens of times- made a bad choice that I later regretted. Haven't you ever done something intentionally that you regretted? Should you be starved and dehydrated to death because of it?
I understand that actions have natural consequences, but starvation and dehydration aren't the natural consequences of these choices. Furthermore, I wouldn't deny medical care to somebody that injured themselves due to stupidity, but try to save them, rather than starving and dehydrating them because they "had it coming"
If it was left in the hands of God, she'd have died the day she overdosed. She is not alive because of the glory of God, she is alive because of the advancement of medical intervention.
I think the next time you require an antibiotic or other medication to save your life, you need to remember what you just said. And food and water aren't medical advancements.
If she had no respect or value for her own life, doesn't that go against EVERYTHING you're saying?
So only people that have high self-esteem should be allowed to eat and drink?
Yes, her father wants to take care of her. However, you can't "nurse" brain damage back to health, and he's also not paying for this care out of pocket.
You also can't nurse a paraplegic into walking. So what?
I don't want my tax dollars keeping a brain dead heroin user alive who didn't care enough about herself or her baby to NOT shoot up.
If she were brain dead, she wouldn't be alive today. She's brain injured and doesn't need anything more than what you and I need to live.
And wait, did you just call her unborn child a "baby"?
There are plenty of people out there who actually value their lives who could make better use of that money.
Okay, so let's starve and dehydrate all the herion addicts currently living off the system.Posted by: Jacqueline at July 18, 2008 11:13 AM
Amanda @ 10:48 AM
Okay - that's what I thought was happening. However, you did originally said: They are big supporters of stem cell research and go to a lot of fundraisers around here.
Upon re-reading your posts it appears that was your impression of the news. Not a known fact, but an impression, from sound-bytes.
So you raised that point in this forum for what reason, if not the promotion of ESCR?
Without qualification, there is an assumption that it's ESCR. I'll tell you why it matters to us - we believe the Hoyts have a heart for life, and yet, as you point out, so many people don't know what advances are being made at the expense of others lives. Yes, there are hard questions, but just as SoMG makes a case for sovereign bodily rights, shouldn't the unborn have those same bodily rights? After all it's their bodies that are getting ripped up to be used as "cures" for others. Go read Embryo by Robert P. George & Christopher Tollefsen.
Also, this isn't about conspiracy theory - you constantly impugn Jill, calling for her to be accurate and fair, and then when we ask the same thing from you, you get indignant.
If I'm wrong, I'll admit it. I've been wrong it the past and most likely will be in the future. We all make mistakes. Admitting them is simply being mature.Posted by: Chris Arsenault at July 18, 2008 11:18 AM
"Opting out of tax money going to PP would be a very good thing, I think. Or NEA dues going to PP. "
Carla, I agree. If I had to pick two things to opt out of providing funding to, it would be the war, and PP.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 11:20 AM
Amanda, feigning exasperation won't work. You know the site you're commenting on. I still submit your point was intended as a dig, and fraudulent at that until proven otherwise.
The lessons to take away are to be prepared to authenticate statements portrayed as fact and to avoid vague generalities on the topics of adult/embryonic stem cell reearch.
Human embryo experimentation is as direly seen here as abortion.Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 18, 2008 11:20 AM
LOL. Okay Jill. So lets start by having you go back and "authenticate" every comment you've made about something one of your "sources" has said or overheard.
And a "dig"?? HAHA.
A dig at who? A dig at what? Are we feeling a little sensitive today? And its amazing how you can tell I'm "feigning" exasperation through the internet. Your magical powers never cease to amaze me.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 11:31 AM
"I can do all things through Him who strengthens me."
How easy it is to forget. What an inspiration they are.Posted by: Janet at July 18, 2008 12:02 PM
"avoid vague generalities"...yeah...like "all in the anti-abortion camp see ESCR as just as dire as abortion" I hate abortion. I really do, with all my heart...but I think stem cell research-any kind-is great.Posted by: xalisae at July 18, 2008 12:28 PM
Also, sorry, just noticed this:
"Rick can't walk or talk. "
True that he can't walk, but he can talk, in a sense. He uses an assitive technology, caled an Augmentative Communication Device, to "speak" through a computer. He can also write things down. We have a few patients here who use them - including one who has an eye-movement activated ACD. She can move a mouse cursor with her eyes over certain buttons that have phrases on them like " I'm hungry" or "I need to use the bathroom" and my personal favorite "Can I help you?" (for when people are gawking at her).
Not comparable to people in vegetative states.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 12:31 PM
Amanda - here's a link that touches upon our sensitivity:
At the bottom it looks at the ESCR & abortion relationship.Posted by: Chris Arsenault at July 18, 2008 12:38 PM
"And I like how nobody seemed to give two flips about the Lauren chick when she was a pregnant heroin addict bouncing from relative's house to relative's house, but now that she has an agenda attached, daddy and his saviour are very concerned about her life, etc."
How do you know?Posted by: Jasper at July 18, 2008 1:09 PM
Because I just got through reading an article about her, and she never really had a place to stay (and I'd think that her dad would've had her come over before she was forced to stay with her uncle if he really cared), and it implied her father had very little interaction with her until recently, and then there's the fact that she's a heroin addict that o.d.'ed, and usually a lack of parental involvement and drug abuse go hand-in-hand.Posted by: xalisae at July 18, 2008 1:31 PM
X - agreed, times 1000. I read that as well... her dad didn't even know she was pregnant OR had a drug problem until she'd overdosed. He was not involved in her life at all... makes it kind of hard to empathize with how badly he wants to "nurse her back to health" when he couldn't be bothered with her for most of her life.Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 1:58 PM
But I do love it when many of you guys treat me with disdain when I try to talk about my position on stem cell research and I hear, "Your argument sounds like teh evil baby killerz!". The point I try to make is quite different than what I've heard from hard-line pro-choicers, and that tells me that when the opposite side tries to present their point, you're never really listening, or it'll be a cold day in hades when any one of you will admit that the other side might actually have a point, and none of us are ever going to get anywhere with these attitudes. You're all just going to continue thinking that people who don't fall in line with you 100% about EVERYTHING are evil murdering sluts, and the other side will think you're nothing but a bunch of judgemental, Bible-thumping wackos.Posted by: xalisae at July 18, 2008 2:53 PM
PVS is often misdiagnosed, Amanda:
Mike Barnes, professor of neurological rehabilitation at the Hunters Moor centre in Newcastle, said it was possible that the patients had not had "true" PVS.
"A diagnosis of PVS means the patient should not wake up and respond."
He said a study carried out by specialists 10 years ago had shown that up to 45% of patients diagnosed with PVS actually had a range of different conditions, from which they could wake up.
Professor Barnes added: "This drug could be unmasking a condition from which people are able to wake up temporarily.
"But if they did have PVS, it would be a remarkable finding, and certainly worth further research."
Misdiagnosis is indeed a reality, given Barnes remarks and the results of a recent study of 84 patients having a "firm diagnosis" of PVS which found that 41% regained consciousness by six months, 52% by three years.
So Rick had loving parents who tried assistive technologies and some patients are refused these aids, like Terri Schiavo, for example. Terri could obey commands, but wasn't allowed therapy.
How can you be so confident that the person you're starving and dehydrating isn't simply unable to communicate with you without help?Posted by: Jacqueline at July 18, 2008 3:00 PM
x:2:53: But I do love it when many of you guys treat me with disdain when I try to talk about my position on stem cell research and I hear, "Your argument sounds like teh evil baby killerz!". The point I try to make is quite different than what I've heard from hard-line pro-choicers, and that tells me that when the opposite side tries to present their point, you're never really listening, or it'll be a cold day in hades when any one of you will admit that the other side might actually have a point, and none of us are ever going to get anywhere with these attitudes. You're all just going to continue thinking that people who don't fall in line with you 100% about EVERYTHING are evil murdering sluts, and the other side will think you're nothing but a bunch of judgemental, Bible-thumping wackos.
Posted by: xalisae at July 18, 2008 2:53 PM
x: Did anyone say anything disdainful to you on this thread today? If they did, I missed it. Obviously not all pro-lifers hold all the same views. I recognize that. Sometimes I am guilty of making incorrect assumptions. It doesn't mean I hate you, I don't think anyone else does either. Really. I guess most of us are pretty strong in our views on ESCR. Just because I'm not going to change doesn't mean you aren't entitled to your own views. I agree with you that civil conversation is the only kind we should be having on this subject or any for that matter.
the other side will think you're nothing but a bunch of judgemental, Bible-thumping wackos.
That's a bit judgmental, if that's how you feel. Anyways, what's wrong with a little Bible-thumping? ;o)Posted by: Janet at July 18, 2008 4:22 PM
That's a bit judgmental, if that's how you feel. Anyways, what's wrong with a little Bible-thumping? ;o)
hehehe, Janet, I agree. I prefer my bible-thumping in small doses however! :)Posted by: Elizabeth (Gabriella's Momma) at July 18, 2008 4:33 PM
Well, I have been ignored.Posted by: Jacqueline at July 18, 2008 7:19 PM
I don't feel that way, personally, I'm just telling you how you're often perceived as somewhat of an outside observer. I think there might be a little truth to both sides of the story, honestly...both sides a little misguided, but with basically good intentions, for the most part. But I'm also the kind of person who sees both sides of almost any topic as essential, no matter what side I'm on. Like, I support the war because I feel it's about our national security, which is a top priority for me, but I respect most of the anti-war protesters, because we need people fighting for peace, because peace is important too, and as the situation gets better and better, we need them to help put things back in and keep them in perspective. And, I don't think I've personally really been mistreated, Janet, but it kinda sticks in my craw when I suggest we treat a typically respectful, obviously (to me, at least) middle-of-the-road pro-choicer that I'm growing somewhat fond of a little more decently, and that suggestion is met with a single, disrespectful word, "Baloney", or "over my dead body will I show either of you harlots any respect". Not that I'll take anything he says seriously from now on, seeing as how he seemed to try to defend racism the other night and I just can't take a racist seriously, but still, it's my understanding he's supposed to be one of the more respected individuals on this cite, and he's supposed to be representing a pro-life view? ummm...ok...Posted by: xalisae at July 18, 2008 8:44 PM
Sorry about the "baloney" comment X, that was out of line.... I didn't mean to offend you. I'm am not a racist, not at all. I just don't feel the need to patronize minority people, I am no better or "above" them. In-fact several of my good friends are Hispanic .Posted by: Jasper at July 19, 2008 12:54 AM
I wasn't so much offended as disappointed, really. It's sad watching a cause I really believe in miss valuable opportunities for growth and work against itself with what I can only describe as an intent to self-destruct...I really must say I am baffled, and when I first came here, I didn't expect to find out that I'm "not pro-life enough"...like I can't believe there are two large, national pro-life entities out there just because the original was "not pro-life enough". In terms many of you are familiar with, I believe it was Mathew 12:25 that states: "...a house divided against itself cannot stand..."
And I'm sorry for, I guess, taking some of your comments the wrong way the other night...it's just that I pretty much addressed what you said (the breakdown of the importance of family and upbringing within some cultures, rather than the races of those people, are to blame), even going as far as to list a growing problem within the segment of the white population in my own area for which the importance of familial bonds and interaction
is becoming increasingly diminished (poor and lower-middle-class whites manufacturing and using meth with increasing frequency), and was met with largely no answer.
x: I don't feel that way, personally, I'm just telling you how you're often perceived as somewhat of an outside observer.
Are you talking to me? I'm often confused by your statements when you say "you" and don't qualify it with "pro-lifers", pro-choicers" , "(a specific name)".
If I'm the only one confused, I'll just assume you aren't unhappy with or referring to me if you don't name me specifically . Lol. :) Do you know what I mean?
If you want to, repeat the question you had about the breakdown of family that wasn't addressed before and maybe someone can try to address it.Posted by: Janet at July 19, 2008 2:29 PM
Jacque, your 3:00 post was excellent.