Page 6 of 27

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:15 am
by Sam
Elrod wrote:
Sam wrote:WHY didn't he make those statements 15 years ago? That is my major problem with him recalling an alledged one time conversation, and coming forward after all that time.
You continue to raise this same doubt of yours without acknowledging the possibility that for eight years he prayed, believed or hoped that she might get better.
Elrod

As far as I know there are others that have the same doubt.....and I am not the only one that has it.

My point is as I have made it...he waited 8 years to recall an alledged one time conversation....not IF he prayed or believed or hoped she might get better...

I ask you, if you were a juror in a death penalty case, would you in good concious,sentence someone to death, based upon an alledged one time statement made more than 8 years ago?

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:18 am
by Sam
carolinagirl wrote:We don't put retarded people to death by starvation. I don't think it's a matter of "will she return to her former quality of life?" She won't. But she IS alive, and she doesn't deserve to die. She is permanently brain-damaged, but so are some other people in nursing homes. If she is alive but simply cannot feed herself, and we have the technology to feed her, as we have for 15 years, she should be allowed to live at whatever state of life she has. Some autistic people cannot react to other people in the way we would expect them to, but they have a right to live the lives they have.

YOU GO GIRL!!!

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:19 am
by DonnaKayDunbar
That statement was made several times, in front of several people...

The courts have agreed that this was Terri's wish.

I also find it interesting that Mr. Schiavo visits Terri most frequently. Not her parents.

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:24 am
by AlbatrossFlyer
without wading into the pro-life / spousal rights /government interference mess. i'd like to straighten out a number of factual INACCURACIES being spewed around the thread. whether you accept them or not is up to you, but at least people will know what they are.

last night (monday 2/21) the ABC evening news did what i consider the best indepth report on the history of the case. i tried to find a link to the report on the ABC news website but i haven't found it yet.

so summarizing the facts reported in the piece.

approximately 15 years ago JS suffered a massive heart attack with severe brain damage due to oxygen starvation while undergoing a fertility treatment procedure at a clinic.

for the first 3.5 years after the attack BOTH the parents AND the husband worked in concert without disagreement to provide JS with significant treatment considered by most to be above and beyond accepted practice. she recieved physical therapy typical of stoke victims. she was moved to california to undergo an experimental procedure to implant electrodes in her brain to stimulate the nerve cells. she has already received all of the treatments the parents think will improved her condition if she would be allowed to live. none of these treatments have improved her condition to date.

the medical malpractice case against the fertility clinic was settled for $750,000 3.5 years after her attack. after the settlement the husband and parents suddenly had diverging opinions on how to continue her treatment. the settlement is being used to pay for her care and most observers feel the entire settlement has now been spent on her care.

as for the video tape being circulated by the parents purportedly showing positive responses to neurological tests, it is an edited version of 4 hours of tests. what was not included in the tape was the multiple tests she did not pass. in particular the "test" showing her eyes tracking a mickey mouse balloon did not include the 5 other times she failed to track the balloon. (ABC showed the other 5 times in addition to the footage the parents are using)

the florida judge handling the case watched the entire 4 hours of tape and found no evidence supporting the parents medical claims.

unfortunately the most damning piece of evidence against JS improvement is the obtuse medical statement "her cerebral cortex has deteriorated and been replaced by spinal fluid.

dr. arnott ABC's medical expert, explained the cerebral cortex is the 2 large lobes lay people call the brain. protruding up from the spinal cord is the brain stem and is surrounded by the cortex lobes. the brain stem controls involuntary body functions like heart beat and breathing. unfortunately over the past 15 years her "brain" has dissolved away and no longer exists. as crass as it sounds her head is full of water with only her brain stem left controlling her heart, breathing and causing the involuntary muscle reactions. eating and drinking are controlled by the cortex, hence her inability to feed herself and her need for a feeding tube.

dr arnott also noted because her cortex is so damaged she will die a peaceful painless death.

also this is not a one-of-kind case as some would like to make it out to be. there are approximately 600 JS cases in the country every year. (ABC figure) as reported in today's PHX newspaper there are approximately 40 cases in PHX alone.

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:29 am
by DonnaKayDunbar
Thanks, AF. That was a great summary!

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:35 am
by Sam
DonnaKayDunbar wrote:That statement was made several times, in front of several people...

The courts have agreed that this was Terri's wish.

I also find it interesting that Mr. Schiavo visits Terri most frequently. Not her parents.
How many one time conversations can you accurately recall that are beyond 8 years old?

Are the Courts always right? How many sentences have been overturned?

Are doctors always right?

It has been reported previously, that her husband has denied her parents access to visit her, denied her physical therapy,etc.

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:45 am
by AlbatrossFlyer
sam, would you be debating this case so strenuously if everything was exactly the same but husband claimed JS wanted to live and the parents were suing to end her life?

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:47 am
by rednekkPH
Sam wrote:
How many one time conversations can you accurately recall that are beyond 8 years old?
About what to have for dinner? None.

About whether or not my wife wanted to die with dignity or be kept alive as an empty shell...you can be damn sure I'd remember that one.

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:49 am
by Sam
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:sam, would you be debating this case so strenuously if everything was exactly the same but husband claimed JS wanted to live and the parents were suing to end her life?
YES

Posted: March 22, 2005 11:53 am
by Sam
rednekkPH wrote:
Sam wrote:
How many one time conversations can you accurately recall that are beyond 8 years old?
About what to have for dinner? None.

About whether or not my wife wanted to die with dignity or be kept alive as an empty shell...you can be damn sure I'd remember that one.

They knew each other and were married for how long ??? If her wishes were so strong, I am sure she would have said it more than once....that is IF she said it...

IF (God forbid) you and your family were involved in the same type situation would you wait over 8 years to bring up that one time conversation?

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:07 pm
by rednekkPH
Sam wrote:They knew each other and were married for how long ??? If her wishes were so strong, I am sure she would have said it more than once....that is IF she said it...
I hate broccoli. I feel very strongly about this. I only needed to tell my wife-to-be once. Believe me, she knows I hate broccoli, there is no need for further conversation on the subject.

Closer to the subject at hand, such talk is depressing. I would guess that they both felt the conversation only needed to take place once. With an attentive mate, you should only have to explain such feelings once.
Sam wrote:IF (God forbid) you and your family were involved in the same type situation would you wait over 8 years to bring up that one time conversation?


If I were holding out (albeit false) hope that they would recover, then yes I would. Once I was able to face the reality that they in fact gone, I would do whatever it took to honor their wishes.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:07 pm
by Elrod
Sam wrote:IF (God forbid) you and your family were involved in the same type situation would you wait over 8 years to bring up that one time conversation?
I can see where a person might not volunteer that information if they still held a hope or belief that their loved one might someday recover.

I can also see that over an extended period of time a person may become more knowledgeable about the patient's condition and chance of recovery. After understanding the reality of the situation I can see where they might give up their own wishes and seek to honor the patient's wish not to be sustained in such condition.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:12 pm
by AlbatrossFlyer
why people don't put their wishes in writing.....

besides the "creepy" factor that people don't want to talk about the subject, here's what you have to do in AZ to make your wishes legal and relatively binding.

you must have the following:

Durable health care power of attorney. a document in which you designate a person to make future health care decisions on your behalf. the document must be signed by a witness unrelated to you or a notory public. you should also have your doctor sign it to show they will comply with it.

Living will. a 2 page document in which you decide the type of end-of-life care you would like should you be in a coma, persistent vegatative state or other terminal condition. it must be signed by a witness unrelated to you or a notory public. a copy should be filed with your doctor. if you filled out a Durable health care power of attorney the Living will must be attached to it.

Prehospital medical care directive (DNR notice). this one page form must be printed on orange paper with a recent photo attached. (AZ law) it must be signed by you, your doctor, and a witness.

Letter to my agent. a one page document informing your representative and any alternates of his/her responsibilities concerning your medical decisions wishes. you must sign it and attach one copy to your Durable power of attorney and provide a copy to your representative so they can produce additional proof of their responsibilities if necessary.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:30 pm
by Wino you know
carolinagirl wrote:We don't put retarded people to death by starvation. I don't think it's a matter of "will she return to her former quality of life?" She won't. But she IS alive, and she doesn't deserve to die. She is permanently brain-damaged, but so are some other people in nursing homes. If she is alive but simply cannot feed herself, and we have the technology to feed her, as we have for 15 years, she should be allowed to live at whatever state of life she has. Some autistic people cannot react to other people in the way we would expect them to, but they have a right to live the lives they have.
Thanks for saying what I no longer have the strength to say, C.G.
It's YOU that apparently is the voice of reason in this case.
As I said before, if the Iraqi P.O.W.s (who KILL our soldiers every day) were being starved, the soldiers running the prison camps would be given the firing squad, much to the joy of many "compassionate" liberals.

ALSO, as I said yesterday-this judge who ruled in this case is a Clinton appointee, which meant Terry never ever had a chance, because as we all know, it's the liberal judges who are the final authority in this country.
Somehow, thanks to a bunch of liberal activist judges over the years, it's the judiciary that is the most powerful branch of government.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:34 pm
by ph4ever
Very good information AF!!!! I might add to also let your family aware of these documents and your wishes. When my father had his drawn up years ago he made sure that several people within the family had copies so there would be no misunderstanding between us.

One good outcome of this debate for me is that my 18 year old son and I discussed these issues at length over the weekend and I know beyond a shadow of a doubt what his wishes are and he knows mine as well.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:36 pm
by AlbatrossFlyer
Wino you know wrote:
carolinagirl wrote:We don't put retarded people to death by starvation. I don't think it's a matter of "will she return to her former quality of life?" She won't. But she IS alive, and she doesn't deserve to die. She is permanently brain-damaged, but so are some other people in nursing homes. If she is alive but simply cannot feed herself, and we have the technology to feed her, as we have for 15 years, she should be allowed to live at whatever state of life she has. Some autistic people cannot react to other people in the way we would expect them to, but they have a right to live the lives they have.
Thanks for saying what I no longer have the strength to say, C.G.
It's YOU that apparently is the voice of reason in this case.
As I said before, if the Iraqi P.O.W.s (who KILL our soldiers every day) were being starved, the soldiers running the prison camps would be given the firing squad, much to the joy of many "compassionate" liberals.

ALSO, as I said yesterday-this judge who ruled in this case is a Clinton appointee, which meant Terry never ever had a chance, because as we all know, it's the liberal judges who are the final authority in this country.
Somehow, thanks to a bunch of liberal activist judges over the years, it's the judiciary that is the most powerful branch of government.
**** fact check time *****

this case has been reviewed by 15 different judges in 7 state courts.... not counting the federal court system. state judges are not appointed by any president.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:40 pm
by Wino you know
I rest my case. The judiciary branch has become the most powerful branch of government. I didn't think it worked that way in a represenative republic.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:41 pm
by Blonde Stranger
Wino you know wrote: Thanks for saying what I no longer have the strength to say, C.G.
It's YOU that apparently is the voice of reason in this case.
As I said before, if the Iraqi P.O.W.s (who KILL our soldiers every day) were being starved, the soldiers running the prison camps would be given the firing squad, much to the joy of many "compassionate" liberals.

ALSO, as I said yesterday-this judge who ruled in this case is a Clinton appointee, which meant Terry never ever had a chance, because as we all know, it's the liberal judges who are the final authority in this country.
Somehow, thanks to a bunch of liberal activist judges over the years, it's the judiciary that is the most powerful branch of government.
Did you actually take the time to read the FoxNews article on Judge Whittemore? Here's an excerpt:
Longtime colleagues describe Whittemore, 52, as thoughtful, fair and down-to-earth, not the least flamboyant.

"He is a highly, highly regarded judge," said Tampa lawyer John Fitzgibbons. "He is highly intelligent and has just an excellent judicious temperament. He will allow all sides to state their position, to have their say."

Whittemore, appointed to the federal bench by President Clinton (search) in 1999, is not known to display any political leanings.

Fitzgibbons said those who have criticized previous rulings in the case will not have an easy time accusing Whittemore of bias.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151095,00.html

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:46 pm
by Wino you know
A LIBERAL JUDGE with no political leanings???

COME ON! I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born LAST NIGHT!

OF COURSE his "collegues" are going to say his stuff doesn't stink!
Even JUDGES have friends.

Posted: March 22, 2005 12:49 pm
by Blonde Stranger
Judge Greer, the judge who has rendered most of the decisions about Terri Shiavo in favor of her husband and against the parents, is described by local Republican political leaders as "Conscientious. Honest. Compassionate. A good Christian. An outstanding lawyer."

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/22/North ... _bac.shtml
Local Republicans back Greer
Accused of "murder" in the Schiavo case by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, the judge is defended at home.
By MICHAEL SANDLER, Times Staff Writer
Published March 22, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CLEARWATER - Many local Republicans shuddered last weekend when U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay accused a Pinellas judge of "murder" and "terrorism."

Such labels, troubling in any context, are particularly grating when they involve two members of the same political party.

"I was absolutely so disgusted with what he said," said County Commissioner Bob Stewart.

Pinellas County Property Appraiser Jim Smith, a former state legislator and Republican state committeeman, called DeLay's remarks "a disgrace."

Local Republicans had their own words for Judge George Greer, who, as presiding judge in the Terri Schiavo case, ordered the removal of her feeding tube on March 18.

Conscientious. Honest. Compassionate. A good Christian. An outstanding lawyer.

"Those folks that are saying anything bad about Judge Greer, they don't know him, and apparently they don't understand the law and the separation of powers," said state Rep. Everett Rice, R-Treasure Island, who stood behind Greer's decision last week in Tallahassee.

In Washington, Republican lawmakers worked through the weekend after Greer refused to let congressional subpoenas interfere with his order. Today would be Schiavo's fourth ful l day without nourishment.

Leading the way was DeLay, the House majority leader, who used inflammatory language while marshaling congressional Republicans to swiftly force a federal judge in Tampa to hear a request by Schiavo's parents to reinsert her feeding tube.

"Right now, murder is being committed against a defenseless American citizen in Florida," DeLay said.

He also said, "Schiavo's life is not slipping away - it is being violently wrenched from her body in an act of medical terrorism."

DeLay's office did not respond to requests for comment.

Greer, who declined to comment for this story, has been the subject of verba l attacks from religious and right-to-life groups since his ruling on Schiavo. He has als o received at least one death threat.

His Republican colleagues in Pinellas are saddened by DeLay's statements in the already emotional debate.

"I personally don't agree with Judge Greer's decision," said Ken Burke, Pinellas County Clerk of the Circuit Court and an active Republican. "But I respect the way he made it. I think those are inappropriate comments on DeLay's part."

"We need more judges like Judge Greer, not fewer," said Bruce McManus, a Largo probate lawyer who specializes in elder law.

McManus has found himself in a particularly difficult position. He's a member of groups that have been critical of Greer, such as the Southern Baptist Convention. But he also specializes in the area of law that Greer is interpreting.

McManus said Greer has done his best to make a tough decision, and called DeLay's comments "ridiculous."

"Judge Greer is an evangelical Christian man," McManus said. "He believes in the right to life as much as some of the people who are criticizing him so harshly. But he also believes in the rule of law, which he was sworn to uphold. To the best of his ability, that's what he is trying to do."

Rice is also a lawyer and last week opposed a bill in Tallahassee that would have blocked the removal of Schiavo's feeding tube.

"I can safely assume Judge Greer did the right thing in this case," Rice said. "And those people trying to vilify him about this are wrong. They are screaming and hollering for political gain. That's the only reason I can figure."

Rice said the comments have to hurt, but he knows the judge is taking them in stride.

"I think one of the most telling things about Judge Greer's integrity is that he could have dumped this case many times," Rice said. "He would not shirk his responsibility and he would not dump it on a fellow judge."

For Tony DiMatteo, the chairman of the Pinellas County Republican Executive Committee, the Schiavo case is "an emotional issue" that has brought out a variety of opinions in the party. DiMatteo has chosen to keep his to himself. He offered a few words from a former Republican president.

"Ronald Reagan had the 11th commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican," DiMatteo said. "I wish more would follow the commandment of Ronald Reagan."