jackiesic wrote:
The doctor (chosen by her husband, not the courts) who came up with the
PVS diag. that the Fl. Judge is relying on is an avowed euthanasia advocate.
The court appointed Dr. also came back with the PVS diag.
BOTH dr's hired by Mr. S also came up with PVS.
the only two that didn't were hired by the parents.
Which doesn't surprise me... but hubbys drs negate parents drs.... leaving the court appointed dr the only neutral party.
I'm going with the guy who isn't being paid on this one...
jackiesic wrote:
The doctor (chosen by her husband, not the courts) who came up with the
PVS diag. that the Fl. Judge is relying on is an avowed euthanasia advocate.
The court appointed Dr. also came back with the PVS diag.
BOTH dr's hired by Mr. S also came up with PVS.
the only two that didn't were hired by the parents.
Which doesn't surprise me... but hubbys drs negate parents drs.... leaving the court appointed dr the only neutral party.
I'm going with the guy who isn't being paid on this one...
wino-everything that I have read and heard indicates that any expressions from Terri are merely random and involuntary, and not reactive. She is not responding to those in the room, but occasionally the changes in expression might occur in such a way as they appear to be a conscious response.
Wino you know wrote:[
I feel the spotlight on me again in this one, so I'll try-
1)No, I wouldn't want to be left in a vegetable-like state. The thing is-Terry IS concious, alert, and does respond to people by smiling, moving her head, blinking her eyes, and reacting to people touching her. I'm NOT saying it's THE way to live, of course, and, again, I WOULD NOT want that for myself-all I've been saying all along is that if the parents are willing to care for her and bear the medical expenses, why not let them do it? I can't begin to imagine the pain of a parent seeing their child OF ANY AGE slip away. That has GOT to be the ultimate pain.
My other concern is that simply starving a person to death seems BEYOND cruel. If she was totally unconcious and COULDN'T be fed, perhaps I'd feel differently.
"... in a persistent vegetative state, the brain centers that control wakefulness are functioning, but those that permit conscious awareness of oneself or the environment are damaged or destroyed.
As a result, patients close their eyes to sleep and open them when they wake up. If a doctor brushes the eyeball with a wisp of cotton, they may blink. If something gets caught in the throat, they will cough. There may be limited eye movements, though patients can't follow a person walking from one side of the room to another, for example..."
ejr wrote:wino-everything that I have read and heard indicates that any expressions from Terri are merely random and involuntary, and not reactive. She is not responding to those in the room, but occasionally the changes in expression might occur in such a way as they appear to be a conscious response.
I'm reading reports of both, Ellen-some say, as you do, that the movements are involuntary, while others insist that her movements are indeed reactionary.
Which is why, Michael Schiavo be damned, the judge who will be ruling in this case should go into the room with her for at least an hour.
I still maintain that it's extremely cruel to starve an innocent person to death.
Remember all the media conglomerates screaming to high heaven when they thought the prisoners at Abu Ghrabi were being starved?
Terry doesn't deserve this.
Wino you know wrote:I just think that if Terry's parents are wanting to take care of her and pay her medical expenses, they should be given that chance.
Unless, of course, Michael really is acting in accordance with what he believes her wishes were...
And thus the debate continues... not sure I see what business it would be of a federal court tho...
I don't think the federal court WANTED to take on this case, but congress, being pressured by their constituents, and HAS the authority under Article 3 to determine what jurisdiction all courts have (with the exception of the U.S. Supreme Court-all others were created by congress), has been feeling the heat. And, rightfully, or wrongfully, I have to go along with them on this one.
Normally I say the less government and government agencies there are, the better.
I would just ask anyone if it were THEIR child, would you just sit back and say OKAY-PULL THE PLUG? And be okay with it? I hope to God nobody here EVER has to make that decision. Parents aren't SUPPOSED to outlive their children. If you don't feel empathy for the parents, you don't have a heart. As much as we all talk about how much we love our children, I just find that difficult, if not impossible to believe.
Judge doesn't order Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted
Tuesday, March 22, 2005 Posted: 7:13 AM EST (1213 GMT)
TAMPA, Florida (CNN) -- A federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the reinsertion of a feeding tube for Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman who is the center of a national legal battle over her life.
Attorneys for Schiavo's parents will file an appeal at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia.
Schiavo has been without food or water since Friday, when her feeding tube was removed by order of a state judge who ruled that her husband has the right to decide her fate.
The ruling in Tampa by U.S. District Judge James Whittemore came after Congress and President Bush enacted legislation aimed at allowing federal courts to review Schiavo's case.
On one side of the wrenching case is Michael Schiavo, Terri Schiavo's husband. He insists that his wife would never want to continue to live in her current condition -- what Florida courts have deemed a "persistent vegetative state."
People in a persistent vegetative state cannot think, speak or respond to commands and are not aware of their surroundings.
Terri Schiavo, now 41, collapsed in her home in 1990, suffering from heart failure that led to severe brain damage. Michael Schiavo said his wife suffered from bulimia that resulted in a potassium deficiency that triggered the heart failure
Michael Schiavo is vowing to carry through with what he calls his wife's wish not to live in such a condition, saying, "I will stick by Terri."
"When Terri's wishes are carried out, it will be her wish. She'll be at peace, she'll be with the Lord," Michael Schiavo said on Monday. "This is what Terri wants. She does not want to be in this condition. She does not want to exist in this condition, and I'm going to carry out what she wanted."
But Terri Schiavo's parents point to the absence of a "living will," or written document, clearly spelling out her wishes. They argue that their daughter's due-process rights have been violated and that she, as a Roman Catholic, would not have wanted to die.
They also contend that their daughter's condition could improve with treatment.
Death could come within two weeks
Doctors have said Terri Schiavo could live for one to two weeks without her feeding tube.
Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, are facing an uphill battle. Repeated court rulings have held that Michael Schiavo is his wife's legal guardian and therefore has the right to make decisions regarding her care.
But at a hearing Monday, Judge Whittemore grilled the Schindlers' attorney about the constitutionality of their case.
Michael Schiavo was not at Monday's federal hearing, instead opting to remain at Terri Schiavo's bedside. He said it is going to be "hard" when she finally dies.
"I've cried many tears so far, trust me," he said. "I made a promise to Terri. I'm going to stick by her side, and I'm going to do this for her. Terri is not a piece of property that you pass back and forth. She didn't say, 'Well, when I become sick, give me back to my parents.' I will stick by Terri."
Michael Schiavo and his attorney, George Felos, said Terri made it clear years ago that she would not want to live in such a condition -- even though she never made a "living will." They said she once made the comment to her best friend after they saw an emotional movie in which one of the characters was in such a state.
"She said, 'No tubes for me,'" Michael Schiavo said.
Asked if he would feel bad if his wife died and medical experts later figured out a way for Terri to live a better life, Michael Schiavo said that was a medical impossibility.
"Let's be realistic, Larry. You can't re-grow a brain," he said.
Meanwhile, outside the hospice where Terri is staying, her brother thanked supporters on behalf of the family and said they remain optimistic her feeding tube will be reinserted.
At the same time, he said it is disturbing to visit his sister without the feeding tube in.
"She's still alert, but we're going on four days now and we're slowly watching my sister being starved to death," Bobby Schindler said. "It's a surreal situation when you walk in there and you realize you're watching a loved one slowly being starved to death and dehydrated to death. It's hard to describe."
Wino you know wrote:I would just ask anyone if it were THEIR child, would you just sit back and say OKAY-PULL THE PLUG? And be okay with it? I hope to God nobody here EVER has to make that decision. Parents aren't SUPPOSED to outlive their children. If you don't feel empathy for the parents, you don't have a heart. As much as we all talk about how much we love our children, I just find that difficult, if not impossible to believe.
Would I "just" pull the plug? No. But I would probably let my child go after 15 years with no prognosis for a meaningful recovery.
I can empathize with the parents while still disagreeing that removing life-sustatining care is, by default, cruel, inhumane or indicitive of not having a heart.
It seems to me that there are numerous scenarios where relieving my child's suffering and letting the child die would be more ethical than letting my child live in pain. You may call it callous, I see it as selfless.
But that would be the way I would view it, not the way I think Schaivo's parents should go.
But regardless, the issue before the courts is not and has not been whether its ethical to remove the feeding tube.... it has consistently been about what Terry would have wanted and, in the absence of a living will, who has the responsibility to make those decisions for her.
To suggest that this case is about the ethics of removing life-sustaining care would be wrong. Certainly that is the debate that has sprung up around it, but it's not at all what is before the court.
The only issue to be debated about Terry is should it be her husband or her parents who make that decision.
Last edited by Key Lime Lee on March 22, 2005 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Eleven longhaired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus...
Wino you know wrote:I just think that if Terry's parents are wanting to take care of her and pay her medical expenses, they should be given that chance.
Unless, of course, Michael really is acting in accordance with what he believes her wishes were...
And thus the debate continues... not sure I see what business it would be of a federal court tho...
Lee,
That is just it...IF he was so concerned about her wishes...why did he wait so long to come forward and recall an "alledged" one time conversation?
I am not looking for an argument....just questioning the reasoning and REAL motives. IF he was so sincere and really believed in her wishes and carrying them out...I would think he would have done so much sooner...rather than wait to recall the alledged one time conversation.
Pardon me Connie, if I am being repetitive...my apologies to you, for you not understanding that intentional death by starvation and dehydration and taking up to 14 days or longer to kill an innocent person is considered inhumane and cruel by some of us. Oh wait....I am being repetitive again...
Wino,
YOU GO MAN! YOU ROCK!!!
TikiBar,
YOU GO WOMAN! YOU ROCK!!!
Thank you, again!
Sam
Roll with the punches, play all of your hunches...come what may... POW-MIA, YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN!!!
SUPPORT OPERATION JUST CAUSE!!! http://www.ojc.org/
captainjoe wrote:For all those who want Terry kept alive:
For the sake of argument, say you told your spouse that you did not want to live in a veg-like state and you did not have a living will - would you still want your spouse to carry out your final wishes?
Say something horrible happens to you and you have no living will but you and your spouse have talked in the past about this - wouldn't you want your wishes followed?
Isn't that what her husband is trying to do?
It's not necessarily WHAT they're doing. We'll never know all the facts. It's the WAY they're doing it that angers me so much.
Sam wrote:Lee,
That is just it...IF he was so concerned about her wishes...why did he wait so long to come forward and recall an "alledged" one time conversation?
Well since neither you nor I know him, all we can do is speculate.
Maybe for the first 8 years he really believed she could recover. Maybe he only brought up the conversation when he lost hope.
All I know is that numerous courts and judges have found no reason to believe that Michael Schaivo has acted in any way that wasn't in Terri's best interests. If they did, they would have removed him as guardian.
There's something to be said for judges intimately involved in the case making the decisions they do.
Eleven longhaired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus...
Key Lime Lee wrote:To suggest that this case is about the ethics of removing life-sustaining care would be wrong. Certainly that is the debate that has sprung up around it, but it's not at all what is before the court.
This is, of course, right on the mark. The grandstanding and self-promotion about this in Washington is alarming. This exact scenario happens IN PRIVATE, EVERY DAY all over the country, and the world, with no attention from politicians. But get the right people involved, as both her parents and husband have done, and it becomes a "cause." The reality - argued many times (I believe 34 court cases?) - is that her body is useless for housing life. That's what our bodies do - they get us around while we are here. This poor woman is not here anymore - she probably isn't anywhere since some insist on refusing to let her body proceed to die. With no hope for restoring her life to her body, it serves her no purpose anymore. Out of the glare of cameras and the noise of politicians, this scenario plays out in the dignity of privacy every day. But the problem here is that her body serves other lives now with all sorts of agendas.
More than anything, this is a sad commentary on how we increasingly determine "ethics" using media-driven, politicaly motivated factors instead of sound reasoning.
My $.02.
If you're going to do nothing at least do it at the beach!
Sam wrote:Lee,
That is just it...IF he was so concerned about her wishes...why did he wait so long to come forward and recall an "alledged" one time conversation?
Well since neither you nor I know him, all we can do is speculate.
Maybe for the first 8 years he really believed she could recover. Maybe he only brought up the conversation when he lost hope.
All I know is that numerous courts and judges have found no reason to believe that Michael Schaivo has acted in any way that wasn't in Terri's best interests. If they did, they would have removed him as guardian.
There's something to be said for judges intimately involved in the case making the decisions they do.
Lee,
I agree with you and all we can do is speculate....IMNSHO, I find room for reasonable doubt in this particular case. Apparently none of us are judges or doctors that have evaluated her or have ever met/ personally seen her ( as far as I know...).I know most people here have said they would not want to live in such conditions...but we are not talking most people here we are talking of an individual...that none of us know, whose real decisions cannot be expressed at this time.
The period of time that went by for him to recall the alledged one time conversation makes the aledged one time conversation highly suspect and raises flags to me. It causes me to question.
"IF" you were a juror and heard a death penalty case....and the conviction rested on such a recalled conversation....could you in good faith convict the accused ???
I believe we all want her wishes carried out, however do we really know what they are/were? What is the rush to starve her to death after Fifteen years? I do not know...
Once she is dead, as you and everyone else knows, it will be too late to say it was not what she wanted.
I have been through having "the plug pulled" before. They were not like this case. Techinically ( to me ) that means the respirator and the machines were keeping them alive....they were not breathing on their own..."the plug was pulled" they passed immediately or within a few mins.
Terri is breathing on her own...an IV and a feeding tube are not machines....she is alive. To what degree is speculation on both sides as Wino posted. But certainly no one can doubt she is alive....
I have seen my own parents have to bury some of my sibblings. I can tell you that they would not want to see them suffer, but I can also tell you that they would do EVERYTHING to save their lives.
I believe any good parent would. It is easy for some ( not saying you) to claim false hope when such cases happen. I can say, after being there and the feelings and emotions that go on....when it is out of doctors hands....the love and desire and hope are still there...sometimes miracles do occur and sometimes they do not, doctors have no explanations.
Is Terri beyond the reach of a miracle?
Roll with the punches, play all of your hunches...come what may... POW-MIA, YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN!!!
SUPPORT OPERATION JUST CAUSE!!! http://www.ojc.org/
Sam wrote:Lee,
That is just it...IF he was so concerned about her wishes...why did he wait so long to come forward and recall an "alledged" one time conversation?
Well since neither you nor I know him, all we can do is speculate.
Maybe for the first 8 years he really believed she could recover. Maybe he only brought up the conversation when he lost hope.
All I know is that numerous courts and judges have found no reason to believe that Michael Schaivo has acted in any way that wasn't in Terri's best interests. If they did, they would have removed him as guardian.
There's something to be said for judges intimately involved in the case making the decisions they do.
Lee,
I agree with you and all we can do is speculate....IMNSHO, I find room for reasonable doubt in this particular case. Apparently none of us are judges or doctors that have evaluated her or have ever met/ personally seen her ( as far as I know...).I know most people here have said they would not want to live in such conditions...but we are not talking most people here we are talking of an individual...that none of us know, whose real decisions cannot be expressed at this time.
The period of time that went by for him to recall the alledged one time conversation makes the aledged one time conversation highly suspect and raises flags to me. It causes me to question.
"IF" you were a juror and heard a death penalty case....and the conviction rested on such a recalled conversation....could you in good faith convict the accused ???
I believe we all want her wishes carried out, however do we really know what they are/were? What is the rush to starve her to death after Fifteen years? I do not know...
Once she is dead, as you and everyone else knows, it will be too late to say it was not what she wanted.
I have been through having "the plug pulled" before. They were not like this case. Techinically ( to me ) that means the respirator and the machines were keeping them alive....they were not breathing on their own..."the plug was pulled" they passed immediately or within a few mins.
Terri is breathing on her own...an IV and a feeding tube are not machines....she is alive. To what degree is speculation on both sides as Wino posted. But certainly no one can doubt she is alive....
I have seen my own parents have to bury some of my sibblings. I can tell you that they would not want to see them suffer, but I can also tell you that they would do EVERYTHING to save their lives.
I believe any good parent would. It is easy for some ( not saying you) to claim false hope when such cases happen. I can say, after being there and the feelings and emotions that go on....when it is out of doctors hands....the love and desire and hope are still there...sometimes miracles do occur and sometimes they do not, doctors have no explanations.
Is Terri beyond the reach of a miracle?
I guess this got lost in the shuffle, but here is the court's opinion on Terri's wishes after the testimony of more than just Michael Schiavo. The relevant part starts on page 4:
Considering that there's no indication of neural activity in any part of the brain responsible for consciousness, I'd say yes. But then it's not my decision to make, it's her husband's.
The fact that he waited hasn't given any court that heard the case reasonable doubt to question his motives. Do you believe that every judge is on the take and every decision has been tainted?
If Michael is such a horrible person, why didn't her parents object when he was originally named the guardian?
You can ask all the hypothetical questions you want... eventually you have to have some faith in our legal system to sort it out.
Eleven longhaired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus...
PINELLAS PARK - Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo said Saturday that it isn't just the Florida governor who should visit his wife to learn about the case.
Jeb Bush's brother, President Bush, should visit Terri Schiavo, too, he said.
"Come down, President Bush," Schiavo said in a telephone interview. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it."
She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't.
He made a similar offer to the governor last week, saying lawmakers interferring in his wife's life know nothing about the case. So far, Gov. Bush hasn't responded to the offer.
President Bush has indicated he will sign any federal legislation to keep Terri Schiavo alive.
Weary after an emotional visit with his wife, Schiavo said he is astonished that politicians want to interfere in such a private matter.
"Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."
He said U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who is leading a charge to extend Terri Schiavo's life, is a "little slithering snake" pandering for votes.
"To make comments that Terri would want to live, how do they know?" Schiavo said of the members of Congress who want to keep his wife alive.
"Have they ever met her?" Schiavo said. "What color are her eyes? What's her middle name? What's her favorite color? They don't have any clue who Terri is. They should all be ashamed of themselves."
Schiavo said he was going to stay at his wife's side through the entire ordeal and said he wouldn't back down in his fight to have her wishes carried out.
"Terri died 15 years ago," Schiavo said, referring to the collapse and cardiac arrest that doctors say virtually destroyed her brain. "It's time for her to be with the Lord like she wanted to be."
PINELLAS PARK - Angered by the latest political developments in Washington, Michael Schiavo said Saturday that it isn't just the Florida governor who should visit his wife to learn about the case.
Jeb Bush's brother, President Bush, should visit Terri Schiavo, too, he said.
"Come down, President Bush," Schiavo said in a telephone interview. "Come talk to me. Meet my wife. Talk to my wife and see if you get an answer. Ask her to lift her arm to shake your hand. She won't do it."
She won't, Schiavo said, because she can't.
He made a similar offer to the governor last week, saying lawmakers interferring in his wife's life know nothing about the case. So far, Gov. Bush hasn't responded to the offer.
President Bush has indicated he will sign any federal legislation to keep Terri Schiavo alive.
Weary after an emotional visit with his wife, Schiavo said he is astonished that politicians want to interfere in such a private matter.
"Instead of worrying about my wife, who was granted her wishes by the state courts the past seven years, they should worry about the pedophiles killing young girls," Schiavo said, referring to a local case. "Why doesn't Congress worry about people not having health insurance? Or the budget? Let's talk about all the children who don't have homes."
He said U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who is leading a charge to extend Terri Schiavo's life, is a "little slithering snake" pandering for votes.
"To make comments that Terri would want to live, how do they know?" Schiavo said of the members of Congress who want to keep his wife alive.
"Have they ever met her?" Schiavo said. "What color are her eyes? What's her middle name? What's her favorite color? They don't have any clue who Terri is. They should all be ashamed of themselves."
Schiavo said he was going to stay at his wife's side through the entire ordeal and said he wouldn't back down in his fight to have her wishes carried out.
"Terri died 15 years ago," Schiavo said, referring to the collapse and cardiac arrest that doctors say virtually destroyed her brain. "It's time for her to be with the Lord like she wanted to be."
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. My other major problem is intentionally starving and dehydrating someone to death and it being called "humane treatment", when people are serving time/being prosecuted for doing the same to other human beings and to animals...
Roll with the punches, play all of your hunches...come what may... POW-MIA, YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN!!!
SUPPORT OPERATION JUST CAUSE!!! http://www.ojc.org/
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.
"Nonsense! I have not yet begun to defile myself." - Doc Holliday
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.
POW-MIA, YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN!!! 