Teri Schiavo Execution in Florida

[crwtom 0]

Quote

Sad that even our government is spending time on the popular cause and not the important ones.

as an individual case it's probably not important in larger scheme
of things - as a legal precedence it may well be quite
important from a number of legal perspectives.

But that's where I agree with your qualms about involvement of
the legislature . At this point, right in the middle of a process that
should be the concern of only the judicial brach, the congress
has absolutely no business of interfering. This runs broadside
against all fundamental ideas of due process and separation of
power.

This is an issue where you can legitimately have any oppinion
on - it's not hard to understand the point and believes of each
side and from all I understand both Schiavo's husband and her
parents want to do what's best, in their minds, for her. There's
no right or wrong that's obvious to everyone - but there needs to
be a way to resolve it.

For this purpose society has put a laws and courts in place that
lay out general and uniform principles by which such situation are to be resolved and judges who do their best to understand and
interpret them. Like it or not, this IS now a matter of the courts and
judges only.

The discussions how dead she really is and those
contests about who has seen more people in a vegetative state
of whatever are entirely irrelevant at this point of the process. If
you don't like how this one went write a letter to your congress
woman to tell her to make another law the NEXT time around
that applies universally to all other cases and is agreed upon by
a majority of voters or reps.

Granted that formally congress left the decision in the hands of
the courts - and only opened up the channel to the federal system.
The intent to disrupt and take sides in a judical process of one individual case was, however, quite unconcealed. It is equally
obvious that the purpose was to make polical hay with the case.

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Based on what actions?

Let's do a few...

1. He is married to Terri, but living with another woman and has two children by her.
2. Although justified based on the above, she can’t divorce him.
3. Parents have offered to foot the medical bills and he still wants her dead.
4. He has consistently denied her rehabilitation and been hostile to anyone who attempts to help her beyond what is absolutely required (e.g. feeding baby food by mouth instead of feeding tube).
5. He has tried to deny all sensory input (e.g. removing pictures on the wall) to Terri making her state even more like a prison and a living hell.
6. This in spite of an equal amount of expert medical opinion stating that a degree of rehabilitation is possible even for a person in her condition.
7. I believe he has even denied her Catholic last rights when she does die. He’s planning on having her cremated instead of burial like her family wants. He also will not allow her to die at home.

Why?

[justinb138 0]

Quote

By "starving" her to death, they can avoid the personal responsibility, close their eyes, and wish it all away. Pathetic really.

Teri Schiavo is dead. Why keep her body alive?

Quote

Watch the news.

What actions are you referring to? I have been watching the news (which is probably the most biased source for information anyway) and I haven't seen anything that would make me not believe him.

Quote

Really? Where's your proof of her stated wishes?

Her husband of many years relayed that message to everyone. He has nothing to gain in her death. I haven't seen or heard anything that would lead me to believe that he has any other agenda than making sure he did what she wanted.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

for he has absolutely nothing to gain here.

Insurance money? Why is he still married to her? Why is he still in a decade long adulterous affair with another woman and has two kids with her? Why not just divorce and let her parents (who are willing) care for her from now on. Supposed to be "till death do we part", right?

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Teri Schiavo is dead. Why keep her body alive?

You don't know that. There's plenty of expert medical opinion stating otherwise.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

Quote

Quote

Teri Schiavo is dead. Why keep her body alive?

You don't know that. There's plenty of expert medical opinion stating otherwise.

You can get any "expert medical opinion" you want, you just need to hire the right doctor. Hire a Fundie-raving-loony-bible-banging MD, he's gonna say keep the slab of meat alive forever. Hire a realistic doc, he'll make her as comfortable as possible until she dies.

Personally, I think he should divorce her and cede custody to the parents.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

1. He is married to Terri, but living with another woman and has two children by her.

Teri has been dead for 15 years. What's wrong with living with another woman?

Quote

2. Although justified based on the above, she can’t divorce him.

I haven't heard that this is the case.

Quote

3. Parents have offered to foot the medical bills and he still wants her dead.

If he was going against her wishes to stay alive in her current condition, what motivation would he have to let her die? None, he could just walk away.

Quote

4. He has consistently denied her rehabilitation and been hostile to anyone who attempts to help her beyond what is absolutely required (e.g. feeding baby food by mouth instead of feeding tube).

She is essentially brain dead. What good is any kind of rehabilitation going to do?

Quote

5. He has tried to deny all sensory input (e.g. removing pictures on the wall) to Terri making her state even more like a prison and a living hell.

I seriously doubt that is the case. While he may have removed pictures on the wall, I doubt that was the reason. Sounds like a reporter is showing alot of their opinion in their reports.

Quote

6. This in spite of an equal amount of expert medical opinion stating that a degree of rehabilitation is possible even for a person in her condition.

I've yet to hear anything from a doctor saying that any amount of rehabilitation is possible. If you have such information from a credible source, I would like to see it.

Quote

7. I believe he has even denied her Catholic last rights when she does die. He’s planning on having her cremated instead of burial like her family wants. He also will not allow her to die at home.

You're assuming that she wanted the exact same things that her family wanted for her.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Personally, I think he should divorce her and cede custody to the parents.

I agree with you. He should have done that a long time ago before marrying again and having kids, though.

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

If they're just going to kill her, they aught to give her a lethal injection and get it over with. Wait...that's illegal. By "starving" her to death, they can avoid the personal responsibility, close their eyes, and wish it all away. Pathetic really.

OK, which one is it? Are they planning to starve her because they're gutless, or because its the only legal way of letting her die. Slamming someone for doing things by the book is a bit odd.

If it was me I'd prefer whoever was looking after me to give the injection and save everyone else the weeks of is he/ isn't he that they will have to endure. But hey, they've been waiting 15 years because of all this political football so a couple of weeks shouldn't cause that much more distress, right?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[wmw999 2,439]

Here is a pretty comprehensive timeline blog. There's a lot of information.

He spent a number of years investing in aggressive rehab. He listened to medical opinion before terminating it. Yes, he lives with another woman now and has children by her. She visits Terri with him some of the time when he goes to visit her.

Apparently he has invested a lot into her -- he is a respiratory therapist, as a long-term patient she has no serious health problems other than what got her there in the first place (and we all know nursing-home horror stories). He feels her life has ended. After 8 years of her being in a persistent vegetative state, he asked a judge to decide if he was the right person to make that decision, since he was unsure.

Having received the affirmation from the judge, he's going forward.

I really feel for her parents -- it must be hell to lose a child. She has lost a lot of brain matter; it's replaced by cerebrospinal fluid -- that's evident from scans. That's a physical change, not a "mental state" change that can be debated.

If it were me, I'd've let her parents take over. Apparently he feels strongly that would not be her wish, as this can't possibly be the easiest way to move on with his life.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 2,989]

>You can't base human lives on "he said; she said."

That is _exactly_ what we base much of the rights of marriage on - that one person can speak for the other. A wife can withdraw from her husband's bank account, sign documents for him, decide on medical treatments for him if he is incapacitated etc etc. In the eyes of the law, they become in some sense one person.

Imagine, if you will, that you are unconscious and injured, and required a risky surgery. Imagine further that your wife decides that you should have it, but a laywer entered the situation and said "nope, there's no proof he would have wanted that, you don't have the right to risk his life." I suspect you would not like that sort of intrusion.

>If they're just going to kill her, they aught to give her a lethal injection
> and get it over with. Wait...that's illegal. By "starving" her to death, they
> can . . . .

. . . carry out her wishes.

>avoid the personal responsibility, close their eyes, and wish it all away. Pathetic really.

I think it's pretty pathetic to use a human body to make a political point in contradiction of her wishes, but that's just me.

[billvon 2,989]

>You can get any "expert medical opinion" you want, you just need to hire the right doctor.

Agreed. The three doctors hired by her husband reported she had no possibility of recovery; the three doctors hired by her parents went so far as to say she would make a significant recovery and would walk and talk again. The doctor appointed by the judge stated there was no appreciable chance of her recovering.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Teri has been dead for 15 years. What's wrong with living with another woman?

Not dead…
Vegetative…
There was a neurologist on the news this morning who said that a degree of rehabilitation was possible even with a person in her condition.

Quote

I haven't heard that this is the case.

I don’t think he’ll divorce her. I wonder why.

Quote

If he was going against her wishes to stay alive in her current condition, what motivation would he have to let her die? None, he could just walk away.

You’re assuming that he has completely honest intentions.

Quote

She is essentially brain dead. What good is any kind of rehabilitation going to do?

Again…she’s not “brain dead.” Who are we to say what quality of life is acceptable to the norm. Who’s to say what joy, however little it may be, she experiences in her own way? Who’s to say that’s not worth anything?

Quote

I seriously doubt that is the case. While he may have removed pictures on the wall, I doubt that was the reason. Sounds like a reporter is showing alot of their opinion in their reports.

Maybe…
I’m just watching the news like you are.

Quote

I've yet to hear anything from a doctor saying that any amount of rehabilitation is possible. If you have such information from a credible source, I would like to see it.

I’m not a physician but I heard it from one on the news this morning.

Quote

You're assuming that she wanted the exact same things that her family wanted for her.

I believe she was also Roman Catholic. I’m not but they’re pretty serious about that stuff. You do the math.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

Based on what actions?

Let's do a few...

1. He is married to Terri, but living with another woman and has two children by her.
2. Although justified based on the above, she can’t divorce him.
3. Parents have offered to foot the medical bills and he still wants her dead.
4. He has consistently denied her rehabilitation and been hostile to anyone who attempts to help her beyond what is absolutely required (e.g. feeding baby food by mouth instead of feeding tube).
5. He has tried to deny all sensory input (e.g. removing pictures on the wall) to Terri making her state even more like a prison and a living hell.
6. This in spite of an equal amount of expert medical opinion stating that a degree of rehabilitation is possible even for a person in her condition.
7. I believe he has even denied her Catholic last rights when she does die. He’s planning on having her cremated instead of burial like her family wants. He also will not allow her to die at home.

Why?

Apparently I haven't followed this close enough....could you post links to where you found this stuff out...and who is saying it? I'm not sure what to believe. I heard the lawyer of the parents claim the husband is damning her to hell by removing the feeding tube. Yes, this was his legal argument. The Pope has declared that refusing to eat or have water is a sin since it is a form of suicide....therefore the lawyer claims this is suicide. Guess all those Catholics that have a living will are now doomed to spend eternity in hell.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[tigra 0]

Quote

I believe she was also Roman Catholic. I’m not but they’re pretty serious about that stuff. You do the math.

I was born and raised Roman Catholic. I've made my wishes pretty clear to my family, although nothing is in writing. Those wishes include not being kept alive artificially or in a vegetative state, also organ donation to the extent that its possible, and cremation. Luckily (hopefully) my immediate family will respect my wishes even though they go against my Catholic upbringing and other relatives will object. Isn't it possible that even though her family has always known what Terri's wishes were, they are so contrary to their belief system they won't honor them?

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

I believe she was also Roman Catholic. I’m not but they’re pretty serious about that stuff. You do the math.

I was born and raised Roman Catholic. I've made my wishes pretty clear to my family, although nothing is in writing. Those wishes include not being kept alive artificially or in a vegetative state, also organ donation to the extent that its possible, and cremation. Luckily (hopefully) my immediate family will respect my wishes even though they go against my Catholic upbringing and other relatives will object. Isn't it possible that even though her family has always known what Terri's wishes were, they are so contrary to their belief system they won't honor them?

Get your wishes on paper.

Religion is a crutch that is usually used when life gets tough. If someone is having a hard time making a choice like this one, they will turn to clergy for answers....and we know where that will lead. God's wishes will outweigh yours when it comes to those choices.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[tigra 0]

Bo,

I actually trust my family to respect my wishes, but at some point, yes I guess I do need to formalize some things.

maura

[Thunderbow 1]

Yes, she will suffer greatly. Yes she will be put on strong pain killers. But mostly so her caretakers can stand to be around her and not have to see all of the pain. On our local Catholic radio station they interviewed a doctor that had spent a year and half caring for her. He stated that people dying this way spasm so much that they have broken their own backs. He also states that she is not vegatative. She responds to conversation, she even lookedtoward the light of the window when he told her there were squirrels outside.
Her so called husband (who has had two children with his basically common law wife since she became sick has refused to let her have any therepy for swallowing or speech. This doctor was quite certain she could have learned to eat. A feeding tube is not extraordinary means of life support. Many people with many conditions need a feeding tube. In the case of any uncertanty regarding a situation like this we should always err on the side of life.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am.

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

You’re assuming that he has completely honest intentions.

No, the law makes that assumption and scores of trials, jurisdictions, and judges have already ruled accordingly in this case. Legislative intervention in the judicial process at this point represents a congressional hubris that is unprecedented and is obscene beyond description. Unbelievable.

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[wmw999 2,439]

Read more. There have been a LOT of years that have passed. There's a website I reference above from the University of Miami.

It's a tragic situation, he's not perfect, but he's no ogre either.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[tigra 0]

I actually agree that when there is uncertainty, you should err on the side of life. The real issue here is how much uncertainty is there?

This case has already been through so many courts now. So many judges have heard the "expert" testimony from both sides and a court appointed neutral physician as well, right? If those "experts" who say she can recover were credible or had scientific fact to back them up, no judge would have agreed to her husband's request to honor her wishes and let her die. Instead, several judges have upheld the ruling over and over again. Based on that I have to believe that her family is grasping at straws and holding on to false hopes. Others, with their own agenda that has nothing to do with what is best for her, have latched on to this case to use her as a political pawn.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

There was a neurologist on the news this morning who said that a degree of rehabilitation was possible even with a person in her condition.

I've heard doctors on TV that saying taking their new supplement will make your dick bigger. What's your point?

Quote

You’re assuming that he has completely honest intentions.

Your'e assuming that he doesn't when there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

[Ron 10]

Quote

There is no proof of that. If there were, there would be no argument.

There is no proof otherwise.

90% of the people polled if in the same situation would not want to exist.

A wife tells a husband much more than a wife tells her parents.

Do you have any proof that she would have wanted to "live" like she is?

Her parents are just emotional about it. Doctors have said that her ceribral cortex has turned to spinal fluid.

There is nothing left of this woman.

Let her body die so if she has a soul it can rest.

Quote

Based on his actions in the past, he hasn't demonstrated that he's had her best interests in mind.

List his choices that show this.

Quote

You're assuming way too much without any evidence.

See I LIVE in Tampa. This has been news for 15 YEARS here.

I know plenty about the story since it all started.

It is the reason I had a living will drawn up when I was 18.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[pajarito 0]

Quote

I've heard doctors on TV that saying taking their new supplement will make your dick bigger. What's your point?

Depends on the drug. Some will in fact make your dick bigger (e.g. Viagra). It's a vaso-dialator. Many of the guys you're hearing on TV aren't really doctors. The one I'm talking about, however, is a board certified neurologist. I think he holds some credibility.

Quote

Your'e assuming that he doesn't when there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

* There is no evidence (other than his word) that Terri wanted to die in such an instance.

* I listed questionable circumstances on his part already in a previous post. Primarily that he's still married to Terri but is living with another woman and has 2 children with her. Why didn't he divorce her? Maybe he'd lose something in doing so?

[flyclearjohn 0]

Quote

Insurance money? Why is he still married to her? Why is he still in a decade long adulterous affair with another woman and has two kids with her? Why not just divorce and let her parents (who are willing) care for her from now on. Supposed to be "till death do we part", right?

February 25, 1990
Terri Schiavo suffers cardiac arrest, apparently caused by a potassium imbalance and leading to brain damage due to lack of oxygen. She was taken to the Humana Northside Hospital and was later given a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) to provide nutrition and hydration.

May 12, 1990

Terri Schiavo is discharged from the hospital and taken to the College Park skilled care and rehabilitation facility.

June 18, 1990

Court appoints Michael Schiavo as guardian; Terri Schiavo’s parents do not object.

June 30, 1990

Terri Schiavo is transferred to Bayfront Hospital for further rehabilitation efforts.

September 1990

Terri Schiavo’s family brings her home, but three weeks later they return her to the College Park facility because the family is “overwhelmed by Terri’s care needs.”

November 1990

Michael Schiavo takes Terri Schiavo to California for experimental “brain stimulator” treatment, an experimental “thalamic stimulator implant” in her brain.

January 1991

The Schiavos return to Florida; Terri Schiavo is moved to the Mediplex Rehabilitation Center in Brandon where she receives 24-hour care.

July 19, 1991

Terri Schiavo is transferred to Sable Palms skilled care facility where she receives continuing neurological testing, and regular and aggressive speech/occupational therapy through 1994.

May 1992

Terri Schiavo’s parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, and Michael Schiavo stop living together.

August 1992

Terri Schiavo is awarded $250,000 in an out-of-court medical malpractice settlement with one of her physicians.

November 1992

The jury in the medical malpractice trial against another of Terri’s physicians awards more than one million dollars. In the end, after attorneys’ fees and other expenses, Michael Schiavo received about $300,000 and about $750,000 was put in a trust fund specifically for Terri Schiavo’s medical care.

February 14, 1993

Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers have a falling-out over the course of therapy for Terri Schiavo; Michael Schiavo claims that the Schindlers demand that he share the malpractice money with them.

...and it all slides down hill from here.

Brother, You're pretty emotionally wound up on this issue. A look at the timeline convinces me her husband was actively and aggressively involved in her attempted rehabilitation before accepting the reality of the situation. I feel for her parents, but they are emotionally out of control on the issue and I believe their emotional issues should not prolong the indignity and suffering that is their daughters life.

I've evaluated many hundreds of patients for supportive measures to be withdrawn and had a rep (somewhat undeserved, I think) for being overly resistant to doing so. I felt it was such a grave step that I wanted to be absolutely clear there was no hope and always chose to err on the 'safe' side of the issue.

If asked, I suspect I would certify that there was absolutely no hope of recovery in Ms. Schiavo's case and have no nagging doubts about the decision.

If I were Terri's advocate, I would allow her peace.

John