Teri Schiavo Execution in Florida

[flyclearjohn 0]

Quote

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.

You could not have any experience or involvement in this type of situation for it is simply not true.

Quote

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.

Now this, is pure bullshit! As repugnant as it may seem to you, they fade away, quietly and (from all clinical observations) peacefully. I've been involved with several families after the decision to withdraw all support has been made. I personally know of no such incidents, not am I aware of anything in the literature supporting such crap.

You've got to be trolling.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

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

Personally, I wouldn’t want to live like that either. I’m in that 90%.

Quote

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?

No one can predict that something like that would happen to them. Your qualification on the end of your sentence “like she is” is misleading. When you come up on a person in an accident and they are unconscious (maybe even already dead or dying), their consent to treatment is considered “by law” to be “implied.” That’s because it is assumed that the person in critical condition that can’t speak for themselves “wants to live.” That is, unless it is otherwise stated in an advance directive which Terri did not have. There is no proof that she would “want” to die in any condition. The assumption “by law” is that a person wants to live, not die.

Quote

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

Much of it has. No question there. That doesn’t mean that she can’t live or be rehabilitated to a degree in which to live some sort of existence that may be meaningful in some minute way to her or others. Just because it doesn’t measure up to mine or yours is beside the point and arrogant.

Quote

There is nothing left of this woman.

That is not true and you have no proof other than your opinion.

Quote

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

I thought you were an atheist. Anyway, who’s to say it’s not already? We need to err on the side of life. Not death.

Quote

List his choices that show this.

I already have for some of them.

Quote

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.

Smart man.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Let's do a few...

Yes, lets.

Quote

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

He has a piece of paper that says he is married to a lump of human tissue with the IQ of a plant.

He waited 8 years before he asked if he was the right person to carry out her wishes.

Terri died 8 years ago. The lump of tissue that lays in that bed is not human anymore. All of the things that make us alive are gone.

Court appointed Dr's say that it is a lost cause and with her Ceribral Cortex turned to mush that there is ZERO chance she will ever recover

Lets look at the Court record:

Quote

tissue. Although the physicians are not in complete
agreement concerning the extent of Mrs. Schiavo's brain damage, they all agree
that the brain scans show extensive permanent damage to her brain. The only debate
between the doctors is whether she has a small amount of isolated living tissue in her
cerebral cortex or whether she has no living tissue in her cerebral cortex.

Quote

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

She cannot divorce him since she is brain dead.

Check the pictures out below...One is Terri's brain CT scan, the other a normal human.

Source http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/CT%20scan.png

None of the 17 affidavits are by providers who examined Schiavo. Only one of the 17 providers claims to have reviewed her medical records. The remaining 16 providers apparently based their statements primarily on six snippets of videotape, totalling 4 minutes and 20 seconds, which have been posted on Schiavo's parents' website and broadcast repeatedly on the news.

Quote

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

Because she asked him to not let her exist in that state.

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).

He tried rehabilitation for 8 years.

Here is the time line

Quote

December 1963… Terri's birth date

November 1984… Terri & Michael marry

February 1990… Terri suffers cardiac arrest and a severe loss of oxygen to her brain

May 1990… Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy

July 1990… Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center

November 1990… Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies

January 1991… Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon

July 1991… Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy

May 1992… Michael and the Schindlers stop living together

January 1993… Michael recovers $1 million settlement for medical malpractice claim involving Terri's care; jury had ruled in Michael's favor on allegations Terri's doctors failed to diagnose her bulimia, which led to her heart failure; case settled while on appeal

March 1994… Terri is transferred to a Largo nursing home

May 1998… Michael files petition for court to determine whether Terri's feeding tube should be removed; Michael takes position that Terri would chose to remove the tube; Terri's parents take position that Terri would chose not to remove the tube

February 2000… Following trial, Judge Greer rules that clear and convincing evidence shows Terri would chose not to receive life-prolonging medical care under her current circumstances (i.e., that she would chose to have the tube removed)

March 2000… Judge Greer denies petition for more swallowing tests, finds it uncontested Terri cannot swallow sufficiently to live

April 2000… Terri is transferred to a Hospice facility

January 2001… Second District Court of Appeal affirms the trial court's decision regarding Terri's wishes

April 23, 2001… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

April 23 or 24, 2001… Trial court orders feeding tube removed

April 24, 2001… Terri's feeding tube is removed for the first time

April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file motion asserting they have new evidence regarding Terri's wishes

April 26, 2001… Trial court denies Terri's parents' motion as untimely

April 26, 2001… Terri's parents file new legal action against Michael Schiavo and request that the removal of Terri's feeding tube be enjoined; the case is randomly assigned to Judge Quesada

April 26, 2001… Judge Quesada grants the temporary injunction, orders Terri's feeding tube restored

July 2001… Second District rules that Judge Greer erred in denying the motion alleging new evidence and, in essence, orders the trial court to consider whether new circumstances make enforcement of the original order inequitable; Second District also reverses the temporary injunction and orders dismissal of much of the new action filed before Judge Quesada

(uncertain)… Terri's parents detail their reasons why enforcement is inequitable: (1) new witnesses have new information regarding Terri's wishes, and (2) new medical treatment could sufficiently restore Terri's cognitive functioning such that Terri would decide that, under those circumstances, she would continue life-prolonging measures; Terri's parents also move to disqualify Judge Greer

(uncertain)… Trial court denies both motions as insufficient

October 2001… Second District affirms the denial of the motion to disqualify and the motion regarding the new witnesses; the appellate court reverses the order with regard to potential new medical treatments and orders a trial on that question with doctors testifying for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor

March 2002… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

October 2002… Judge Greer holds a trial on the new medical treatment issue, hearing from doctors for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor; Terri's parents also assert that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state
Schindlers file emergency motion for relief from judgment based on a 1991 bone scan report indicating Terri's body had previously been subjected to trauma

November 22, 2002… Following trial, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion for relief (new medical evidence motion), rules that no new treatment offers sufficient promise of improving Terri's cognitive functioning and that Terri is, in fact, in a persistent vegetative state

November 22, 2002… On this same day, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' emergency motion related to the 1991 bone scan

June 2003… Second District affirms the trial court's decision denying Schindlers' motion for relief from judgment

August 22, 2003… Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

August 30, 2003… Terri's parents file federal action challenging Florida's laws on life-prolonging procedures as unconstitutional

September 17, 2003… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion to provide additional therapy, finding it an effort to retry the issues that were previously tried

October 10, 2003… Federal court dismisses Schindlers' case

October 15, 2003… Terri's feeding tube is removed for the second time

October 20, 2003… Florida House passes a bill to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube

October 21, 2003… Federal court rejects injunction request

October 21, 2003… Florida House and Senate pass a bill known informally as "Terri's Law" to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube Governor signs the bill into law and immediately orders a stay; Terri is briefly hospitalized while her feeding tube is restored

October 21, 2003… Michael brings suit against the Governor, asking to enjoin the Governor's stay on grounds "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional; Judge Baird rejects Michael's request for an immediate injunction, allowing the tube to be restored, and requests briefs on the constitutional arguments involving the new law

November 7, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor's motion to dismiss Michael's suit and have case litigated in Tallahassee

November 20, 2003… Judge Baird rejects Governor's request for the judge to recuse himself

December 1, 2003… Guardian ad litem appointed under "Terri's Law" to advise Governor submits report to Governor

December 10, 2003… Second District rejects Governor's effort to have Judge Baird disqualified

April 2004… Second District affirms Judge Baird's decision denying Governor's motion to dismiss and have case litigated in Tallahassee

May 2004… Judge Baird declares "Terri's Law" unconstitutional on numerous grounds

June 2004… Second District certifies "Terri's Law" case directly to the Florida Supreme Court

July 2004… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment based on Pope John Paul II speech

September 2004… Florida Supreme Court affirms Judge Baird's ruling that "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional

October 2004… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on Pope John Paul II speech)

December 1, 2004… Governor asks U.S. Supreme Court to review Florida Supreme Court's decision declaring "Terri's Law" unconstitutional

December 29, 2004… Second District affirms (without written opinion) Judge Greer's ruling denying Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment

January 6, 2005… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, alleging Terri never had her own attorney, that the trial court impermissibly applied the law retroactively, and that the original trial on Terri's wishes violated separation of powers principles

January 24, 2005… U.S. Supreme Court declines review in "Terri's Law" case

February 11, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' latest motion for relief from judgment (motion raising various due process challenges)

February 23, 2005… Florida's Department of Children and Families asks to intervene and for 60-day stay to permit investigation of alleged abuse

February 23, 2005… Schindlers file motion requesting new tests to determine Terri's status

February 25, 2005… Judge Greer rules motions appear endless, he will grant no further stays; sets
March 18 date for removal of feeding tube
February 28, 2005… Schindlers file motion requesting that Terri be fed orally

March 2, 2005… Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, arguing factual error in original judgment

March 8, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion to feed Terri orally

March 9, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion requesting new tests

March 9, 2005… Judge Greer denies Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on factual error)

March 10, 2005… Judge Greer denies Department of Children and Families request to intervene and for stay, finds agency is free to investigate

March 16, 2005… Second District affirms Judge Greer's denial of Schindlers' motion raising various due process challenges, emphasizes law has been followed in this case

March 18, 2005… Schindlers file new federal action arguing due process violations in original trial; case assigned to Judge Moody

March 18, 2005… Judge Moody denies new federal claim, citing lack of jurisdiction

March 18, 2005… Congressional committee issues subpoenas for Michael, Terri, and Terri's caregivers to appear at hearing to be held at the hospice where Terri has stayed

March 18, 2005… Congressional committee files motion to intervene and modify order requiring the removal of Terri's feeding tube

March 18, 2005… Judge Greer denies congressional committee motion, ruling no grounds exist for intervention

March 18, 2005… Congressional committee requests Florida Supreme Court and Second District stay the feeding tube's removal

March 18, 2005… Terri's feeding tube removed for the third time

March 18, 2005… Florida Supreme Court denies congressional committee request, citing lack of jurisdiction

March 18, 2005… Second District denies congressional committee request as without merit

March 21, 2005… Congress enacts Terri's Law II, authorizing Terri's parents to seek federal court review of whether Terri's federal rights have been protected

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.

Living hell? She is not there to feel anything. Why place pictures in front of a plant?

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.

And even more Dr's that state she is gone beyond a shadow of a doubt. Not to mention the DR's that were appointed by the state.

Quote

7. I believe he has even denied her Catholic last rights

You believe, or you know? How do you know she has not had them already?

Quote

He’s planning on having her cremated instead of burial like her family wants.

Maybe she wanted to be creamated? Why should the parents over rule a husband or her choices?

Quote

He also will not allow her to die at home.

Maybe because there is no need? She feels nothing.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

Personally, I wouldn’t want to live like that either. I’m in that 90%.

So why are you so willing to make her?

Quote

No one can predict that something like that would happen to them. Your qualification on the end of your sentence “like she is” is misleading.

My parents brought us kids together when this all started. They told us what they wanted. Brain dead...Unplug them. Thats not so hard to guess.

Quote

Much of it has. No question there. That doesn’t mean that she can’t live or be rehabilitated to a degree in which to live some sort of existence that may be meaningful in some minute way to her or others. Just because it doesn’t measure up to mine or yours is beside the point and arrogant.

Her cerebral cortex is Jelly...She will not ever recover.
To claim she will is ignorant, and to force your wishes on her is arrogant.

Quote

That is not true and you have no proof other than your opinion

I formed my opinion off of medical doctors that examined her and did a CT scan of her brain. Where did you get yours from, the Bible?

Quote

I thought you were an atheist

Just because I think the Bible was written by a bunch of guys trying to make themsevles powerful does not mean I have no faith. Just because I don't believe in your god does not mean I don't believe in A god.

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

[Thunderbow 1]

I guess you could say the same thing about the doctors that say she'll never come around. Who do we believe. If she dies now we'll never know,

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

[Thunderbow 1]

Nope, not trolling. Just repeating what I heard. I truly hope what you say is true. Apparently there are a lot of people that can't agree. But I still think being wrong on the side of death is not the way to go. I would hope that in a case like this life would win out.

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

[flyclearjohn 0]

Quote

Nope, not trolling. Just repeating what I heard. I truly hope what you say is true. Apparently there are a lot of people that can't agree. But I still think being wrong on the side of death is not the way to go. I would hope that in a case like this life would win out.

First, allow me to apologize for the rather strident tone of my initial response to you. The massive amounts of 'information' being put out by people pushing their own agendas makes it all too easy to repeat it in good faith.

The withdrawal of supportive care happens every day throughout our country. It is usually with much older patients and certainly without the drama attendant in this case. In the early years of my practice, I stayed with the family, at the bedside, primarily because I had grave doubts about how humane the process was. I now have no such doubts. I am as certain as anyone not actually experiencing it can be, Terri will not suffer.

I sincerely wish that with the end to Terri's suffering, her parents and all involved can move on with their own healing process.

John

[CanuckInUSA 0]

With all due respect to those who love her and wish to see her still breath, can't we just put her to sleep like we would a pet?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

With all due respect to those who love her and wish to see her still breath, can't we just put her to sleep like we would a pet?

I'm so thankful that I had the option of putting my dog to sleep when it was time. So much more humane than what we make people endure....

Peace~
linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

but from what I understand she's not actually brain dead

Her "Higher Brain" (Cerebral Cortex) has died, irreversibly. Her "Lower Brain" (brainstem) is still functioning. Unfortunately the courts consider only -complete- brain death to be the termination of life.

Her heart can beat. Her breathing can continue unaided. (brainstem function). However her cognitive perception or function is gone, never to return. Her quality of life is absent.

She is indeed in a living death.

Teri Schiavo's case is not the first one of this kind to pass through the courts over and over and over again.

Take the case of Nancy Cruzan. She also had higher brain death but not lower brain death. Her family fought the courts for nine long years...in and out of both State and Federal courts....before they won the right to disconnect Nancy's feeding tube.

If Nancy's case paved the right to decision making for the family way back in 1983, why are we having to go through this all over again!

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

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.

No, it is not the precedence case. Look back to 1983 where this same story played on the hearts of America way back then. Exact same "Higher Brain" vs "Lower Brain" death scenerio.

Look at the case of Nancy Cruzan.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

With all due respect to those who love her and wish to see her still breath, can't we just put her to sleep like we would a pet?

It is illegal to mistreat an animal the way T.S. is being starved to death. I agree she should be given medication to end her life mecifully.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Because he made a vow to do that, perhaps?

His vow???? I assume you are talking about their marriage vows. Now, you and I were not present when they exchanged those vows, but if they followed the traditional wedding vows, what happened to 'sickness and in health', 'forsaking all others' and 'until death do us part'?

If those vows were included in their wedding ceremony, then I would surmise that he has broken quite a few of them.

To those who questioned my comment about seeing things from a spiritual point of view, I would answer that it is a fair question. However, my answer would be entirely too lengthy to post here and quite honestly it is too personal to me and I truly feel I would be setting myself up for unwanted criticism in this forum.

I was just making a statement about how I see things. In hindsight I think I should have left it out of the discussion.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

To those who questioned my comment about seeing things from a spiritual point of view, I would answer that it is a fair question. However, my answer would be entirely too lengthy to post here and quite honestly it is too personal to me and I truly feel I would be setting myself up for unwanted criticism in this forum.

So you want other people to live by the rules of your faith, but it's too personal for you to tell us what those rules are. You really like to make it difficult for people don't you.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Ron 10]

Quote

His vow???? I assume you are talking about their marriage vows

No I think Bill is talking about when Terri told him that she didn't want to be on life support and he told her he would not let that happen.

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

[billvon 2,989]

>His vow???? I assume you are talking about their marriage vows. Now,
>you and I were not present when they exchanged those vows, but if they
> followed the traditional wedding vows, what happened to 'sickness and in
> health', 'forsaking all others' and 'until death do us part'?

I don't know what vows he made when they got married. One of the most basic parts of any marriage is that one person will fight for the other's rights when they are unable to.

But "in sickness and in health" - she is now as sick as she can get and he is still fighting for her, to ensure her wishes are carried out. "until death do us part" - see above. "Forsaking all others" - I don't know if that was part of their vows or not (it wasn't part of mine) but if it was I would agree that he's broken that. He may consider that her mind/spirit/person is already gone, and therefore it's OK to move on. I don't know.

But in any case, the 'vow' I was referring to was simply a promise. Aerohaga questioned his motives in having his wife's wishes carried out; I think that there is nothing wrong with carrying out a promise you made to your wife/husband. Indeed, I hope most people have that kind of devotion in their marriages.

>I was just making a statement about how I see things. In hindsight I
>think I should have left it out of the discussion.

I think that's the most important part of your post. You seem to disagree with the overall philosophy of euthanasia on religious grounds, and that's the important part. It's also the one part I wouldn't argue with, since everyone has their own views on such things.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

To those who questioned my comment about seeing things from a spiritual point of view, I would answer that it is a fair question. However, my answer would be entirely too lengthy to post here and quite honestly it is too personal to me and I truly feel I would be setting myself up for unwanted criticism in this forum.

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


So you want other people to live by the rules of your faith, but it's too personal for you to tell us what those rules are. You really like to make it difficult for people don't you.

No, I never said that I want people to live by my rules. If you had read the rest of my post, you would see that I said in hindsight that I feel I should never have brought up my spiritual beliefs.

I do not owe you or anyone else here an explanation of my spiritual beliefs.

As for your statement that I "really do like to make things difficult for other people" is completely out of line and I take offense to it. You do not know me personally and have no right to judge me or my actions...that you have no knowledge of.

I'll make you a deal; you stay out of my life and I'll stay out of yours.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[flyclearjohn 0]

Quote

With all due respect to those who love her and wish to see her still breath, can't we just put her to sleep like we would a pet?

What's really sad is due to the extreme and persistant actions of her parents, I can't imagine a physician prescribing sedation or analgesia for fear of being branded a murderer and tied up with lawsuits for years to come.

[billvon 2,989]

>We don't even starve animals to death.

But we do starve people. Indeed, it's required under the law. Before he left Texas, Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes. It is called the Texas Futile Care Law. Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this week. No doubt the baby was not as photogenic as Teri.

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

Bush signed a law in Texas that expressly gave hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes.

What a hypocrite. Didn't he say something along the lines of "err on the side of life", maybe he should have been "err on the side of life and as long as you have the money to pay the bills."

[Thunderbow 1]

So now we put a value in dollars on someone's life. Do we keep going and figure grandpa is going to suck up too much money in the nursing home so let's get rid of him while he still has some money to leave us. Abortions are to the point that the baby can be delivered partially then their brains scrambled to kill them. This probably was never invisioned when Roe v. Wade was decided. Oh yeah, she never had the abortion and is now on the other side.

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

[Thunderbow 1]

I have no idea. It's another very real aspect of the problem. Just like the "pro-lifers" who want to stop abortions but won't help single moms raise or feed their babies.

[Thunderbow 1]

I personally would not want be kept alive in a vegetable state or even near vegetable state for years. Even worse would be if I were paralyzed from my neck down. That would be the most difficult thing to experience for me. If I were this lady I would rather be dead.

Quote

What if this lady is different than most people posting here. What if she was deeply faithfilled and is now able to think just enough to be quietly praying for many many people. She quite possibly could be enjoying her time if she is that faithful. There are people that spend their whole life in prayer. Skydiving is not the only way to spend your life. It is even hard for me to imagine being that close to God but it happens. So just maybe some judge is being prayed for but at the same moment he is allowing the very person doing the praying to be killed.

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

• Quote

[beowulf 1]

That is a big what if. From what the doctors are showing it appears that there is very minimal brain activity. So if she is laying there praying to god then it isn't much of a prayer. Another What if and in my opinion is more likely, what if she is laying there praying to god asking to just let it all end quickly? How many years has she been like this? I wouldn't wish that situation on anyone.

[billvon 2,989]

>She quite possibly could be enjoying her time if she is that faithful.

Or she could be dimly aware of the agonizing, unending pain coming from her deteriorating body, and is praying as hard as she can for an end to it. But we can't know which it is, if indeed she is aware at all (which every test, examination and indication says she isn't.) The best we can do is go with what the person who knows her best thinks.