It Has Begun

[sweetnpetite]

I'd want it done to me if I were her. I wouldn't want to be forced to live when everything else is gone. I can't imagine a worse kind of torture.

But what she would want might not neccesarily be the same as what you or someone else would want.

Bumped because her feeding tubes were removed today and I really haven't read any threads about it so far and I don't want to start a new one.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Terri Schiavo (born Theresa Marie Schindler on December 3, 1963) is a severely brain damaged American woman whose husband's efforts to remove her feeding tube and forbid anyone from attempting to feed her by mouth have prompted a fierce debate over euthanasia, guardianship, and the rights of the disabled. On March 18, 2005, her feeding tube was removed for the third time.

Michael Schiavo, Terri Schiavo's husband, is her legal guardian. He contends that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state and that he is carrying out her wishes to not be kept alive in that state.

Terri Schiavo's family (parents and siblings) contest both of Michael's claims. They say she is responsive and in no discomfort, that her condition does not meet the medical definition of "vegetative," and that she would not wish to die. They also contend that Terri was a victim of domestic violence, both before and after her injury, and that Michael does not have her best interests at heart. They seek to revoke his legal guardianship of Terri, arguing, among other things, that his living with another woman since 1995, with whom he has two children, makes him legally estranged from her. [1] (http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1664).

Although the courts that have heard this case have generally sided with Michael Schiavo, her family has vigorously appealed the courts' decisions and sought to prevent her death. Numerous disability rights organizations [2] (http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/sc04-925/op-sc04-925.pdf), religious organizations, members of the Florida legislature, the Vatican (http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=66849), and some members of the United States Congress (http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Speeches.Detail&Speech_id=173) have joined the legal battle, siding with Terri's family. The ACLU also joined the legal battle, siding with Michael Schiavo.

Schiavo's condition
Terri's condition and prognosis are matters of dispute. Michael and Terri's personal physicians since 1991 contend that she is in a vegetative state. The medical definition of a vegetative state varies, but Stedman's (http://www.stedmans.com/) definition is a state "in which an individual is incapable of voluntary or purposeful acts and only responds reflexively to painful stimuli." Terri's family claims that she does not meet that definition. The only facts which appear not be in dispute are that she is not in a coma, she is severely brain damaged, and she is partially blind. Since her collapse, she has been fed through gastric feeding tubes, which is the life support mechanism around which the case revolves, though whether she could, instead, be spoon-fed is disputed.

Her family, and medical experts who support their position, claim that she smiles, laughs, cries, moves, and makes child-like attempts at speech. Sometimes she has been reported to say "Mom" or "Dad" or "yeah" when her parents ask her a question. When they kiss her, they claim she looks at them and sometimes "puckers up" her lips. They cite the testimony and affidavits of 33 physicians and therapists (including 15 neurologists), who, after reviewing video segments provided by her parents, believe that Terri should receive further tests and/or would likely respond to therapy. Two of these physicians had access to her full medical history and examined her in person. Some of these physicians have claimed that there is a "strong likelihood that Terri is in a minimally conscious state."[3] (http://www.law.uh.edu/healthlawperspectives/Death/040120New.pdf)[4] (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0D17FF345F0C7B8CDDAB0894DD404482)

Michael Schiavo, and the doctors he has chosen to care for and evaluate her, such as Dr. Ronald Cranford (http://www.bioethics.umn.edu/faculty/cranford_r.shtml), contend that she is in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), that her occasional apparent responses are actually reflex or random behavior common to PVS patients, and that therapy would be fruitless. Accordingly, Michael ceased therapy for her in late 1992. [5] (http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder11-02.txt)

In 2002, a trial was held to determine whether or not any new therapy treatments would help Terri Schiavo restore any cognitive function. A new CAT scan was done, as was an EEG. Two doctors were selected by her parents, two by her husband, and one was appointed by the court. These five doctors examined the records, scans, videos, and Terri herself. The physicians were divided in their conclusions. Judge Greer ruled with the two chosen by her husband and the one assigned by the court that her state of PVS was beyond hope of significant improvement.[6] (http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder11-02.txt) The second district court of appeals reviewed all the evidence and upheld the trial court's decision, saying had they heard the case themselves, they would have ruled the same as Greer. Some physicians, such as Dr. Peter Morin and Dr. Thomas Zabiega, both neurologists, say that no such diagnosis can reliably be made without more a sophisticated test such as an MRI or PET scan.[7] (http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/johansen200503160848.asp)

[edit]
Cause
On the morning of February 25, 1990, at approximately 5:30 AM, Terri Schiavo collapsed in her home, resulting in irreversible brain damage from a lack of oxygen. According to her discharge summary from Humana hospital [8] (http://www.terrisfight.org/documents/Humana Discharge Summary 050990.pdf), Terri Schiavo suffered cardiac arrest and anoxic brain damage, accompanied by hypopotassemia (http://public.onelook.com/?w=hypopotassemia), seizures, respiratory failure, and an injured knee. The cause of her cardiac arrest was undetermined, but her low potassium was suspected.

At a malpractice trial (1992), a jury concluded that Terri suffered from bulimia, which caused her chemical imbalance, and cardiac arrest. Florida's Second District court upheld the finding that Terri suffered a cardiac arrest as a result of a potassium imbalance.

Michael Schiavo first sought permission to remove Terri's feeding tube in November 1998. Her feeding tubed was removed first on April 26, 2001, but was reinstated two days later on an appeal by her parents.

Since Mr Schiavo's petitioning the court to remove his wife's feeding tube, questions about the cause of Schiavo's collapse have been raised by Schiavo's family, and by Dr. Hammesfahr, a neurologist they hired to examine her in 2002. A bone scan (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/bone.jpg)[9] (http://www.hospicepatients.org/dr-walker-t-schiavo-bone-scan-deposition.txt) done one year after her injury showed (according to the radiologist who evaluated it) that she had also suffered previous traumatic injuries to multiple ribs (on both sides), to both sacroiliac joints, to both knees, to both ankles, to several thoracic vertebrae, and to her right thigh, plus a minor compression fracture of the L1 vertebra. Terri Schiavo's family did not know of the existance of this scan until November, 2002.

After the family discovered a bone scan report that may have suggested abuse-related injuries, they petitioned Judge Greer for a full evidentiary hearing to evaluate the new evidence. On November 22, 2002 Judge Greer, ruled that it was irrelevant to his determination that Terri would not want to be kept in a PVS, and denied their motion[10] (http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder11-02-scan.pdf).

Terri's family and the doctor they selected to represent them, Dr. Hammesfahr, have suggested that she was battered, presumably by the person with whom she was alone at the time of her collapse: her husband.[11] (http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0347,hentoff,48738,6.html) According to testimony from her brother and one of her co-workers, the couple was having marital problems at the time of her injury, and Terri had told them that she was considering divorce.[12] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/05 - TerriDiscussesDivorceBobby.htm)[13] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/04 - JACKIERHODESTESTIMONY.htm). Her friend also said the couple argued heavily the day before her collapse over the expense of Terri's haircut. Other witnesses say that Michael had a history of violent and erratic behavior[14] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/08 - SuzanneExperience.htm)[15] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/16 - DrCaroleLiebermanProfile.htm)[16] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/09 - BobbyExperience84.htm)[17] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/07 - PhoneConvShookBobJr.htm), that when she collapsed he did not promptly seek medical assistance for her, and that, despite his CPR training, he left her face-down on the floor, gasping for air[18] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/28 - 1990PoliceReportAnalysis.htm). Additionally, nurses who cared for Terri have sworn in affidavits that Michael was abusive to her after her collapse, as well[19] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/Affidavit C Iyer 082903.pdf)[20] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/Affidavit H Law 083003.pdf)

The Florida Department of Children and Families (http://www.state.fl.us/cf_web/) (DCF) has begun an investigation of the abuse allegations. Previous investigations have found Michael Schiavo innocent. (Report of Guardian ad Litem Wolfson [21] (http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/wolfson's report.pdf))

[edit]
Guardianship
Michael Schiavo is Terri's legal guardian, but her family seeks his removal as guardian, so that they can assume responsibility for Terri's care. Michael has successfully fought those efforts in court.

In a September 27, 1999 deposition, he told why he refused to turn over guardianship to Terri's parents. He said it was, "because they put me through pretty much hell the last few years [with] the litigations they put me through [and] their attitude towards me because of the litigations. There is no other reason." After consultation with his attorney, he later added that "another reason would be that her parents wouldn't carry out her wishes."[22] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/contradictions.htm)

Since Terri's injury, Michael has moved in with another woman, and fathered two children with her. Some contend that this is a conflict of interest, and should disqualify him from guardianship. The Schindler family has mulled using this in their case, as adultery is technically a crime in the State of Florida, although never enforced.

[edit]
Controversy
The fundamental differences on both sides of the issue are focused mainly upon the disputed medical evidence presented by each side. Even though the courts have consistently ruled that, as her husband and legal guardian, Michael Schiavo has the legal right to decide her medical treatment, her family members have nonetheless used every legal measure available to them to prevent her death.

Raising the issue of a possible conflict of interest is the fact that Michael Schiavo stands to inherit the remainder of Terri's malpractice settlement upon her death.

Terri's family has been battling her husband over her fate since 1993. Although she never wrote a living will expressing a wish to refuse nutrition or medical treatment if disabled, Michael claims that he recalls conversations they had had which make him sure she would not want to continue living in such a state, and two of his relatives have supported that claim.[23] (http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1614)

However, her family disputes his recollections, claiming that Terri is a devout Roman Catholic who would not wish to violate the Church's teachings on euthanasia by intentionally starving or dehydrating herself to death, and that she apparently never expressed such a desire to anyone in her own family or circle of friends. It was only after the courts awarded more than $1 million in legal settlements (mostly to cover the cost of her long term care and rehabilitation) that Michael first publicly recalled conversations in which Terri had expressed a wish to die rather than live in the condition in which she now finds herself.[24] (http://www.hospicepatients.org/rich...eport-of-guardianadlitem-re-terri-schiavo.pdf) Her family also cites an affidavit by a woman with whom he had a relationship prior to those legal settlements, indicating that Michael told her repeatedly that he did not know what Terri's wishes would be for her care[25] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/AffidavitTCapone050901.pdf), and the testimony of a close college friend, Diane Christine Meyer (http://www.google.com/search?q=("Diane+Christine+Meyer"+OR+"Diane+Meyer")+Schiavo), who says that Terri told her in 1982 that Karen Ann Quinlan shouldn't have been removed from life support.

Terri's father, Robert Schindler, has stated that Florida Judge George W. Greer, who has pronounced the most recent decisions in the case, and who also appointed himself Terri's guardian ad litem (http://public.onelook.com/?w=guardian+ad+litem) (which Terri's family says was illegal), has never called her into the courtroom or visited her to observe her condition first-hand. Schindler feels that if Terri dies in accordance with the court order, that it will be an instance of "judicial homicide".

Michael Schiavo says that Terri Schiavo would not have wanted to live "as a vegetable", and that he is fighting for her "right to die". As the legal guardian of Terri, he has placed strict limits on the time her family is allowed to visit her, and he has refused to allow her to undergo any sort of therapy; instead, he had Terri placed in hospice, though she is not terminally ill.

[edit]
Legal involvement and "Terri's Law"
In 2004, Michael Schiavo won a court case to have her feeding tube removed, which would have resulted in her death by dehydration or starvation. Six days later, the Florida Legislature, in emergency session, passed "Terri's law (http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/schiavo/flsb35e102103.pdf)", giving Florida Governor Jeb Bush the authority to intervene in the case. Governor Bush immediately ordered the feeding tube reinserted.

During the six days that Terri's feeding tube was removed, Michael prohibited any attempt to feed her orally, and refused to allow a priest to place a small part of a sacramental wafer on her tongue[26] (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35156) during Holy Communion.

On May 19, 2004, Florida Judge W. Douglas Baird overturned the law saying that it "summarily deprived Florida citizens of their right to privacy."

Governor Bush appealed the ruling to the Florida Supreme Court and on September 23, 2004 they reached a unanimous decision [27] (http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/schiavo/flsct92304opn.pdf), ruling that the legislature and executive branches of government unconstitutionally intervened in a judicial matter. The appellants immediately appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

On January 24, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, ending any further legal avenue for appeal.

[edit]
Recent developments
On February 25, 2005, Judge Greer ruled that Michael Schiavo may order the feeding tube removed on March 18, 2005. The Florida Department of Children and Families is also attempting to intervene by investigating allegations of abuse by Michael Schiavo. This could have resulted in a 60-day delay before the feeding tube was removed, but the request for the delay was denied on March 10, 2005. Similarly, their request to be permitted to attempt to spoon-feed Terri if the feeding tube is removed was denied on March 8, 2005.

Members of the Florida Legislature were considering a bill that would make removing food and water from patients in a persistent vegetative state illegal without a living will. [28] (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050310/ap_on_re_us/brain_damaged_woman_2) Although this bill was passed by the Florida House 78-37, the Florida Senate hours later defeated a different measure 21-16. [29] (http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050318/NEWS01/503180459/1002)

Congress is also considering a bill to prevent Terri's death, called "The Incapacitated Person's Legal Protection Act" (H.R.1151 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.01151:), S.539 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.00539:)). The primary sponsor of the House bill, H.R. 1151, is Florida Rep. Dave Weldon (http://weldon.house.gov/), a physician. Dr. Weldon says that medical evidence "prove Terri is not in a vegatative state."[30] (http://weldon.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=7156)

On March 11, 2005, media tycoon Robert Herring offered US$1 million to Terri Schiavo's husband if he agrees to sign all rights to her parents. The offer expired on March 14, 2005, four days before her feeding tube is scheduled to be removed. Robert Herring is a supporter of embryonic stem cell research, who believes her condition could be curable in the future. Michael Schiavo's attorney, George J. Felos, stated that his client found the offer "offensive" and that he had already rejected other monetary offers, including one of US$10 million, to sign over his rights to Terri. [31] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4339033.stm)

Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed at 1:45 P.M. EST on March 18, 2005 [32] (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7212079/). Earlier in the day, U.S. Senate majority leader Bill Frist (R-TN) announced that she will be called to testify before the Senate's Health, Education and Labor Committee at a March 28, 2005 hearing. Frist, a practicing doctor, serves on the committee. Republican congressmen Dennis Hastert, Tom DeLay, and Tom Davis opened a congressional inquiry of the House Government Reform Committee, to take place in Clearwater on March 25, and issued subpoenas for Terri, Michael, and several hospice workers. According to the lawmakers, harming Schiavo or preventing her from appearing at the hearings would be a violation of federal law. [33] (http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050318/D88TFV3O0.html) Judge Greer responded by denying the congressional motion, and letting the order stand which gave Michael Schiavo permission to remove Terri's feeding tube. The judge said he saw no reason to change his earlier permission allowing Schiavo's husband to remove her feeding tube. Greer ordered that the tube be removed immediately, per Michael Schiavo's request.

from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo

 

[sweetnpetite]

To me, this is a dead give-away that her husband doesn't have her interests at heart. [Never mind all of the disputed info that suggests the same thing.]


In a September 27, 1999 deposition, he told why he refused to turn over guardianship to Terri's parents. He said it was, "because they put me through pretty much hell the last few years [with] the litigations they put me through [and] their attitude towards me because of the litigations. There is no other reason." After consultation with his attorney, he later added that "another reason would be that her parents wouldn't carry out her wishes."[22] (http://www.zimp.org/stuff/contradictions.htm)

 

[impressive]

We give convicted criminals on death row lethal injections, and yet the innocent we starve to death.

In his book, Wesley J. Smith describes the intense suffering imposed on those being starved to death.

"Proponents of dehydration contend that deaths by dehydration are peaceful," Smith wrote.

Noting that "the patients we are discussing are not terminally ill" and that those who are conscious can feel hunger and thirst, Smith quotes Dr. William Burke, a neurologist in St. Louis, who described the agonizing process.

"A conscious person would feel it (dehydration) just as you and I would. They will go into seizures. Their skin cracks, their tongue cracks, their lips crack. They may have nosebleeds because of the drying of the mucous membranes, and heaving and vomiting might ensue because of the drying out of the stomach lining. They feel the pangs of hunger and thirst. Imagine going one day without a glass of water. Death by dehydration takes ten to fourteen days. It is an extremely agonizing death."

 

[sweetnpetite]

She is NOT in a coma. She is awake, alert, responsive, and relies on no medical intervention other than a gastrostomy (a feeding tube) for nutrition -- and she is being starved to death.

All true. And I'd like to point out that there is a major difference between brain damaged and brain dead.

She was able to walk and talk some before the husband ordered that the therapy stop. Q: If she didn't want to get better [and live]- *why* would she participate in her recovery. Why would she put forth the effort?

 

[sweetnpetite]

This sickens me. They are killing this woman based on nothing but hearsay, as she left no written document expressing her wishes. Regardless of your views on her "quality of life," that fact alone should scare the shit out of you.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20050318/D88TK4QO0.html

Wow, that article makes it sound like republicans and religious freaks want to keep her alive against her express wishes.

• She's breathing on her own and hooked to no machines besides a feeding tube.
• She's brain damaged not brain dead.
• No one knows if she can feed herself because attempts at spoon feeding have been forbidden.

On February 25, 2005, Judge Greer ruled that Michael Schiavo may order the feeding tube removed on March 18, 2005. The Florida Department of Children and Families is also attempting to intervene by investigating allegations of abuse by Michael Schiavo. This could have resulted in a 60-day delay before the feeding tube was removed, but the request for the delay was denied on March 10, 2005. Similarly, their request to be permitted to attempt to spoon-feed Terri if the feeding tube is removed was denied on March 8, 2005. from the article.

I don't see how this is any different from letting a severely retarted or autistic or catatonic person starve to death. Because that's all they are doing. Just taking away her food and letting her die.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

But what she would want might not neccesarily be the same as what you or someone else would want.

Maybe so, but it's hard for me to imagine that anyone would choose to be kept alive by machines when all reasonable hope of recovery is gone.

I mean, how many living wills are there that say, Yes, I do want to be kept alive by extraordinary means even when I have no chance of recovery?

In any case, this is a such a tragedy that it seems almost obscene to argue about it. You can only feel for all parties involved and wish for peace for all of them.

I'm bowing out.

 

[sweetnpetite]

We give convicted criminals on death row lethal injections, and yet the innocent we starve to death.

And we put them on suicide watch.

She hasn't even had an attorney! Even an infant is given an attorney in a court case. I can't beleive that she doesn't have one.

she's not on a life support
she's not on a resperator.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Maybe so, but it's hard for me to imagine that anyone would choose to be kept alive by machines when all reasonable hope of recovery is gone.

I mean, how many living wills are there that say, Yes, I do want to be kept alive by extraordinary means even when I have no chance of recovery?

In any case, this is a such a tragedy that it seems almost obscene to argue about it. You can only feel for all parties involved and wish for peace for all of them.

I'm bowing out.

In this case, she's not being kept alive by any machines. Just a feeding tube. No reperator, no lifesupport system, just food. No extrordinary means. We use more extraordinary means on a premature infant or a person with a birthdefect.

anyway, as far as the living will goes, I think most people who would want to be kept alive just don't bother filling one out, assuming that the absence of one means they *do* want to be kept alive. (considering how hard it has been historically for family members to end life support) Also, in this case, she did not have a living will.

The sad thing is, she was able to move and speak before her husband ordered an end to her physical therapy. Additionally, she is *not* terminally ill. It's not that therapy won't help her, because he refuses to allow it!

They cite the testimony and affidavits of 33 physicians and therapists (including 15 neurologists), who, after reviewing video segments provided by her parents, believe that Terri should receive further tests and/or would likely respond to therapy. Two of these physicians had access to her full medical history and examined her in person. Some of these physicians have claimed that there is a "strong likelihood that Terri is in a minimally conscious state."

Not really trying to argue, so much as point out some of the misconseptions about the case.

 

[sweetnpetite]

In 2004, Michael Schiavo won a court case to have her feeding tube removed, which would have resulted in her death by dehydration or starvation. Six days later, the Florida Legislature, in emergency session, passed "Terri's law (http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/schiavo/flsb35e102103.pdf)", giving Florida Governor Jeb Bush the authority to intervene in the case. Governor Bush immediately ordered the feeding tube reinserted.

During the six days that Terri's feeding tube was removed, Michael prohibited any attempt to feed her orally, and refused to allow a priest to place a small part of a sacramental wafer on her tongue[26] (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35156) during Holy Communion.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I'd like to point out that i am usually a huge supporter of the ACLU, I'm a huge liberal and democrat and I'm not Catholic or even parituclarly religious in the sence of any organized religion/christainity.

And then I'll bow out since no one wants to talk about this.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I agree that this is an agonizing case.
However, there is a clear legal guardian, whose wishes are being denied with all sorts of nasty accusations and faith-based arguments, and political grandstanding to boot.

I don't imagine these sorts of situations are ever fully resolvable - so-called "experts" can be found on either side of the issue, people can be found to raise all manner of claims after the fact...

There is a clear legal guardian. It's that person's decision to make, by law. All of the rest is trying to change the rules because they don't like the outcome. The courts have bent over backwards to try to give any possible argument a fair hearing, and it's come down to politicians using the case to grandstand with motions that have no prayer of being taken seriously by the courts, but make headlines.

It's time to enforce the law.

 

[impressive]

And then I'll bow out since no one wants to talk about this.

That's 'cause it's easier to look away.

 

[shereads]

"They are killing this woman" whose cerebellum is dead, for the same reason my mother, my sister and I killed my dad when he suffered irreversible brain damage

We knew that his greatest fear was helplessness. Terry, her parents and her husband have been used for political gain by everyone from Jeb Bush to Trent Lott, who called her a "healthy young woman" and a victim of "medical terrorism."

Out of a dozen doctors who have actually examined Terry, one has gone on record that Terry's facial expressions and noises are evidence that she has awareness. That one had to be dug up by the right-to-life movement to help Gov. Bush pass "Terry's Law," denying her husband the right to carry out his wife's wishes, which were also witnessed by her brother-in-law and two friends.

"This woman" is not smiling in the home movie her so-called saviors keep showing on television. She is having reflexive facial movements. She is as likely to screw up her face in pain or cry out as if she is frustrated as she is to smile, but you don't see any videotapes of those moments because the people who respect her right to die with dignity know the definition of dignity.

One of the ring-leaders of the right-to-life movement who turned a family's personal tragedy into a three-ring circus had the AUDACITY to say today that liberal politicans "are using Terry for political gain." Right. It would be politically expedient to align oneself with Terry's husband, who receives frequent death threats.

They're using Terry for political gain? Well then, no wonder Governor Bush had to create a special law to circumvent a court order! He was just trying to stop politicians from using Terry.

God help any of you if you ever have a loved one whose body is alive and whose cerebellum is "a dead space filled with water," as described by her neurologist. If your mother, father, husband, wife or adult child didn't anticipate an event like this one and put his or her wishes in writing, you might have to kill him or her while fending off hate mail, television cameras, anonymous threats and public character defamation.

Thank God I was allowed to kill my father without anyone but our family and his doctors being involved. If any one of you had tried to stop me, I'd have killed you too.

Stay the fuck out of it until you've been there.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I agree that this is an agonizing case.
However, there is a clear legal guardian, whose wishes are being denied with all sorts of nasty accusations and faith-based arguments, and political grandstanding to boot.

The following are not nasty accusations but facts:

1. Her husband lives with another woman and has two children w/ her. He has lived with her for ten years.

2. The husband stands to inherit money if she dies.

3. She is not in a coma, she is not brain dead. She is not hooked to life suport. She just needs to be fed. He refuses to allow her to be fed, refused her to recieve communion and refuses to allow her physical therepy, including having her weaned from the feeding tube.

In this case, i think his claim to being her husband, let alone a legal gardian is less than clear. If i were married and unable to feed myself, I do not consider that it is my husbands right as my 'legal gardian' to refuse me food. Being fed is not 'extraordinary means.' It is rediculous to let her die like this. She can breath on her own, she is not terminally ill, she does not have a degenerative disease.

This is cruel and unusual and imp is right, we wouldn't treat a criminal like this.

 

[EmeraldKitten]

I think her husband is a fucker. And 'husband' is too nice a word.

I'll be the first to admit I didn't read every word of every post, but I've seen enough.

I'd like to strap Mr. Michael to the bed and not feed him for 6 days (or longer, preferablly) and see how he likes it.

What a dumb shit. If he doesn't want the responsiblity, he needs to turn the guardianship over to the mom and dad.


I'm glad nothing like that happened when I was born, because I wouldn't be here today.

Imp, you're a sweetie. *hug*

 

[shereads]

The last words my father ever said were to a paramedic: "I'm afraid." "What are you afraid of, sir?" "I'm afraid I'll end up in a nursing home."

I've stood in Michael Shiavo's shoes. I don't know what motivates him, but the kind of person he is is irrelevent. Terry's life is that of an animal who can be made to perform tricks for the camera; except that a performing animal is able to enjoy food and not have it pumped into the body through a surgically created hole. A hole that has now been opened three times instead of one.

The only good thing that's happened to her in 15 years is that she's unable to know she appears on television frequently, showing off what looks like a grin. No pictures so far of the diaper or the bed sores or the surgeries to stick the tube back in her stomach.

Again: wait until it happens to someone you love.

 

[shereads]

Fyi, you can specify in your Liviing Will "HYDRATION ONLY," which will extend life for a while but guarantee none of the potential discomfort of dehydration.

If you don't put your wishes in writing, anyone who disagrees with the decision of the person who has your power of attorney, and who has a cause to promote, can seek a court order awarding them custody, and if a sympathetic judge agress to hear the case, your family will have to get a lawyer and fight them.

 

[sweetnpetite]

"They are killing this woman" whose cerebellum is dead, for the same reason my mother, my sister and I killed my dad when he suffered irreversible brain damage

We knew that his greatest fear was helplessness. Terry, her parents and her husband have been used for political gain by everyone from Jeb Bush to Trent Lott, who called her a "healthy young woman" and a victim of "medical terrorism."

Out of a dozen doctors who have actually examined Terry, one has gone on record that Terry's facial expressions and noises are evidence that she has awareness. That one had to be dug up by the right-to-life movement to help Gov. Bush pass "Terry's Law," denying her husband the right to carry out his wife's wishes, which were also witnessed by her brother-in-law and two friends.

"This woman" is not smiling in the home movie her so-called saviors keep showing on television. She is having reflexive facial movements. She is as likely to screw up her face in pain or cry out as if she is frustrated as she is to smile, but you don't see any videotapes of those moments because the people who respect her right to die with dignity know the definition of dignity.

One of the ring-leaders of the right-to-life movement who turned a family's personal tragedy into a three-ring circus had the AUDACITY to say today that liberal politicans "are using Terry for political gain." Right. It would be politically expedient to align oneself with Terry's husband, who receives frequent death threats.

They're using Terry for political gain? Well then, no wonder Governor Bush had to create a special law to circumvent a court order! He was just trying to stop politicians from using Terry.

God help any of you if you ever have a loved one whose body is alive and whose cerebellum is "a dead space filled with water," as described by her neurologist. If your mother, father, husband, wife or adult child didn't anticipate an event like this one and put his or her wishes in writing, you might have to kill him or her while fending off hate mail, television cameras, anonymous threats and public character defamation.

Thank God I was allowed to kill my father without anyone but our family and his doctors being involved. If any one of you had tried to stop me, I'd have killed you too.

Stay the fuck out of it until you've been there.

And what if his wife had been the one to apose you?

this is her parents who want to keep her alive. Her parents who are there caring for her and talking to her. the one who wants her let her starve to death has moved on to a new life.

this is not a case where her family is in concert and politicians are butting in without cause. If we beleive her estranged husband has her best interest at heart- why would we not think so of her own mother her gave birth to her?

I am sorry about your father,and I know less about that than I do about this case. I do however know what it is like to be a mother and a woman and a human. And I think I have a right to an oppinion on what is happening.

I have a friend who had a do not resesetate order. It couldn't be found, so she was given an oxygen tube. [She recovered and went home. She was able to spend a few more days with her young son before dying at home. The phone was found in her hand so it is assumed that she was going to call the hospital. She may not have wanted extraordinary measures, but that doesn't mean she didn't want treatment.] Terry does not have a written order, only the word of her husband which is in dispute. She does not need to be resesutated. She only needs to be fed. She is disabled and brain damaged and I feel that she has a right to life sustaining nutrition. that is not going above and beyond. that is not extraordinary means.

I do not know the facts in your fathers case, but I assume that they were not in dispute in the way they are in this one.

 

[Huckleman2000]

The following are not nasty accusations but facts:

1. Her husband lives with another woman and has two children w/ her. He has lived with her for ten years.

2. The husband stands to inherit money if she dies.

3. She is not in a coma, she is not brain dead. She is not hooked to life suport. She just needs to be fed. He refuses to allow her to be fed, refused her to recieve communion and refuses to allow her physical therepy, including having her weaned from the feeding tube.

In this case, i think his claim to being her husband, let alone a legal gardian is less than clear. If i were married and unable to feed myself, I do not consider that it is my husbands right as my 'legal gardian' to refuse me food. Being fed is not 'extraordinary means.' It is rediculous to let her die like this. She can breath on her own, she is not terminally ill, she does not have a degenerative disease.

This is cruel and unusual and imp is right, we wouldn't treat a criminal like this.

Well, if he's been living with the "another woman" for 10 years, that means that it was 5 years after her accident before they moved in together. What, do you suppose, is the appropriate amount of time to grieve and move on in this case? Terri is dead to him in all but an artificial sense.

His claim to being her husband and legal guardian is probably the only clear thing in this whole sad affair. It's the only thing that opponents can attack, and they have done so for many years without success.

Sometimes, there are no good answers, and the law dictates who is the one to choose among the bad options. In this case, it's the husband, and he has withstood years of unsuccessful attacks trying to take that legal responsibility from him.

It's time to enforce the law.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Knowing my friend, she would *never* want to be deprived of nutrition or hydration.

Nursing homes suck. But not everyone fears them worse than death. Also, Terri's parents do not want to put her in a nursing home, they want to bring her to there house. They don't want her to just lie there gathering bead sores, they want her to resume treatment. They are not just religious nuts, they love their daughter, they believe that there is hope for her.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Fyi, you can specify in your Liviing Will "HYDRATION ONLY," which will extend life for a while but guarantee none of the potential discomfort of dehydration.

If you don't put your wishes in writing, anyone who disagrees with the decision of the person who has your power of attorney, and who has a cause to promote, can seek a court order awarding them custody, and if a sympathetic judge agress to hear the case, your family will have to get a lawyer and fight them.

She is not even given hydration. Not even ice chips.

If you can specify "Hydration only" but not to not be given hydration, how can she be refused even this?

 

[Huckleman2000]

I do not know the facts in your fathers case, but I assume that they were not in dispute in the way they are in this one.

I don't think they are in dispute - they've all been resolved through the courts! The case has been turned down by the Supremes! The opponents are reduced to trying to issue a subpeona to a vegetable for Congressional testimony! The case has become a sad farce, when the actual legal arguments are long settled and the losing opponents are lashing out and lending themselves to media whores.

None of us are as close to this as the judges, and there seems to be little doubt on their part.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Well, if he's been living with the "another woman" for 10 years, that means that it was 5 years after her accident before they moved in together. What, do you suppose, is the appropriate amount of time to grieve and move on in this case? Terri is dead to him in all but an artificial sense.

His claim to being her husband and legal guardian is probably the only clear thing in this whole sad affair. It's the only thing that opponents can attack, and they have done so for many years without success.

Sometimes, there are no good answers, and the law dictates who is the one to choose among the bad options. In this case, it's the husband, and he has withstood years of unsuccessful attacks trying to take that legal responsibility from him.

It's time to enforce the law.

Also- he didn't even *say* that she didn't want to be kept alive like this for 7 or 8 years after the brain damage occured.

"On the morning of February 25, 1990, at approximately 5:30 AM, Terri Schiavo collapsed in her home, resulting in irreversible brain damage from a lack of oxygen."

Michael Schiavo first sought permission to remove Terri's feeding tube in November 1998."

A brother and coworker also testified that she told them she was considering a divorce. If this is the case, he is probably not the person that she wants making her medical descisions. There are enough questions to his motivation that they should be addressed before an irriversible decision is made. Including a large settlement that he stands to inherit.

Do I think 5 years is long enough, because she was 'dead to him.' No. Because she's not brain dead, she's brain damaged. And she's still his wife. IF he loved her, he would be there for her, even if he thought she wouldn't want to live like this, he would realize that she is still alive. He would come and hold her and tell her he loves her and he's doing everything he can to give her peace. Even if she couldn't understand him, he would want to tell her. I don't know if my grandmother could understand the things i said to her while she was dying, but I said them anyway. And I had an urge to be with her in the time that I could and to try to comfort her.

IF she is 'dead to him' then he should relinquish his rights as her husband. If he can move on while his wife lies helpless but still alive, he can't love her with any kind of true love worthy of a spouse. Not as far as I'm concerned.

 

[sweetnpetite]

None of us are as close to this as the judges, and there seems to be little doubt on their part.

How about her parents.

there seems to be little doubt on their part either.