Schiavo case

[blike]

Anybody else following this travesty? It really is getting a bit ridiculous.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150797,00.html

Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped because of a chemical imbalance, and court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, says she told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, and say she could get better.

 

The court found that it was Terri Schiavo's wish not to kept alive in her current state and issued an order to remove the feeding tube Friday. Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, wouldn't comment on when and how the removal will take place or whether Michael Schiavo would visit his wife before it happened.

 

Doctors have said it could take a week or two for Terri Schiavo to die once the tube that delivers water and nutrients is removed.

[coquina]

Anybody else following this travesty? It really is getting a bit ridiculous.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0' date='2933,150797,00.html

Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped because of a chemical imbalance, and court-appointed doctors say she is in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, says she told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, and say she could get better.

The court found that it was Terri Schiavo's wish not to kept alive in her current state and issued an order to remove the feeding tube Friday. Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, wouldn't comment on when and how the removal will take place or whether Michael Schiavo would visit his wife before it happened.

 

Doctors have said it could take a week or two for Terri Schiavo to die once the tube that delivers water and nutrients is removed.[/quote']

 

The article says she is in a persistant vegitative state, but this description doesn't sound like it:

"She's not just barely alive, she's not being kept alive, she is alive as you and I, and as such, we have a moral obligation to protect and defend her from the fate premeditated by the Florida courts," DeLay said. "This is not over — we are still working."

 

If the above statement is true, than there must be some means by which she can communicate her wishes. If she can't it should be her husband's decision.

 

Who knows - if the feeding tube is withdrawn, perhaps hunger will cause her to wake up, if, indeed she is not in a true vegetative state.

 

You know - I just thought of something. They implant microchips in dogs so that the owner can be notified if the dog is missing.

 

Why can't people (at their own request) have microchips inserted that would be coded to a living will? That way, no one else has to make the decision for you. It could be backed up by taking a finger print of the person and comparing it to one on file to make sure no mistakes were made.

[blike]

Her feeding tube is out now. It's about time the courts stood up for themselves. Congress and the federal government need to keep their hands out of private affairs.

 

Unfortunately, it's bound to be put back in after congress finds a way to force the issue.

[Lance]

Her "husband" has been living with another woman (and had kids with) for the past ten years.

 

Death row inmates have more rights than this woman.

[blike]

Her "husband" has been living with another woman (and had kids with) for the past ten years.

He's moved on, I don't think there is anything wrong with that. None of this would have happened if she had been allowed to die earlier on. The husband agreed to let the courts decide and they sided with him.

 

Isn't the best right we can give her right now the right to die peacefully? It's been decided in several courts that she did not wish to be kept alive in such a situation.

[Auburngirl05]

I personally think she should be allowed to die....but the fact that she has to starve to death is painfully ironic, considering it was her bulimia that caused the chemical imbalance that put her in this position...

[RICHARDBATTY]

Without seeing her myself its hard to form a conclusion. The one picture I have seen seems to show a happy if disabled person but , that might be a picture chosen to give that impression. I say if she is not suffering keep her alive.

[Ophiolite]

The news footage shown in the UK was of an individual who appeared conscious and aware of their surroundings. The date of the footage was not given. Ifthat footage represented her current state than my lay opinion is that an illegal killing is about to take place.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of this decision I am appalled that she is to be allowed to die. This is moral cowardice on the part of society as expressed in the law. If one has a pet that is beyond hope we end its life with an injection. This is simply euthenasia wrapped up with a pretence that it is not in a manner that makes the entire painful process even worse, in almost every sense.

[Newtonian]

Aparently Ophilite our footage(uk) is very recent.Terri Schindlers condition does not fit the definition of PVS.She responds to stimuli and can open her eyes on request,smile ,cry.Although she cannot communicate verbally,she shows a cognitive awareness of her environment.

There are a number of org's people still fighting for her case to live.Her family are certain that none of the above examples are simple reflexes.14 independant medical proffesionals (6 of which are neurologists)have given testomony that Terri is NOT in PVS.Sorry to be emotive but nobody denies she swallow volutarily.

 

 

This would not be allowed if it were in the UK,another case of crazy americans IMO.

 

 

The courts have ruled only that the feeding tubes could be removed(her husbands wishes),and NOT deny her right to food and water!! So she's allowed regular food and water but seeing as how she cannot consume regular food and water,she is to starve to death. hello ..

 

Heres some facts,

1..Her husband has consistantly denied her right to therapy/rehabilitation.

Florida Statute 744.3215 Rights of persons determined incapacitated:

 

(1) A person who has been determined to be incapacitated retains the right

(i) To receive necessary services and rehabilitation.

Nurses whom have cared for her have sworn affidavits,she has recieved no rehabilitation therapy.

2..1992 terri was awarded approx 1 million dollars designated for future medical expenses FOR HER.But some of this ammount has been allowed to be spent on her husbands attorney's fees !! hello

Summary of expenses paid from Terri’s 1.2 Million Dollar medical trust fund (jury awarded 1992) One a Mr George Felos hired by her husband is sitting pretty with approx $400.000 dollars.

NOTE: In his November 1993 Petition Schiavo alleges the 1993 guardianship asset balance as $761,507.50

 

Atty Gwyneth Stanley

Atty Deborah Bushnell

Atty Steve Nilson

Atty Pacarek

Atty Richard Pearse (GAL)

Atty George Felos

$10,668.05

$65,607.00

$7,404.95

$1,500.00

$4,511.95

$397,249.99

 

Other

 

1st Union/South Trust Bank

$55,459.85

 

Michael Schiavo

$10,929.95

 

Total $545,852.34

All sanctioned by judge George Greer,so its legal.

 

 

I dont know about anyone here,but were has the money been spent on HER MEDICAL CARE.

[Lance]

The news footage shown in the UK was of an individual who appeared conscious and aware of their surroundings. The date of the footage was not given. Ifthat footage represented her current state than my lay opinion is that an illegal killing is about to take place.

 

 

Those tapes were recorded several years ago. Right after that her husband decided not to allow any more tapes to be recorded.

[Lance]

The problem in my eyes is I don't believe she really wants to die. I believe her husband wants her to die. I also think its extremely cruel to starve her to death. They are not even letting anybody attempt to feed her with a spoon.

 

Refusing food to death row inmates would be considered cruel and unusual. Hell, if you starved your dog to death you would be in trouble.

[Skye]

You can't really complain about a specific case (starving to death) that is part of general rule.

[blike]

The one picture I have seen seems to show a happy if disabled person but , that might be a picture chosen to give that impression. I say if she is not suffering keep her alive.

 

The news footage shown in the UK was of an individual who appeared conscious and aware of their surroundings. The date of the footage was not given.

 

Aparently Ophilite our footage(uk) is very recent.Terri Schindlers condition does not fit the definition of PVS.

The footage you saw was from august 2001. What you were not shown is the countless hours the Schiavo's parents spent filming hoping for a response. They propped her up with strings and such. They went over the same routine for hours on end until she randomly had the responses they were looking for. The rest was then cut away and the tape edited into the format you saw it in.

 

She responds to stimuli and can open her eyes on request,smile ,cry.

No she doesn't. The US courts appointed several doctors and scientists to reproduce the responses Terri's parents filmed. They even brought the parents back in and everything. She does not respond to stimuli. She does not open her eyes on request, and she does not smile on request. The tape is very deceiving. That's why Michael Shiavo refused to allow more tapes to be made, because they were a sham in order to sway public opinion.

 

This would not be allowed if it were in the UK,another case of crazy americans IMO.

Maybe I should just write this off as just another case where those crazy Europeans have rushed to a decision without knowing the whole story. Don't you guys consider us a right-wing conservative cesspool compared to yourselves? If this is taking place in conservative land, I assure you it would take place in the UK. The problem here is that the facts are so skewed by the parents that it's hard to understand why the US courts are allowing this to take place.

 

I dont know about anyone here,but were has the money been spent on HER MEDICAL CARE.

Her medical care is provided to her courtesy the tax payers of the state of florida. That's why her award was allowed to be used to for Michael's legal fees. Furthermore, after the issue had passed through several courts, Michael's position was constantly upheld.

allowed to die. This is moral cowardice on the part of society as expressed in the law. If one has a pet that is beyond hope we end its life with an injection.

Indeed. What's sad is that the same lawmakers who are raising a big stink about her "starving to death" are the same lawmakers who refuse to put into law any sort of humane death policy. Stinking republicans piss me off.

[blike]

The problem in my eyes is I don't believe she really wants to die. I believe her husband wants her to die. I also think its extremely cruel to starve her to death. They are not even letting anybody attempt to feed her with a spoon.

The courts have determined that was her wish in this case.

 

Technically she won't starve to death. She'll die of an electrolyte imbalance before her body runs out food. However, she won't feel any of it, considering most of her brain is fluid now. It is sad that we don't have any other legal means of taking care of this though. Surely a morphine drip is more humane than starving.

[Newtonian]

The footage you saw was from august 2001. What you were not shown is the countless hours the Schiavo's parents spent filming hoping for a response. They propped her up with strings and such. They went over the same routine for hours on end until she randomly had the responses they were looking for. The rest was then cut away and the tape edited into the format you saw it in.

What you also saw was from 2001 footage,of a person whom was supposed to be in a PVS.

You seem to know quite a lot of this parental conspiracy.Perhaps you could give me a link to the unedited video.And factual evidence to support your claims of them attaching strings and such to work her like a puppet.Just were have you got this information from please.

 

 

]The US courts appointed several doctors and scientists to reproduce the responses Terri's parents filmed. They even brought the parents back in and everything. She does not respond to stimuli. She does not open her eyes on request, and she does not smile on request. [/u']The tape is very deceiving. That's why Michael Shiavo refused to allow more tapes to be made, because they were a sham in order to sway public opinion. The problem here is that the facts are so skewed by the parents that it's hard to understand why the US courts are allowing this to take place

There seems to be something seriously wrong with US laws on guardianship here.A spouse who has moved on sometime ago into another relationship.Has the right to request the euthanising of his estranged partner,over and above the wishes of her parents and family.

You appear to portray conspiracy by deranged demonic parents and family.Do you not consider that their reaction is one that any parent or family would be.When their child,whom they love and clearly not in a PVS.Able to show somehow she is aware of her parents and environment and is about to have her life terminated.

Good god man they know ,love and cherish their daughter.If she was in PVS all this time and showed them that to all intents her quality of life was zero.We would not be discussing this.

The fact is her family know whats best for their daughter,more than you ,i or a guy she married.

 

I assure you it would take place in the UK.

I assure you it would not.

We had a case Tony Bland,whom was in a true defined PVS after Hillsborough disaster.Only after extended treatment did his doctors along with the consenting family apply to the courts.To allow him to die.

This was an extreme case,and under British law the schiavo case would not be considered.

There are approx 1400 cases of patients in states similar to PVS in the UK

Her medical care is provided to her courtesy the tax payers of the state of florida. That's why her award was allowed to be used to for Michael's legal fees.

It is irrelevent who is providing her treatment.The award was for HER medical care.Not her husbands to fritter away on attorney's extortionate bills.

Im with her family on this,unfortunately, official medical examinations and expert assessments were not carried out on the patient to clarify her precise neurological state.Doctors have testified on her behalf that Terri does not fit the criteria for PVS.As such she must be considered a living human person, deprived of full consciousness, whose juridical rights must be recognized, respected, and defended.

To prevent access to food and water constitutes an abuse of the juridical authority.If this leads to Terri's death it would create a juridical precedent and would present euthanasia in reality as a right before the courts of the US.

With dire consequenses for other more or less automonous persons everywhere in your country.

Your right it stinks alright,when in the near future doctors will choose who should live/die.This case shows clearly the family have no rights.Soon this will negate the spouse as well.

We have been here before,a certain gov in Europe chose this path..and hopefully we all know what happened.

[blike]

There seems to be something seriously wrong with US laws on guardianship here.A spouse who has moved on sometime ago into another relationship.Has the right to request the euthanising of his estranged partner,over and above the wishes of her parents and family.

A spouse, whether moved on or not, still has the legal right. That is not seriously wrong, and I doubt anyone would agree that it is. Just because he has moved on does not mean that he does not love her or does not know what she would have wanted.

 

You appear to portray conspiracy by deranged demonic parents and family.Do you not consider that their reaction is one that any parent or family would be.When their child,whom they love and clearly not in a PVS.Able to show somehow she is aware of her parents and environment and is about to have her life terminated.

I don't know that I would label it conspiracy. I don't think they are deranged or demonic. They are her family, afterall. Nonetheless, they do not have any legal say in the matter. I don't doubt that they think they are doing what's best for Terri.

 

she is aware of her parents and environment and is about to have her life terminated.

No she's not. The only evidence is a videotape? Why can't they reproduce it?

 

The fact is her family know whats best for their daughter,more than you ,i or a guy she married.

All things aside, it doesn't matter what's best for her. What matters is that Terri clearly indicated what her wishes were if she were relying on life support (her feeding tube is considered life-support by florida law), and her choice has been verified and respected by several courts.

 

It is irrelevent who is providing her treatment.The award was for HER medical care.

Not exclusively, which is why Michael was allowed to use some of it on attorney's fees.

 

To prevent access to food and water constitutes an abuse of the juridical authority.

No it's not. Michael gave the court authority.

 

With dire consequenses for other more or less automonous persons everywhere in your country.

What do you mean dire consequences? This is a victory for autonomy. This is what Terri would have wanted. This is a victory for personal rights.

 

Your right it stinks alright,when in the near future doctors will choose who should live/die.

Doctors don't chose, family members do. In this case, her spouse is only one who has the authority to make the decision, and he gave the authority to the courts (which is permissible by law).

 

his case shows clearly the family have no rights.

If a spouse is alive, families have no rights. When you get married your spouse assumes all the rights and responsibilities.

 

"The Legislature recognizes that for some the administration of life-prolonging medical procedures may result in only a precarious and burdensome existence. In order to ensure that the rights and intentions of a person may be respected even after he or she is no longer able to participate actively in decisions concerning himself or herself, and to encourage communication among such patient, his or her family, and his or her physician, the Legislature declares that the laws of this state recognize the right of a competent adult to make an advance directive instructing his or her physician to provide, withhold, or withdraw life-prolonging procedures, or to designate another to make the treatment decision for him or her in the event that such person should become incapacitated and unable to personally direct his or her medical care."

 

Bottom line: This is a victory for personal rights in this country. The judicial branch got involved because this right was challenged and Michael turned the right over to the court because of disputes between him and the family.

 

 

"Rather than make the decision himself, Michael followed a procedure permitted by Florida courts by which a surrogate such as Michael can petition a court, asking the court to act as the ward's surrogate and determine what the ward would decide to do. Michael did this, and based on statements Terri made to him and others, he took the position that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures. The Schindlers took the position that Terri would continue life-prolonging measures. Under this procedure, the trial court becomes the surrogate decision-maker, and that is what happened in this case.

 

The trial court in this case held a trial on the dispute. Both sides were given opportunities to present their views and the evidence supporting those views. Afterwards, the trial court determined that, even applying the "clear and convincing evidence" standard -- the highest burden of proof used in civil cases -- the evidence showed that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures."

 

Now, onto the PVS issue:

 

You can say that she's responsive all you want, but the fact is that the results seen in the video could not be reproduced. The court thus determined that these were simply reflexive movements, not conscious movements. CT scans indicate that most of her brain is severely damaged. She

[In My Memory]

I dont know whether Schiavo is conscious or has the capacity to feel pain. In the case that she does feel pain, I would consider it profoundly immoral to remove her feeding tube.

 

From an ethical point of view, I think it would be much less unethical to euthanize Schiavo using anesthetics or some kind of pain killer. That kind of death is painless and untraumatic, and I think that kind of compromise would satisfy most people who believe she is in a vegetative state and the others who believe she is self-aware.

[Newtonian]

A spouse, whether moved on or not, still has the legal right. That is not seriously wrong, and I doubt anyone would agree that it is. Just because he has moved on does not mean that he does not love her or does not know what she would have wanted

He alone does have the legal right.And there are plenty saying its seriously wrong,discounting the general opinionated populus,proffesional medical/judges are saying its wrong.This isnt one trial its been going on since 1993.

He has moved on and it doesnt mean he lacks love,his actions have proven the fact he doesnt.

 

After Terri's collapse in 1990 he sued for medical malpratice.Presenting himself to the jury as a devoted husband.He told the jury he would care for Terri for the rest of her life, which experts testified a normal life span, as part of this loving devotion, he would provide her with regular medical tests and appropriate rehabilitation with the money the jury awarded.Terri received about $750,000 in early 1993, and Michael about $300,000 for loss of her companionship. As soon as the money was in the bank, Michael put her two cats to sleep. He then melted down her wedding and engagement rings to make a ring for himself.Within the year he wanted her dead. he refused to allow doctors to treat her with antibiotics to treat a serious infection, claiming that Terri would not want to live in her disabled condition a point he somehow forgot to mention to the malpractice jury. Not coincidentally, had she died, he would have inherited her $700,000.

All things aside, it doesn't matter what's best for her. What matters is that Terri clearly indicated what her wishes were if she were relying on life support (her feeding tube is considered life-support by florida law), and her choice has been verified and respected by several courts

I contest that whats best for her is of the utmost importance.

Like your previous post regarding strings and hours of editing video.This is another example of unsubstanciated fact and assumptions by yourself.You say Terri clearly indicated her wishes..were?.There is no evidence for this,if you have it id like to see this evidence you have.He says she told him is hardly evidence when considering his actions since 1993.His shown already his a liar,one of his previous girlfriends said he told her he had recieved no such wishes and made it up.He now has two children and a new life.he couldnt be more estranged.

This is a loving devoted husband,and you have no problems with your guardian laws.

Doctors don't chose, family members do. In this case, her spouse is only one who has the authority to make the decision, and he gave the authority to the courts (which is permissible by law).

which means whichever hospital/home she is at the doctors do choose!.

What do you mean dire consequences? This is a victory for autonomy. This is what Terri would have wanted. This is a victory for personal rights.

Your take on things is very disturbing.You repeatedly say this is what Terri wanted.Please show me were.A victory for autonomy?

No this is legalising euthanasia patients of percieved fully/semi autonomous.And thats just to start.

 

Have you actually researched this case Blike.I only ask because if all your posting is a personal opinion without full knowledge,i recommend you research the situation in depth.The current standing in this case may or may not end in Terri's death.

Its just im having difficulty in understanding your defence of an estranged,adulterous,vindictive,b**tard of an excuse for a man!

edit

The video that the family you say cannot produce is irrelevent.I find it more pertinent that her family obviously can see their child/relative is still there,and in no way PVS (a dead shell).And despite the clear motives of her estranged husband they have continued to fight for her life for over a decade.Im certain that if Terri was all but dead the family would not inflict this mental anguish on themselves by taking this action.Its seriously wrong when a stranger/court decides to end your childs life.When you know they are still there!!

[Lance]

"President Bush early today signed legislation transferring jurisdiction of the Terri Schiavo case to a U.S. court. "In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life," a statement from the president said."

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/21/schiavo/index.html

[jdurg]

If my ears didn't deceive me this weekend, I thought I had heard that some senators who oppose the reinsertion of the feeding tube plan on a fillibuster to delay the voting on a bill which would force the tube to be placed back in.

[Lance]

If my ears didn't deceive me this weekend, I thought I had heard that some senators who oppose the reinsertion of the feeding tube plan on a fillibuster to delay the voting on a bill which would force the tube to be placed back in.

 

Nope, the law was already passed and signed with no filibusters. I think any senator that did that would be voted out pretty quickly in the upcoming elections.

[Cadmus]

Your take on things is very disturbing.

 

Its just im having difficulty in understanding your defence of an estranged' date='adulterous,vindictive,b**tard of an excuse for a man![/quote']

Wow. That husband sure is an evil, b**tard of an excuse for a man! How dare he pretend to have a life without the entire country, including people like yourself, not only weighing in, and controlling his life, but putting him on trial. I find it difficult to believe that you could get so incensed over this case. Your take on things is very disturbing.

[Lance]

How dare he pretend to have a life without the entire country, including people like yourself, not only weighing in, and controlling his life, but putting him on trial.

 

Are you completely ignoring what hes doing? Hes not "having a life", He wants to kill his wife. You act as if this has nothing to do with Terri but is all about the personal rights of her husband to starve her to death. Thats not “life”.

[Coral Rhedd]

To add a little more less emotional background:

 

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1090180451119

 

These same players have certainly been on this same stage before. What is sad is that the star can't take bows. This poor woman cannot see and cannot understand how people she once loved fight over money like dogs over a bone. It is silly to pretend that either her parents or her husband have high intentions. That is placing an interpretation upon their feelings that we cannot know from news stories. We can only surmise.

 

What is clear is that laws are being passed to cater to this one individual case. Jeb and George are trying to override Florida state law. I think I can probably surmise more about their political intentions than I can about Terri Schiavo's family members.

 

Last night, prompted by this circus of a case, my daughter and I discussed on the phone how, when she next visits, we will both make Living Wills and tape record our feelings and intentions about being kept alive in such a state. Neither one of us would want our lives prolonged by either medical care or sustenance.

 

The purpose of a Living Will is to speak for us when we cannot speak for ourselves.

[Coral Rhedd]

Wow. That husband sure is an evil, b**tard of an excuse for a man! How dare he pretend to have a life without the entire country, including people like yourself, not only weighing in, and controlling his life, but putting him on trial. I find it difficult to believe that you could get so incensed over this case. Your take on things is very disturbing.

 

Cadmus, what he received $300,000 dollars for was "loss of consortium." We can put whatever spin we want on it, but for all emotional and physical intents and purposes, he doesn't have a wife. Legally he has a wife.

 

That is hardly a ceremony I would stand on. It is not like he is 80 years old, is it? If he wants to have a sexual and emotional bond with another woman, he is only normal.

 

Lance and Newtonian would like to argue that he is committing adultery only because they want to make the case that she is still "alive." If Michael were enjoying sex with her still, they would then argue that he is a beast.