Schiavo case

[syntax252]

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' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

 

Amen to that.

 

If it were my daughter, my wife, or myself, I would have wanted the plug pulled years ago.

[Lance]

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' date=' they would then argue that he is a beast. [/quote']

 

Terri's parents filed for divorce on her behalf but the court ruled that because she could not speak for herself Michael would do it for her. Michael didn't want a divorce.

 

Am I the only one that sees this entire ordeal as a tad bit suspicious? It looks like to me that Michael never wants Terri to wake up. 33 doctors testified that they would need to do testing to insure that Terri truly is in a vegetative state. Testing has never been done on Terri because Michael refuses to have it done, testing that would prove she was in a vegetative state. If she truly was brain dead all he would have to do was allow testing and this entire ordeal would be over and he could let her die quietly. Not only that but he was awarded enough money to take care of her for LIFE. He never has to see her again. He could pretend she doesn't even exist.

[jdurg]

Also, one important thing to remember is that nobody knows the full story about this situation. The media will ONLY show you what they want you to see in order to make it seem like they have some breaking news story. I can guarantee you that the facts about this issue have not been made fully available to the public.

[Tom Mattson]

Am I the only one that sees this entire ordeal as a tad bit suspicious?

 

No, I do too. I read an article once (can't find the citation, but I'll look for it) that Michael Schiavo stands to lose a substantial inheritance if he gets divorced. That would certainly constitute a motive.

 

But Schiavo has started a whole family with another woman in the last 15 years. In my opinion, he shouldn't be allowed to have his cake and eat it too. The Schindler family may not be able to force a divorce, but they can certainly file a criminal complaint, because adultery is a crime in Florida. They can and should use the threat of jail time as leverage.

 

http://www.sodomy.org/laws/florida/cohabitation.html

[Cadmus]

Thats not “life”.

I see. What she now has constitutes normal life in your mind.

[Cadmus]

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.

Perhaps so.

 

We can all be sure, from the people on this forum, and in the white house and congress, that Schiavo would rather be alive than die, no matter what her husband says. Her husband cannot know what she really wants because it is not on paper, and we can be sure that Bush knows her much better than her husband and that no one has any ulterior motives in this case but only her best interests at heart.

[Pangloss]

This is a tough case, so I didn't want to weigh on on it until I had reviewed it and thought it over again. I remember debating this a couple of years ago when it was just a Florida issue. This has been "going on" for Floridians for something like ten years now. (sigh) But it had been a while since I'd thought about it.

 

 

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.

 

One of the trial judges viewed the entire four hours of that tape (which was made about five years ago) and commented on it extensively in the trial notes, basically saying that there's no consistency in her reactions whatsoever. Subsequent attempts to get her eyes to follow the balloon, for example, failed.

 

This is not inconsistent with a destroyed cerebral cortex (in fact in a liquified state) sitting atop a fully functional brain stem (which controls autonomic funtions).

 

In short, the lights are on, but nobody is home.

 

The Governor's office in 2003 appointed a well-known medical professor to review her case and report back to his office. He went over tens of thousands of pages of documentation and sat with Shiavo every day for several weeks, and not once did he (or anyone who was observing with him) observe any kind of cognitive function whatsoever.

 

This is the most adjudicated right-to-die case in US history, with 10 years on the dockets and 16 judges ruling on it, with every single one deciding in the husband's favor.

 

 

The problem in my eyes is I don't believe she really wants to die. I believe her husband wants her to die.

 

Not only did she state otherwise to her husband, she also stated otherwise to numerous other family members and friends, all of whom testified in both of the two trials that were held.

 

That is the whole point of the argument. He could just pass her guardianship to the parents and get a divorce -- god knows it would be easier than going through ten years of this nonsense. It simply defies reason that he would want to have her die when he could simply get a divorce. Obviously he's doing this out of conviction that it's what she wanted.

 

 

I also think its extremely cruel to starve her to death.

 

Not if her cognitive function is completely absent.

[coquina]

and I might have missed something along the way, but who's paying for her care?

 

I have been through extreme illness with 4 elderly people - 3 of whom could not take care of themselves, but who did not qualify for "skilled care". If medicare won't pay, secondary insurance won't pay. Medicaid won't take over until the assets of the person have been reduced to a very paltry sum.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think having a feeding tube qualifies as "skilled care". If I am right, a significant amount of asset depletion is occuring. Since she became ill very quickly, she wasn't competent to transfer her assets into someone else's name.

 

If the husband stands to benefit from an estate, the sooner off she's dead the richer he will be. If they are divorced, he loses. If she stays alive long enough to deplete her own money, unless things have changed, his assets can be attached as well (except for his house and a car).

 

Personally, I think she should be allowed to die with dignity. However, I also believe in the old maxim "follow the money". Something tells me if there wasn't a healthy sum of it to be gained, the guy would have divorced her and moved on years ago.

[Coral Rhedd]

Terri's parents filed for divorce on her behalf but the court ruled that because she could not speak for herself Michael would do it for her. Michael didn't want a divorce.

 

If she is alive as you contend' date=' she should be able to express her own wishes about divorce. Since when do parents get to decide that their children should be divorced.

 

Am I the only one that sees this entire ordeal as a tad bit suspicious? It looks like to me that Michael never wants Terri to wake up.

 

Suspicious how? That people should want a share of money. Sounds quite human to me. Are you aware that Terri's parents admitted to wanting a share of Michael's lawsuit award?

 

33 doctors testified that they would need to do testing to insure that Terri truly is in a vegetative state. Testing has never been done on Terri because Michael refuses to have it done, testing that would prove she was in a vegetative state.

 

This is simply not true. Did you read the link I posted?

 

Not only that but he was awarded enough money to take care of her for LIFE. He never has to see her again. He could pretend she doesn't even exist.

 

But he does not. Are you aware that Terri died because a physician did not catch the signs of bulimia that were endangering her life. It was Michael who brought and won the lawsuit. Are you aware of what the term "loss of consortium means?" Terri cannot really act as a wife to Michael anymore. Whatever his motives, moving on to form another relationship does not make him a monster.

 

Tell me Lance, just how long would you be willing to remain celibate and alone, watching your chances for love and children bypass you?

[Coral Rhedd]

and I might have missed something along the way' date=' but who's paying for her care?

 

I have been through extreme illness with 4 elderly people - 3 of whom could not take care of themselves, but who did not qualify for "skilled care". If medicare won't pay, secondary insurance won't pay. Medicaid won't take over until the assets of the person have been reduced to a very paltry sum.

 

[/quote']

 

Here is the answer to your question Sandi:

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1364673/posts

 

Hospice and medicaid pays. It doesn't say so in the link, but in certain circumstances, a person's assets can be protected in a disability trust. I don't know if that is the case here, but from the information in the link, only a small portion of her assets remain.

[Douglas]

and I might have missed something along the way, but who's paying for her care?

I just heard on TV that the taxpayers are picking up the tab at a rate of greater than 80,000 per month.

[Newtonian]

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

Your an idiot.I mean to be offensive!!

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

AGAIN THIS POST SHOWS EVERYONE YOUR AN IDIOT.

Do you have any children?(with your attitude i pity them if you ever have problems),have you researched the case?.if you had you would have realised that the parents would recieve no money.They clearly see their daughter as still there!!! It is silly to make presumptions of her parents when it is clear you dont know what your talking about.

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.

Hey are you serious,wether his wife is in a coma,PVS,or a zombie.He took the vows,he is still married !!! I dont know what laws you have in the countryside but he has two children and a ladyfriend...thats adultery isnt it?

Are you a mind reader,nobody argues he is a beast,but i know who appears trailor trash!!

[Newtonian]

If she is alive as you contend' date=' she should be able to express her own wishes about divorce. Since when do parents get to decide that their children should be divorced.

 

 

 

Suspicious how? That people should want a share of money. Sounds quite human to me. Are you aware that Terri's parents admitted to wanting a share of Michael's lawsuit award?[/quote']

Absolute rubbish.Terris parents did not want any money and your talking out the top of your head.Ive tried to take onboard your opinions but yuor totally pathetically stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But he does not. Are you aware that Terri died because a physician did not catch the signs of bulimia that were endangering her life. It was Michael who brought and won the lawsuit. Are you aware of what the term "loss of consortium means?" Terri cannot really act as a wife to Michael anymore. Whatever his motives, moving on to form another relationship does not make him a monster.

Yes it was michael who brought the law suit,won!. Lied about her wishes to the jury.PROMISED TO PAY HER MEDICAL CARE,AND REHABILITATION to which it was clearly stated she was improving and that rehabiltation therapy was recommended.He refused!!! that does make him a monster.

I ask you coral are you aware of any facts because your certainly talking rubbish.

I wish to apologise to other members/the moderators and admin,for my posts.But i feel very emotional on this case.The very fact that the President of the USA,the Vatican and most important THE parents of Terri are fighting for her life on the basis that the parents at least believe their daughter is still ALIVE.

 

Ive never ever been accused of AH but i plead guilty your totally stupid!!!

[Bluenoise]

Wow

Getting a bit emotional over it all eh?

Just breath in and out camly.

lol

[Lance]

The very fact that the President of the USA,the Vatican and most important THE[/b'] parents of Terri are fighting for her life on the basis that the parents at least believe their daughter is still ALIVE.

 

Dont forget Mel Gibson.

[Coral Rhedd]

No' date=' I do too. I read an article once (can't find the citation, but I'll look for it) that Michael Schiavo stands to lose a substantial inheritance if he gets divorced. That would certainly constitute a motive.

 

But Schiavo has started a whole family with another woman in the last 15 years. In my opinion, he shouldn't be allowed to have his cake and eat it too. The Schindler family may not be able to force a divorce, but they can certainly file a criminal complaint, because adultery is a crime in Florida. They can and should use the threat of jail time as leverage.

 

http://www.sodomy.org/laws/florida/cohabitation.html[/quote']

 

You must want to see a lot of people arrested. There are many outdated laws on the books in many states.

 

IMO, adultery is a family matter between a husband and wife and not a matter for governments to criminalize.

[Coral Rhedd]

AGAIN THIS POST SHOWS EVERYONE YOUR AN IDIOT.

Do you have any children?(with your attitude i pity them if you ever have problems)' date='have you researched the case?.

[/quote']

 

It is always amusing to read your high-minded discourse Newtonian. You set an example for us all. However it would help if you would actually read the posts you pretend to respond to. If you had you would know that my daughter and I just discussed last night the importance of having a Living Will.

 

Hey are you serious,wether his wife is in a coma,PVS,or a zombie.He took the vows,he is still married !!! I dont know what laws you have in the countryside but he has two children and a ladyfriend...thats adultery isnt it?

Are you a mind reader,nobody argues he is a beast,but i know who appears trailor trash!!

 

Ah yes, well in the countryside we all boffing each other's spouses. Clearly your trailer trash reference means you think I am a Southerner, but I can assure you that I am a Texan through and through.

[Coral Rhedd]

Absolute rubbish.Terris parents did not want any money and your talking out the top of your head.Ive tried to take onboard your opinions but yuor totally pathetically stupid.

 

You didn't read the link I posted' date=' did you?

 

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

 

The one which said:

 

According to the Schindlers the fight started because Michael reneged on his promise to share the malpractice money with them.

 

So Michael wasn't the only one who wanted some to the money.

 

Yes it was michael who brought the law suit,won!. Lied about her wishes to the jury.PROMISED TO PAY HER MEDICAL CARE,AND REHABILITATION to which it was clearly stated she was improving and that rehabiltation therapy was recommended.He refused!!! that does make him a monster.

I ask you coral are you aware of any facts because your certainly talking rubbish.

 

You seem to think you are the only one who has access to the facts. Where are your links.

 

On the radio tonight I heard that Michael objected to surgeries that would keep her alive when he felt that this would be very much against her wishes.

 

These matter really come down to he said, they said.

 

What the doctors have generally said in the cases before the court is that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state.

 

I wish to apologise to other members/the moderators and admin,for my posts.But i feel very emotional on this case.The very fact that the President of the USA,the Vatican and most important THE parents of Terri are fighting for her life on the basis that the parents at least believe their daughter is still ALIVE.

 

Why should I care what the President says? His politics are not mine and I didn't vote for him. Why should I care what the Pope says? I am not Catholic. As for Terri's parents, of course I am sad for them. But I do believe in principle of Separation of Powers and the President and the politicians have overstepped their boundaries. I bet the current judge rules the same.

 

Ive never ever been accused of AH but i plead guilty your totally stupid!!!

 

Could you please tell me what AH means? I am too stupid to figure it out on my own and would appreciate your elaboration.

[Newtonian]

Please dont go there Coral! i will defend anyone here who i percieve to be picked on.You know quite well my reference to trailer trash was not directed at you.Its totally unfair you should use this .

my points to you were valid you clearly have do not know about the case fully.Yes im quite emotional ive spent the last few days researching the case facts..I still fail to see how people in positions of authority can so willfully pass judgement on an individuals life when they are not aware of the full facts...

Thankfully the last 8 hours have shown rediculus judgements can be addressed.

My opinion of your posts is still correct correct however.

[Newtonian]

The link you posted is rubbish Coral,the only dispute over money came when it was agreed that should Terri be so ill that they was no hope,the remaining money would be given to charity..at which Michael said kiss my sweet ass(though maybe not those exact words)

[Coral Rhedd]

The link you posted is rubbish Coral,the only dispute over money came when it was agreed that should Terri be so ill that they was no hope,the remaining money would be given to charity..at which Michael said kiss my sweet ass(though maybe not those exact words)

 

Where are your links Newtonian? If you have been researching, where is your evidence? All you have presented is piety and emotionalism. Show us some proof of your assertions.

 

Answer this: Do you recognize a person's right to refuse medical care?

 

Answer this: Do you think that medical care should be withheld at a person's advance directive when they are in a Persistent Vegetative State?

 

If you cannot answer yes to these questions then your argument amounts to the fact that Michael is a bad person. So what? The world is full of bad people! The courts have chosen to believe time and time again that he told the truth when he said Terri had indicated she would not wish to be kept alive by such means. Unless you were a fly on the wall during a private conversation in which she said the contrary, you cannot know what her wishes were. I do not find it unlikely that this is an issue that a husband and wife would discuss.

 

I do not believe that your arguments have anything to do with the case at hand. I believe that you are one of those perserve life at all costs and under whatever circumstances people. Instead of creating a smoke screen, defend your basic premise!

[Newtonian]

Its apparent you believe alot of things,none of which have a basis in fact!!

You seem to take for granted that you can be lazy and expect others to do the leg work in providing you with facts.Unfortunately i dont work like that.If you had asked me politely i would have given you all the information you requested..

[Coral Rhedd]

I have posted a link and you have not. You have presented assertions but not evidence. Furthermore, you have not refuted my link which you prefer to characterize as rubbish without saying why. I do not believe you have read it.

 

Judging by your posts tonight, I am not sure you can read it.

 

And why should I be polite to someone who argues by attack, by calling me an idiot and "trailor trash?" You are not aquitting yourself well tonight.

[Aardvark]

Why can't people (at their own request) have microchips inserted that would be coded to a living will? That way' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

Insertion of microchips!

 

I unmask and denounce you, you minion of the Anti-Christ.

[Cadmus]

IMO, adultery is a family matter between a husband and wife and not a matter for governments to criminalize.

I agree. How can people seriously wish that Florida would stick the guy in jail for a law like adultery. Shall we ask that laws return society backward, just to punish a guy for allowing his case to become public fodder?