Terry Schiavo

[The Terrible Sweal]

The evidence is the SHE, Terri, would not have wished to continue in such a 'life'. Suffering is totally beside the point.

I would like to see this "evidence"; ...

So you suspect that over a dozen different courts have ALL been bamboozled?

[caesar]

So you suspect that over a dozen different courts have ALL been bamboozled?

I suspect that this "evidence" has only been considered once and then rubber stamped.

I would accept this "evidence" from Michael that his wife wished not to be kept alive in this condition if he had put forth this position prior to finding another love and prior to recieving funds that finally allowed him to be financially independent from the parents. Something he never was during the marriage. Living with her parents or in an apartment provided by them.

This should have been a family decision not just the husband"s. Terri's parents provided support financially and morally to Terri and Michael BEFORE and after her health problems. It seems that Michael was quite willing to accept their assistance before he became financially independent because of and after Terri's health crisis.

I would agree more with cutting off "artificial life support" if it were simply that; and if she were on more sophisticated life support. How can cutting off artifical life support include denying giving her water or jello by mouth which is possible and whch her family is forbidden to do.

We cannot end a loved one's life when they are suffering and in great pain and consciously ask for assistance in allowing them to die. We could be prosecuted for doing so. Terri, from all reports, is not suffering any pain prior to removal of the feeding tube.

[Shakeyhands]

I think there is enough evidence now or at the very least suspicion to investigate just what exactly is going on here. Is the husband afraid that she will some day be able to tell people just what exactly happened leading up to her condition.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=43383

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../26/72807.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/...25/102508.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../25/93355.shtml

You know, these baseless accusations make me ill. Do you not think Max (really a question in itself) that through all of the court cases that something about this might have been brought up at some point, and disproven or tossed because of its baselessness? There is about as much proof that Terris father caused the bone breaks as there is that Michael may have had anythingto do with it.

And all this talk about money is utterly ridiculous, Michael should be congratulated for his moral fiber, not denegrated.

There other thing that is about killing me is the reference to "Terri's heart stopping briefly" it stopped, and she was resucitated, had they let her go then, well.......

Bottom line, if there was sometyhing to save it would be saved.

If it were my child, God forbid, I would have difficult time too, but I would hope that someone would help me through the reality, not a fantasy that things can get better.

[The Terrible Sweal]

So you suspect that over a dozen different courts have ALL been bamboozled?

I suspect that this "evidence" has only been considered once and then rubber stamped.

Well, we know that several courts have considered the matter.

So your suspicions, to be taken seriously, have to amount to impugning pretty much the very concept of judicial decisionmaking. Is that your intent? And if so, what can we resort to instead?

This should have been a family decision not just the husband"s.

It has not been the husband's decision. It's been a the courts' decisions.

I would agree more with cutting off "artificial life support" if it were simply that; and if she were on more sophisticated life support. 

The logic of that position escapes me. What difference do you think the intensity of intervention makes?

How can cutting off artifical life support include denying giving her water or jello by mouth which is possible and whch her family is forbidden to do.

What nonsense is this? She doesn't swallow food, hence the need for the feeding tube.

Terri, from all reports, is not suffering any pain prior to removal of the feeding tube.

Terri is not experiencing anything whatsoever.

[B. Max]

I think there is enough evidence now or at the very least suspicion to investigate just what  exactly is going on here. Is the husband afraid that she will some day be able to tell people just what exactly happened leading up to her condition.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=43383

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../26/72807.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/...25/102508.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../25/93355.shtml

You know, these baseless accusations make me ill. Do you not think Max (really a question in itself) that through all of the court cases that something about this might have been brought up at some point, and disproven or tossed because of its baselessness? There is about as much proof that Terris father caused the bone breaks as there is that Michael may have had anythingto do with it.

And all this talk about money is utterly ridiculous, Michael should be congratulated for his moral fiber, not denegrated.

There other thing that is about killing me is the reference to "Terri's heart stopping briefly" it stopped, and she was resucitated, had they let her go then, well.......

Bottom line, if there was sometyhing to save it would be saved.

If it were my child, God forbid, I would have difficult time too, but I would hope that someone would help me through the reality, not a fantasy that things can get better.

Thank you for that diagnosis Dr. shakeyhands. However your opinion from a distance seems less credible than those that have actually seen her. Not the least of which would also include this judge greer.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?...RTICLE_ID=43470

Yes, if they had not restarted her heart she would have been gone back when, but they did, and now they are going to stop her heart not by removing something that is directly keeping it going, but by withholding food. In any other situation that would be considered murder even torture. Is this now the standard for deciding to eliminate people. Because if it is there are lots yet to go. We now have demicide, inficide and now possibly a new category, eldercide. Something the deathwish crowd have been tossing around for some years now. As the articles i posted above state, people have not been heard and at least some treatments have been withheld.

Question : is there any difference in withholding a feeding tube as opposed to a pill, either of which, if the patient didn't have, they would die.

[kimmy]

I am assuming this guy, Dr William Hammesfahr, is the "noted neurologist" caesar keeps referring to, the guy who says he has patients worse off than Terri who have made full recoveries.

Dr Hammesfahr is also the guy who has been telling the Schindlers that he can heal their daughter. They have used him as their medical expert in the hearings into Terri's condition, each time stating the view that his therapies can revive her. He has appeared on several TV programs with the same message.

How does the medical community at large feel about Dr Hammesfahr?

On Thursday, Dr. Lawrence J. Schneiderman of the University of California, San Diego, a specialist in bioethics of medical futility and end-of-life care, said in an interview, “He’s a quack, to put it the politest way I can.”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7288728/page/2/

While Dr Hammesfahr promotes himself as a "Nobel Prize Nominee", the truth is slightly different.

Hammesfahr, who was disciplined in 2003 by the Florida Board of Medicine, testified during an October 2002 court hearing on the Schiavo case that his claim to be a Nobel nominee is based on a letter written to the "Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine" by Rep. Mike Bilirakis (R-FL) recommending Hammesfahr for a "Nobel Peace Prize in Medicine." But that award does not exist (the Nobel Assembly awards separate prizes in peace and medicine), and assuming Bilirakis intended to nominate Hammesfahr for the prize for medicine, as Hammesfahr claims, the nomination is meaningless because Bilirakis is not qualified to nominate anyone for that award.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200503240007

Judge Greer summarized Hammesfahr's credibility as follows:

An October 25, 2003, St. Petersburg Times article noted that Greer, who presided over the hearing, called Hammesfahr a "self-promoter" who "offered no names, no case studies, no videos and no test results to support his claim" that he had treated patients worse off than Terri Schiavo.

So, while people are busy doubting the motivations of Michael Schiavo, perhaps they should also take a moment to consider the motivations of Dr William Hammesfahr. What has Dr Hammesfahr got to gain in all this? How about this:

Medicare and many other insurances are accepted

http://www.hni-online.com/

As it turns out, Dr Hammesfahr operates his own private clinic (or "Neurological Institute" as he calls it), providing for-profit treatment to stroke victims. As a couple of the above articles mentioned, Dr Hammesfahr has been disciplined in the past by the Florida Department of Health for his therapy, which is considered of questionable value by the medical community.

I think it is perhaps fair to ask whether Michael Schiavo is motivated by the insurance money.

However, I also think it is fair to ask whether this Dr Hammesfahr has been selling the Schindlers a mountain of false hope, exploiting their desperation to garner a windfall of publicity for his private clinic.

-kimmy

[Guest eureka]

This has been nothing but a poitical exercise that is, it seems, backfiring on the Bush administration and the Religious Right. That will be the only value to come out of the whole sad affair.

It is worth noting that, while this has been going on, the US government has cut another $15 billion from medicaid thus ensuring that many in Schiavo's circumstance but with a genuine chance for treatment and recovery, will die.

[B. Max]

This has been nothing but a poitical exercise that is, it seems, backfiring on the Bush administration and the Religious Right. That will be the only value to come out of the whole sad affair.

It is worth noting that, while this has been going on, the US government has cut another $15 billion from medicaid thus ensuring that many in Schiavo's circumstance but with a genuine chance for treatment and recovery, will die.

Yes correct, political in the sense that we've seen this before but on a larger scale. People starved to death because someone else thought they shouldn't exist. The kill terri crowd, mostly leftist athiests have exposed themselves as the same type who committed the genocides of the past.

From 1932-1933, five million Ukrainian peasants died in forced starvation. The Soviet government stationed troops to actively prevent anyone from escaping the famine. Doctors and relief supplies were kept out by force. The famine was a long, deliberate plan to make people dead by creating and maintaining conditions in which they could not obtain food.

http://www.freedomsnest.com/rummel_soviet.html

[Shakeyhands]

This has been nothing but a poitical exercise that is, it seems, backfiring on the Bush administration and the Religious Right. That will be the only value to come out of the whole sad affair.

It is worth noting that, while this has been going on, the US government has cut another $15 billion from medicaid thus ensuring that many in Schiavo's circumstance but with a genuine chance for treatment and recovery, will die.

Yes correct, political in the sense that we've seen this before but on a larger scale. People starved to death because someone else thought they shouldn't exist. The kill terri crowd, mostly leftist athiests have exposed themselves as the same type who committed the genocides of the past.

From 1932-1933, five million Ukrainian peasants died in forced starvation. The Soviet government stationed troops to actively prevent anyone from escaping the famine. Doctors and relief supplies were kept out by force. The famine was a long, deliberate plan to make people dead by creating and maintaining conditions in which they could not obtain food.

http://www.freedomsnest.com/rummel_soviet.html

Please.

[The Terrible Sweal]

I think there is enough evidence now or at the very least suspicion to investigate just what  exactly is going on here. Is the husband afraid that she will some day be able to tell people just what exactly happened leading up to her condition.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=43383

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../26/72807.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/...25/102508.shtml

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/3/.../25/93355.shtml

Worldnet Daily and Newsmax? Good god! Could you have found any less reliable sources?!

They are completely reliable. Just as we can always rely on you to shoot the messenger. The last refuge of a scoundrel.

WordLiesDaily:

An attorney for Terri Schiavo's parents said the severely brain-injured woman cried and yelled out that she wants to live after being told today her life-sustaining feeding tube was about to be removed by court order.

Barbara Weller was in Terri Schiavo's room at the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Fla., when the encounter took place, according to activist Randall Terry, who spoke with WorldNetDaily from outside the building as demonstrators continued a vigil.

Wall to wall B.S.

[The Terrible Sweal]

People starved to death because someone else thought they shouldn't exist.

Your opinion is ridiculous as long as you fail to understand that this is Terri's wishes being given effect.

[caesar]

Your opinion is ridiculous as long as you fail to understand that this is Terri's wishes being given effect.

Only according to Michael after getting a big settlement and new girlfriend.. That is still in hot dispute. Courts be damned. This would not be their first big mistake.

[caesar]

Yes correct, political in the sense that we've seen this before but on a larger scale. People starved to death because someone else thought they shouldn't exist. The kill terri crowd, mostly leftist athiests have exposed themselves as the same type who committed the genocides of the past.

This is not a leftist attempt to dispose of Terri. Bush despite his "attempts" to "help" Terri passed legislation in Texas to allow the removale of life support to patients despite the wishes to the contrary of the family if they didn't have the money to pay.

[B. Max]

People starved to death because someone else thought they shouldn't exist.

Your opinion is ridiculous as long as you fail to understand that this is Terri's wishes being given effect.

Nonsense. What you fail to understand, is that this is not a case of right to die, but right to murder, and death by government, without due process.

Article five of the bill of rights states

nor be deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property, without due Process of Law;

Simply put, there is no constitutional avenue for judges to even order the death of this woman without meeting the following requirements.

No Person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise Infamous Crime, 147

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

147 A capital crime is one punishable by death and an infamous crime is one punishable by death or imprisonment.

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

unless on a Presentment or Indictment of a Grand Jury, 148 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

148 The grand jury consists of not more than twenty-three men called in by the sheriff of the county (or by the United States marshal of the District) to hear witnesses respecting any subject that may properly be brought before them. If they believe that a person accused should be brought to trial, they return into court a "true bill" or indictment, which is a formal charge in writing that acts were done amounting to a crime; otherwise they write "no bill." The person indicted is later brought to trial before a petit jury of twelve, which after hearing the evidence on both sides, returns a verdict of guilty or not guilty. The grand jury originated when men were executed or imprisoned upon the order of the King or on the charge of his subordinates. It was designed to prevent unjust punishment, for the grand jurors (who sat secretly and, therefore, could not be called to account for opposing the government) presumably would protect the accused from wrong. But it is out of time now and many States have abolished it. In those States an "information" is filed by the prosecuting attorney against the person whom he wishes to bring to trial. The Information sets out the charges as the indictment of the grand jury does. The grand jury cannot be dispensed with as a National institution until this Amendment has been changed. c56

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

except in Cases arising in the Land or Naval forces or in the Militia, when in actual Service in Time of War or public Danger; Nor shall any Person be subject for the same Offence to be Twice put in jeopardy of Life or Limb; 149

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

149 here an Englishman had been indicted and put on trial and the evidence did not appear sufficient the court discharged the jury but ordered the prisoner to be held until more proof might come in. Hallam says that he was accordingly indicted again. When he pleaded that he had already been tried, the judges had the effrontery to deny that he had ever been put in jeopardy. A person is considered to have been brought before a court of competent jurisdiction upon an indictment or information in sufficient form and a jury has been impaneled and sworn to try him. Of course he has not been put in jeopardy where a jury fails to agree and the jury has been discharged for that reason, or where a conviction has been reversed by an appellate court.

Nor can his trial be stopped after the jury has been sworn to try him should it then appear that the evidence against him is insufficient. The trial must proceed to verdict.

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

nor shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a Witness against himself; 150

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

150 He cannot be required to testify either directly or indirectly. His papers and books cannot be made to speak against him. In this particular the Fourth and Fifth Amendments unite for one purpose. "This provision." says the Supreme Court, "had its origin in a protest against the inquisitorial and manifestly unjust methods of interrogating accused persons which had been obtained in the Continental system and . . . was not uncommon even in England." It has been remarked as singular that this provision should not have been in the body of the Constitution, as it was already in the constitutions of several States at the time of the Convention. c47

Officers of the army placed a man in the establishment of one suspected of disloyalty, and he purloined papers which were used in evidence against the owner of them. Pointing out once more that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments cooperated to protect a man from being made a witness against himself, either orally or by his papers, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed (1921) the trial court for permitting the papers to be used, and said:

"It has been repeatedly decided that these Amendments should receive a liberal construction, so as to prevent stealthy encroachments or 'gradual depreciation' of the rights secured by them, by imperceptible practice of courts, or by well-intentioned but mistakenly over-zealous executive officers."

In 1893 Congress enacted that no person should be excused from producing books and papers in response to a subpoena duces tecum (a formal writ demanding the production of specified records) of the Interstate Commerce Commission; but it kept the statue within the purpose of this clause by adding that no prosecution should follow any disclosure made. The prosecution being made impossible, the basis of the constitutional right to refuse to answer the Interstate Commerce Commission no longer exists. This special legislation was considered necessary to aid the Commission in its investigations of railroad operation and management.

Of course a person may waive the privilege. And if the statute of limitation bars prosecution for the crime, he will be compelled to answer. So he cannot claim privilege if he has already been pardoned, for that prevents prosecution.

Compulsory self-incrimination existed for four hundred years after the Magna Charta, and it gained some recognition among the early colonists, for the record of the trial of Mrs. Anne Hutchinson in 1673 shows that Governor Winthrop, who presided, was not aware of any privilege against self-incrimination.

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

nor be deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property, without due Process of Law; 151

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

151 This prohibition as to National power is repeated 173 in the Fourteenth Amendment respecting the conduct of the States.

Due process of law means substantially the same as "the law of the land" as used in the English Petition of Right in 1628. Indeed, both expressions were linked in that celebrated Petition, which said that no man should be "in any manner destroyed but by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land"; and that no man should be "put out of his land or tenements, nor taken nor imprisoned, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without being brought to answer by the due process of the law."

[The Terrible Sweal]

Your opinion is ridiculous as long as you fail to understand that this is Terri's wishes being given effect.

Nonsense. What you fail to understand, is that this is not a case of right to die, but right to murder, and death by government, without due process.

What utter drivel. You really think that over a dozen different judges all, for no reason whatsoever, want to kill this woman!? How can that be realistic? It's bonkers.

[caesar]

What really bothers me is that they are not only removing her feed tube; they are refusing to allow her to be given food or water by mouth. Regulating religious services. WHY? Control is the big issue by the husband's side with little compassion for the parents.

Now before the poor lady is even dead they are discussing who and when an autopsy will be performed. Planning a quick cremation. No input from Terri's parents are accepted.

[The Terrible Sweal]

error

[The Terrible Sweal]

Your opinion is ridiculous as long as you fail to understand that this is Terri's wishes being given effect.

Only according to Michael ...

False. According to the duly constituted, legitimate legal authorities.

Courts be damned. 

Are you being silly for some purpose, or is it just your nature? What do you propose we should do without courts? Is running wild through the streets your idea of civilization?

[The Terrible Sweal]

What really bothers me is that they are not only removing her feed tube; they are refusing to allow her to be given food or water by mouth.

Hello!!!!

She doesn't swallow food. That's what a feeding tube is for. Get a grip.

[caesar]

She HAS been able to eat jello. She certainly could take in water or to have an icecube placed against her lips.

Why the morphine if she feels no pain.

[kimmy]

error

Indeed.

I think "error" is about the kindest thing that could be said for the kind of hysteria, hyperbole, denial of reality, and outright fanaticism we've seen from the "Save Terri!" people. I spent some time visiting some of the sites our friend Max linked to earlier, and was utterly startled by some of the dementia I witnessed.

I might, just for laughs, chronical some of the absurdity I read about in a message here. Although, I honestly don't know whether to be amused or just plain worried at the mentality of some of the people out there.

Are you being silly for some purpose, or is it just your nature? 

Let's be courteous. caesar deserves respect and consideration. In fact, she deserves extra respect and consideration, because she was there in person on the day they invented the wheel.

-kimmy

[kimmy]

LA Times: DeLay family tragedy

And DeLay is among the strongest advocates of keeping the woman, who doctors say has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, connected to her feeding tube. DeLay has denounced Schiavo's husband, as well as judges, for committing what he calls "an act of barbarism" in removing the tube.

In 1988, however, there was no such fiery rhetoric as the congressman quietly joined the sad family consensus to let his father die.

"There was no point to even really talking about it," Maxine DeLay, the congressman's 81-year-old widowed mother, recalled in an interview last week. "There was no way [Charles] wanted to live like that. Tom knew — we all knew — his father wouldn't have wanted to live that way."

Doctors advised that he would "basically be a vegetable," said the congressman's aunt, JoAnne DeLay.

Tom DeLay knew that his father wouldn't have wanted to live like that.

Yet he's been publicly berating Michael Schiavo for making the same choice for his wife.

Tom DeLay is a big fat hypocrite.

And a piece of crap.

-kimmy

[caesar]

Let's be courteous. caesar deserves respect and consideration. In fact, she deserves extra respect and consideration, because she was there in person on the day they invented the wheel.

Kimmy you are an arrogant ignorant twit. You think only your opinion matters. You don't understand the word courtesy.

As for the father of Tom DeLay; he was on a respirator and in a coma; a much more severe condition that Terri. His death was almost immediate after turning off the respirator and all family members were able to accept the outcome.

[Tawasakm]

Kimmy you are an arrogant ignorant twit. You think only your opinion matters. You don't understand the word courtesy.

Clearly, caesar, kimmy does respect you by virtue of association with important historical events.

Seriously it looked like it was just a joke.

Also seriously - her points anre well researched and presented. I do not believe that she is ignorant or arrogant. Rather I believe she understands how to research and evaluate information and evidence. If she thinks her arguments are better then yours that does not necessarily make her arrogant - or at least not if she is clearly presenting a superior argument whilst incorporating responses which indicate she is listening to and evaluating the arguments of others. Kimmy does those things.

[caesar]

She is a cold nasty twerp. The lady has parents that deserve a little more compassion and respect. Terri deserves better than a slow death by starvation and especially denial of water.