The latest twist in the Schiavo case.......

[Guest MikeSC]

His interests and her interests do not remotely intersect. He's her "husband" who is engaged with children with another woman.

 

So just because he found another woman instead of sitting by her bed for 8 years, he's not allowed to be of the opinion that she's never, ever going to get any better, and it would be better to let her die?

 

His ENTIRE claim here is that he's her husband.

 

Shouldn't he at least REMOTELY honor his commitment?

 

He wants his "husbandly rights" --- without the commitment. Must be a sweet gig.

And how long ago was the idea of letting her die brought up? Like, did they think it would have been a reasonable idea seven years ago?

You'd think after one, they had a good idea of what her condition was.

Or is it only recently that they realized the extent of the damage? Because if he wanted it done ages ago but never brought up the claim that she said she'd want to die until later on, then I'd be suspicious.

He decided to wait for seven years to "honor his wife's wishes". It took him seven years, no matter WHAT his justification is, to finally "honor" her "wishes"?

 

Seems real suspicious.

-=Mike

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

I think it would be great if someone out there stepped up and proposed a treatment for Terri involving embryonic stem cell therapy. Oh man would this thing turn into a circus then.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/WolfsonReport.pdf

 

38 pages from the State of Florida.

 

one sample

Theresa’s husband, Michael Schiavo and her mother, Mary Schindler, were virtual partners in their care of and dedication to Theresa. There is no question but that complete trust, mutual caring, explicit love and a common goal of caring for and rehabilitating Theresa, were the shared intentions of Michael Shiavo and the Schindlers.

 

In late Autumn of 1990, following months of therapy and testing, formal diagnoses of persistent vegetative state with no evidence of improvement, Michael took Theresa to California, where she received an experimental thalamic stimulator implant in her brain. Michael remained in California caring for Theresa during a period of several months and returned to Florida with her in January of 1991.

 

Theresa was transferred to the Mediplex Rehabilitation Center in Brandon, where she received 24 hour skilled care, physical, occupational, speech and recreational therapies.

 

Despite aggressive therapies, physician and other clinical assessments consistently revealed no functional abilities, only reflexive, rather than cognitive movements, random eye opening, no communication system and little change cognitively or functionally.

 

On 19 July 1991 Theresa was transferred to the Sable Palms skilled care facility. Periodic neurological exams, regular and aggressive physical, occupational and speech therapy continued through 1994.

 

Michael Schiavo, on Theresa’s and his own behalf, initiated a medical malpractice lawsuit against the obstetrician who had been overseeing Theresa’s fertility therapy. In 1993, the malpractice action concluded in Theresa and Michael’s favor, resulting in a two element award: More than $750,000 in economic damages for Theresa, and a loss of consortium award (non economic damages) of $300,000 to Michael. The court established a trust fund for Theresa’s financial award, with SouthTrust Bank as the Guardian and an independent trustee. This fund was meticulously managed and accounted for and Michael Schiavo had no control over its use. There is no evidence in the record of the trust administration documents of any mismanagement of Theresa’s estate, and the records on this matter are excellently maintained.

 

After the malpractice case judgment, evidence of disaffection between the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo openly emerged for the first time. The Schindlers petitioned the court to remove Michael as Guardian. They made allegations that he was not caring for Theresa, and that his behavior was disruptive to Theresa’s treatment and condition.

 

Proceedings concluded that there was no basis for the removal of Michael as Guardian Further, it was determined that he had been very aggressive and attentive in his care of Theresa. His demanding concern for her well being and meticulous care by the nursing home earned him the characterization by the administrator as “a nursing home administrator’s nightmare”. It is notable that through more than thirteen years after Theresa’s collapse, she has never had a bedsore.

 

By 1994, Michael’s attitude and perspective about Theresa’s condition changed. During the previous four years, he had insistently held to the premise that Theresa could recover and the evidence is incontrovertible that he gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care. This was in the face of consistent medical reports indicating that there was little or no likelihood for her improvement.

 

In early 1994 Theresa contracted a urinary tract infection and Michael, in consultation with Theresa’s treating physician, elected not to treat the infection and simultaneously imposed a “do not resuscitate” order should Theresa experience cardiac arrest. When the nursing facility initiated an intervention to challenge this decision, Michael cancelled the orders. Following the incident involving the infection, Theresa was transferred to another skilled nursing facility. Michael’s decision not to treat was based upon discussions and consultation with Theresa’s doctor, and was predicated on his reasoned belief that there was no longer any hope for Theresa’s recovery. It had taken Michael more than three years to accommodate this reality and he was beginning to accept the idea of allowing Theresa to die naturally rather than remain in the non-cognitive, vegetative state. It took Michael a long time to consider the prospect of getting on with his life – something he was actively encouraged to do by the Schindlers, long before enmity tore them apart. He was even encouraged by the Schindlers to date, and introduced his in-law family to women he was dating. But this was just prior to the malpractice case ending.

 

As part of the first challenge to Michael’s Guardianship, the court appointed John H. Pecarek as Guardian Ad Litem to determine if there had been any abuse by Michael Schiavo. His report, issued 1 March 1994, found no inappropriate actions and indicated that Michael had been very attentive to Theresa. After two more years of legal contention, the Schindlers action against Michael was dismissed with prejudice. Efforts to remove Michael as Guardian were attempted in subsequent years, without success.

 

Hostilities increased and the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo did not communicate directly. By June of 1996, the court had to order that copies of medical reports be shared with the Schindlers and that all health care providers be permitted to discuss Theresa’s condition with the Schindlers – something Michael had temporarily precluded.

 

Random question:

 

If she is unable to swallow, would she be able to swallow water?

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Shouldn't he at least REMOTELY honor his commitment?

 

What is he supposed to do, exactly? They may be married, but she's a vegtable. Again, is he supposed to have been sitting next to her hospital bed for the last however many years?

 

You'd think after one, they had a good idea of what her condition was.

 

Well, yeah, I would, but I'm not a doctor; I thought it was possible that she's been getting worse over time, as opposed to being that fucked, right away.

 

But yeah, seven years without saying anything about it (assuming of course, that's she's been this fucked the whole time) does seem suspicious to me.

[Guest TJH]

The woman's mind, which is her self, is dead. Simply because her body is able to maintain function through the aid of machines is no reason to do so.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Forget it, I'm not going to argue a point I half-heartedly can muster the energy to care about.

Edited March 23, 2005 by Jobber of the Week

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

The 11 circuit court of appeals upheld the federal judge's ruling and refused to reconnect the feeding tube. No idea what happens next.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

So, giving somebody water is now not allowed?

 

That is torture.

At least she didn't put undies on Terri's head.

 

And if Mikey is ever put on life support, I'm sure you'll be able to find a few people out there willing to pull the plug *raises hand...*

[tommytomlin 0]

Can you guys go back to being the world's lone superpower now?

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

If you gave her water, she WOULD die right now. She cannot swallow.

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

So, giving somebody water is now not allowed?

 

That is torture.

At least she didn't put undies on Terri's head.

 

And if Mikey is ever put on life support, I'm sure you'll be able to find a few people out there willing to pull the plug *raises hand...*

Why do you feel it necessary to bring Abu Gharib and Michael Moore into this discussion?

[CanadianChris 0]

World of difference between allowing nature to take its course and causing a death by not allowing nutrition to be administered.

How so? Water isn't going to get into her body naturally.

So, giving somebody water is now not allowed?

 

That is torture.

-=Mike

Like I said, she was actually arrested for trespassing.

And if her parents tried to give her water, they'd be prevented, too.

-=Mike

What would they do with the bottle of water, anyway? She can't swallow, so she has no way of ingesting it.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

Mike, you've completely destroyed your argument. You went way too far out on the limb to be able to pull it back.

 

Like you said, you would not argue with a federal court's opinion on the matter. As it stands today, a federal judge and a federal appeals court BOTH have dismissed the case.

 

It is now being appealed to the Supreme Court.

 

Hasn't this gone on long enough. I mean, how many times do the parents have to lose to get the message that they've exhausted their legal options?

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Why do you feel it necessary to bring Abu Gharib and Michael Moore into this discussion?

 

Abu Gharib, no. Mikey Moore -- not EVERY discussion, although it seems like it at times.

 

And my "Mikey" in this case was for Terri's lesser half. However, since "Mikey" usually means Mr. Moore at this place, I shouldn't have said "Mikey" in this instance. I throw myself upon the mercy of this board...

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

Why do you feel it necessary to bring Abu Gharib and Michael Moore into this discussion?

 

Abu Gharib, no. Mikey Moore -- not EVERY discussion, although it seems like it at times.

 

And my "Mikey" in this case was for Terri's lesser half. However, since "Mikey" usually means Mr. Moore at this place, I shouldn't have said "Mikey" in this instance. I throw myself upon the mercy of this board...

My bad, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

[Guest MikeSC]

Mike, you've completely destroyed your argument. You went way too far out on the limb to be able to pull it back.

 

Like you said, you would not argue with a federal court's opinion on the matter. As it stands today, a federal judge and a federal appeals court BOTH have dismissed the case.

 

It is now being appealed to the Supreme Court.

 

Hasn't this gone on long enough. I mean, how many times do the parents have to lose to get the message that they've exhausted their legal options?

I am arguing, at this point, that it'd more humane to give her a lethal injection. There are issues with this case that won't be resolved --- not least of which are that Michael is one scummy guy --- but if she has to die, make it quick.

 

I also do not like the precedent that this case is setting up.

-=Mike

[Stephen Joseph 0]

I do not like this precendent either. You could not appeal state court decisions to the federal court before this case.

 

She's not feeling anything, so it doesn't really matter. I would agree with your concern if there was any thinking or conscienceness left in her.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

I do not like this precendent either. You could not appeal state court decisions to the federal court before this case.

 

She's not feeling anything, so it doesn't really matter. I would agree with your concern if there was any thinking or conscienceness left in her.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

 

If you couldn't appeal state court decisions to a federal court, then why are there so many Supreme Court decisions on issues that were initially state matters?

 

Now, if you're saying you could not appeal a dismissal, then you've got a point. But if a decision is handed down, you could appeal till the cows come home.

 

Evidently, they ain't comin' home for a while.

 

--Ryan

[Stephen Joseph 0]

I meant dismissal.

 

This is one of those days where I really should be drinking coffee nonstop

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

I hereby second that motion. I need the biggest fucking cup of java offered. Might be time for a Dunkin Donuts Great One.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

So they can't conciously let this woman die to ease her suffering but it's cool to make an unconcious decision to send your sons and daughters to die over in Iraq?

 

How much money has been wasted on this turnip so far that could've gone to save the lives of people who actually could have a life?

 

This shit is fucking ridiculous. Somebody needs to ask Mary Schindler how the weather is in denial because that's where she's been living for quite some time now.

[Guest MikeSC]

So they can't conciously let this woman die to ease her suffering but it's cool to make an unconcious decision to send your sons and daughters to die over in Iraq?

 

How much money has been wasted on this turnip so far that could've gone to save the lives of people who actually could have a life?

 

This shit is fucking ridiculous. Somebody needs to ask Mary Schindler how the weather is in denial because that's where she's been living for quite some time now.

I sincerely hope that you are never required to face this situation yourself.

 

It boggles my mind that the left has no problem treating a woman in a way that they wouldn't treat a dog.

-=Mike

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Pretty much all of my family members are in favour of being taken off life support if they ever turn into a Terri, yours truly included.

 

Keeping her alive is delaying the inevitable.

 

How people can say that we have no right to take a humans life is beyond me. We do it every day in all kinds of circumstances but when it's time for somebody to die who deserves to be at peace there's a huge uproar.

[Vern Gagne 0]

N one has any idea what Terry Schiavo wants, and bringing up what you or anyone you know wants, means absolutley nothing in this case.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I was responding to Mike's comment about me being in that situation but thanks for checking out the details.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I wasn't refering to your post, jackass.

[Guest MikeSC]

Pretty much all of my family members are in favour of being taken off life support if they ever turn into a Terri, yours truly included.

Then good for you and your family. Write a living will and it's not a big concern. It's quite easy to say something without facing it.

 

I'm sure if you asked a young model if she'd want to live should her face be horribly disfigured, she'd say no.

 

Doesn't mean that should it happen and she be incapacitated for a while, that we should kill her.

 

I can say I wouldn't want to live if I was paralyzed --- but let's say I get paralyzed. Does that mean I still want to be killed?

Keeping her alive is delaying the inevitable.

So?

 

So what if it "delays the inevitable"?

 

Would you have removed Christopher Reeves' life support machines because they "delayed the inevitable"?

How people can say that we have no right to take a humans life is beyond me. We do it every day in all kinds of circumstances but when it's time for somebody to die who deserves to be at peace there's a huge uproar.

We have no proof that she wanted to die. Her unfaithful husband who has 2 kids with another woman --- and, sadly, there is also a nurse who claimed she went to the police AND her superiors involving his treatment of her.

 

I don't trust HIM.

-=Mike

[Vyce 0]

So they can't conciously let this woman die to ease her suffering but it's cool to make an unconcious decision to send your sons and daughters to die over in Iraq?

[Lord of The Curry 0]

Nice picture but it doesn't work.

 

Nice to see all those "Save my son and daughter in Iraq" protests didn't do anything but a vegetable with a selfish mother will get the attention of the entire country.

[Guest MikeSC]

Nice picture but it doesn't work.

 

Nice to see all those "Save my son and daughter in Iraq" protests didn't do anything but a vegetable with a selfish mother will get the attention of the entire country.

Their sons and daughters openly volunteered for the military.

 

There is considerable disagreement that Terri wanted to die.

-=Mike