Posted on 04/07/2005 8:16:31 AM PDT by amdgmary
Judge George Greer, the Florida county jurist at the center of the Terri Schiavo case, ruled against a woman who was fighting to keep her husband alive in 2000.
While Greer has ruled consistently with husband Michael Schiavo, who seeks to terminate his wife's life by depriving of her of food and water, the parallel case suggests the judge may have a predisposition to removal of any life-support devices rather than an inclination toward the legal guardian.
The 2000 case heard by Greer involved the life of St. Petersburg lawyer Blair Clark, a University of South Florida professor. After suffering a heart attack Sept. 9, 2000, his children, who stood to inherit much of his estate, claimed they wanted to honor his wishes to remove him from a ventilator and feeding tube and allow him to die. His wife, Ping, however, believed his condition could improve with therapy and claimed only one month later treatments had not been given enough time.
Unlike Terri Schiavo, Blair Clark, 58, had a living will, which stated: "If the situation should arise in which there is no reasonable expectation of my recovery from severe physical or mental disability, I request that I be allowed to die and that life-prolonging procedures not be provided."
However, his wife believed there was still a reasonable expectation of recovery.
"His living will did not say, 'Don't save me, just let me die,'" his wife pleaded. "They want to kill Blair and I don't know why. I want to ask, 'What's the rush?' I'm the only one who wants to save him. Every time I say yes, they say no. I had to go to court to give him blood."
But on Oct. 24, 2000, Greer ruled in favor of the children and against the wishes of the wife, ordering all mechanical ventilation and intravenous nutrition stopped.
Ping Clark, of Chinese descent, argued that four days of Chinese herbal medicine and acupuncture treatments had showed promise. She asked only for 30 more days of ventilator support and treatments.
Clark relied heavily on the opinion of neurologists, some of whom claimed Clark's chances of recovery were no greater than one in a thousand.
"If you love somebody, one in 1,000 is a chance worth taking, argued Dennis Rogers, Ping Clark's attorney.
After the ruling, Clark's wife was distraught and couldn't bear to visit the hospital to watch him die.
"I cannot see him die," she cried. "I know how much he wants to live. They'll be guilty their whole lives for killing Blair Clark."
Clark died a week after the ruling, Oct. 31, 2000.
Schiavo's feeding tube was removed Friday by order of Greer at the request of her estranged husband, Michael Schiavo, who contends Terri had expressed a wish to not live under her present condition. Parents Robert and Mary Schindler dispute the court's finding that their daughter is in a "persistent vegetative state," citing numerous physicians who believe she is responsive and could benefit from therapy.
Ping. Judge Greer was involved in another case like Terri's in 2000.
This mutt needs to be called to account. My apologies to mutts everywhere.
Ping Clark, of Chinese descent, argued that four days of Chinese herbal medicine and acupuncture treatments had showed promise.
I wonder how many other cases like this the Judge has ruled over. It looks like he has a slant toward opting for death, as long as he isn't the one doing the dying.
This guy had a living will. Its nothing like the Schiavo case.
Clark relied heavily on the opinion of neurologists, some of whom claimed Clark's chances of recovery were no greater than one in a thousand.
"If you love somebody, one in 1,000 is a chance worth taking, argued Dennis Rogers, Ping Clark's attorney.
But it shows that even a Living Will can be subject to opinion. How can one cover all the possibilities for the actual meaning.
..."sharper than a serpent's tooth...."
Well, exactly where does it say - "Give me only one month for expectation of recovery"?
Well, typically the whole point of someone putting such a clause into a living will is exactly because they don't want to be forced to hang around for month after month in such a condition with no reasonable expectation of recovery.
I agree, it's not really much like Terri's case, save a family dispute and a feeding tube. There is something that bothers though, and that's the rush to take him off of it. Although, this guy was on a ventilator as well, and the article doesn't say when the life support was actually removed vs when he died - it only says it was a week after the ruling.
The wife only wanted 30 more days. I know why Greer would disregard that request, but I have a hard time understanding why her kids would fight her on that. I wouldn't want to be in that family at Thanksgiving dinner, that's for sure.
They wanted their inheritance and didn't want to wait 30 days for it.
Living wills should be more specific. That one was too vague.
Actually, by Florida law his living will governed the decisions, not his wife.
I know, the article certainly seems to suggest it.
It's just so hard to accept that there are people out there who would see the death of one parent and estrangement from the other as a good trade-off for financial gain.
Don't bother them with facts they have no bearing.
That wasn't in the article, was it? Guess they don't have to have Thanksgiving dinner with her then, but still.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.