Posted on 10/31/2003 8:16:51 PM PST by Future Useless Eater
Saturday November 1, 2003 1:01 AM
By VICKIE CHACHERE
Associated Press Writer
TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A judge appointed a University of South Florida professor on Friday to independently investigate the case of a severely brain-damaged woman at the center of a right-to-die battle.
Jay Wolfson, an expert on health care financing, will report to Gov. Jeb Bush and recommend whether the stay the governor enacted to keep Terri Schiavo alive should be allowed to remain.
Schiavo suffered severe brain damage when her heart stopped due to a chemical imbalance and has been in a persistent vegetative state for more than a decade. Doctors have said there is no hope for her recovery.
Her husband, Michael Schiavo, has fought to have her feeding tube removed, saying his wife did not want to be kept alive artificially.
Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, dispute that claim and have fought to keep their daughter alive, saying they believe she could be rehabilitated.
Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for six days in October before the Florida Legislature and Gov. Jeb Bush enacted a special law to have it reinserted. The law also required a guardian to be appointed.
George Felos, the attorney for Michael Schiavo, and the American Civil Liberties Union filed briefs this week challenging the constitutionality of the governor's action. The state is expected to respond on Monday.
The judge said that if the law is found to be unconstitutional, Wolfson is to cease his work.
The Schindlers had objected to Wolfson's appointment, claiming comments he made to a television station indicated he was biased against the newly enacted law. The judge said he found no evidence of bias.
Wolfson did not return calls seeking comment.
The judge ordered Wolfson to report to the governor in 30 days, but said the deadline could be extended if needed.
pur·port·ed ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-pôrtd, -pr-) adj.Assumed to be such; supposed: the purported author of the story.
[Middle English purporten, to set forth, from Anglo-Norman purporter : pur-, forth (from Latin pr-. See pro-1) + porter, to carry (from Latin portre. See per-2 in Indo-European Roots).] source
Got a problem with the definition of the word, 'purported'?
Again I refer you to the court record.
Got links?
The findings of the court reflect that indeed Michael Schiavo made extensive efforts at providing rehabilitive therapy for Terri. Not good enough?
Not if "the court" who made this "finding" = ONE MAN, Judge Greer, who has shown himself to be biased against the Schindlers. Most higher courts that refused to hear the case based their decision on jurisdictional issues, not the merits of the Schindler's case, IIRC. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post.
If you are unable to see the obvious differences between circumstance reported in the article you posted and the testimony and evidence presented in this case, you are totally devoid of any critical thinking ability
You're setting up a straw man. No one has said that Maria Tetto's case is exactly the same as Terri's, in every single aspect. Of course there are "irrelevant" differences: For instance, Maria is different in that she is not married to Michael Schiavo -- so fortunately, her parents who love her are able to make decisions regarding her care. You fail to show any known and "relevant" difference between Maria Tetto and Terri Schindler Schiavo.
What's important to note about Maria Tetto's case is that, just as in the Terri Schiavo case, doctors insisted that Maria's smiles and hand squeezes were mere "reflexes," and that she had no hope of rehabilitation. THEY WERE WRONG.
I used the words "freak of nature" because they apply.
Thanks for revealing yourself, Dr. Mengele.
Since that time, Schiavo has even refused to allow therapy to prevent Terri's hand contractions so that her nails would not dig into her palms!
Maria Tetto's parents were able to obtain medication that prevents the contraction of Maria's hands. NOW MARIA IS ABLE TO WRITE.
Interesting also, that you fail to note another "relevant" similarity between Maria Tetto and Terri Schiavo: They are both still fed by feeding tube.
Maria can speak, make jokes, laugh, write, and go to school. Why can't Terri be given the chance?
The young lady that was the subject of the article did not receive a diagnosis of persistant vegetative state. The only dignosis provided in the article was that she was in a coma. Vast difference.
Her father states that he never had to make a life or death decision because early on there had been a medical finding of the presence of brain activity. Even so he states that he would have delayed such a decision for some 6 months. In the Schiavo case years had passed before that life or death decision was contemplated. It has now been 13 years without a change in Terri's condition.
"Not if "the court" who made this "finding" = ONE MAN, Judge Greer, who has shown himself to be biased against the Schindlers. Most higher courts that refused to hear the case based their decision on jurisdictional issues, not the merits of the Schindler's case, IIRC. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post.
You allege that Judge Greer is biased. This is not true as a matter of law and I would assert as a matter of fact. Even if the Schindlers believed that Judge Greer was biased they did not raise this on appeal except to argue that the denial of their "emergency motion to hold ruling in abeyance pending development of additional medical evidence". Pursuant to Florida law, an adverse finding isn't sufficient to prove bias. The appellate court appropriately stated that even if this issue was raised and argued they would not have reversed.
Had the Schindlers (or their attorneys) thought that there was a bias on the part of Judge Greer, they simply had to file a disqualification motion at any time prior to his decision and within a prescribed time limit after the incident that caused them to believe, for whatever reason, that the Judge was biased against their cause. Under the application of Florida law, the Judge would have had to grant their motion to disqualify. The first disqualification is a gimmee. The Schindlers failed to raise bias as an issue until after a final order was issued. Won't work.
I won't provide you the links- there are things you should do for yourself. However I'll give you a few leads.
Search for:
Schindler v. Schiavo (In re Guardianship of Schiavo), 780 So. 2nd 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(Schiavo I)
Schindler v. Schiavo (In re Guardianship of Schiavo), 792 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(Schiavo II)
Schindler v. Schiavo (In re Guardianship of Schiavo), 800 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(Schiavo III)
Schindler v. Schiavo (In re Guardianship of Schiavo), Case Number 2D02-5394, Opinion Filed June 6, 2003, ALTENBERND, Chief Judge, FULMER and STRINGER, JJ., Concur
It all contained within these decisions. It again should be noted that the Florida Supreme Court and The U.S. Supreme Court has declined this case. Are all the Judges biased??
a "chemical imbalance." What, like an injection of potassium solution? Calcium solution? that would do it.
Seems these three have a great deal in common.
Enthusiasm for a cause can be stifled when other emotions are stifled.
You really ought to read the June 6 2nd DCA opinion before you commit yourself to this statement.
From that opinion: "The Schlindlers have urged this court to conduct a de novo review of the evidence in this case, primarily because of the finality of this decision for their daughter."
The court then correctly pointed out that "it would be improper to reveiw such a fact-intensive determination using a de novo standard." The Judges of the appellate court then "closely examined all of the evidence in this record". They go on to say:
"We have repeatedly examined the video tapes, not merely watching short segment but carefully observing the tapes in their entirety. (emph. added) We have examined the brain scans with the eyes of educated laypersons and condsidered the explanations provided by the doctors in the transcripts. We have concluded that, if we were called upon to review th guardianship's decision de novo, we would still affirm it". (emph. added)
It would seem that while the de novo review "is not appropriate" from a legal standpoint, what they did in arriving at their decision was a de novo review.
If you would take the time to read this opinion in its entirety you will see the lengths the Court went to in arriving at their decision.
When I read this extrordinary decision, I wept.
Michael called Terri's dad who told him to get off the phone and call 911, which he did. Terri's dad then immediately called her brother who lived in the same apartment/condominium complex as Terri and Michael and he went over there right away and was there when paramedics arrived.
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.