Posted on 03/29/2005 8:58:34 AM PST by Long Cut
We, the Witness Protection Program For Freepers, aka the Wild Turkeys, aka the Coalition of the Sane, have through mutual discussion and rigourous thought, determined that:
1. The discussion threads regarding Terri Schiavo (hereafter referred to as "TS") have become too full of innuendo, rumormongering, hyperbole, hysteria, namecalling, paranoia, and general poor behavior to warrant participation.
2. Said threads have degenerated into "echo chambers", wherein the same, common thoughts are continually posted again and again, and the same old disreputable, unconfirmed and/or false urban myths are propagated.
3. Anyone who joins in said theads with alternative viewpoints to the most extreme posts are routinely driven away with slander, accusations, and vile namecalling.
4. No data or evidence contrary to the "prevailing opinions" are accepted, considered, or discussed; and in fact are rejected outright in most instances.
5. That the continued calls for armed insurrection, military or paramilitary involvement, impeachements of politicians and judges, and death threats are embarassing, stupid, shortsighted, doomed to failure, and contrary to most if not all conservative thought prior to this case, as well as damaging in the extreme to FR and the conservative movement as a whole.
6. That such emotional, hyperbolic, and propaganda-driven hysteria is in fact contrary to all conservatives USED to stand for.
7. That the holding up of swastika and other Nazi imagery towards the police and the Bushes, the use of children as political props, and the disruption of the peace at the Woodside Hospice can only reflect badly on conservatives in general, and should be discouraged.
8. That the pursuit of this issue to the exclusion of all others by the GOP has damaged, perhaps beyond repair, the pursuit of other important issues as well as the reputation of the GOP, FR, and conservatism.
The WPPFF is NOT of one mind as to the case of TS or its correct outcome. In fact, wide disagreement exists within our little group. However, we are united in our wish that reason and sanity be respected in the discussion, as well as the rights of all parties involved or participating. We wish to discuss this as adults and intellectuals, as conservatives and as FRiends, not as children screaming past each other on some playground of hysteria. We wish for facts and evidence to be provided, discussed reasonably, and considered fairly.
We reject all accusations of Naziism, "death cultism", or other slander as methods of debate. We reject the practice of "spamming" multiple threads, of posting unending vanities, and the posting of propaganda and calls for violence. We reject, in fact, all unseemly and childish behavior which has come to characterize this case on FR.
We DO invite others to come and reasonably discuss the issue. We have no problem with FReepers who wish to debate in a rational and fair manner, and with due respect for their fellow FReepers. We have NO problem with those whose views are formed by religion; however we reject "preaching" or "being beaten with a Bible" as legitemite debate tactics. Not all of us are Believers, and such tactics only cheapen the source.
If a FReeper finds this an acceptable meansd to discuss this and other issues, they are welcome to join in and participate. Those who find pleasure in attacks, flame-baiting, slander, stalking, and personal atacks will be ignored, and their egos will go unfed.
We assume this thread to be a zone of sanity in an overheated atmosphere. Thus, a general amnesty is in effect. If posters conduct themselves within the guidlines above, we will be happy to discuss and debate with you. If a poster wishes to apologize for past slips of the tongue, or for possible "over-the-top" statements to another, it will be graciously accepted, and your company welcome.
Please bring a sense of humor; we feel that too many have been taking themselves too seriously lately.
Let the discussion begin!
Signed,
The WPPFF, aka The Wild Turkeys, aka the Coalition of the Sane.
"The reasoning was that she would choke to death. Now if the feeding tube was removed and she had been fed orally and then choked to death, where would that put us?"
===
AND WHAT IF SHE DIDN'T (choke to death)?
What if she had been able to swallow and live, proving that she didn't need "artificial" feeding and she is NOT in PVS?
Of course this would have demolished the entire falso foundation of the house of cards MS, Felos and Greer built. This could not be allowed to happen, that's why Greer wouldn't allow Terri to be fed by mouth.
Can you come up with any other explanation for Greer's decision to deny allowing her to be fed by mouth? Is it legal to deny food and nutrition, even by natural means to a person?
I'm not saying I agree with the reasoning behind such an order. I just wonder what you would think if she has been fed and then choked to death? Would that have then been killing her, knowing there had been medical differences of opinion on it?
There is credible evidence that Schiavo's expert witness has misdiagnosed PVS in the past. There is credible evidence that there was reasonable doubt as to her PVS status. Do you think the state should order the death of citizens on evidence that does not meet the reasonable doubt standard? And as an adjunct tot hat question, do you think that state ordered death sentences are not subject to federal review?
If "ifs" and "buts" were fruits and nuts, we'd all have a very merry Christmas...
The answers to your questions and now, tragically, moot.
I know what the court decisions held and I know that anybody who says his removal as guardina is irrelevant is simply fooling themselves. Florida law is pretty clear, if MS is removed as guardian next in line is the adult children of which there were none. After that, the parents and siblings. MS removed as guardian years ago means the case goes away, the Schindlers take care of their daughter and all the vitriol at FR is directed somewhere else. You deny this?
He turned it over to the court then went in on the same footing as her parents to let it hear both sides. Once the court decided it was her wish, it was treated as though she had a directive. Note that their decisions all *order* the tube removed - they do not say *the guardian is allowed* to remove it if he chooses.
Oh, I noticed alright and that is the part where I lose all contact with those who supported the decision. I don't think the state has any right to oreder the death of its citizens absent due process. To me due process in the case of state ordered death sentences requires a trial by jury, an attorney representing the citizen, judicial review right up to the SCOTUS and a finding beyond reasonable doubt.
If she had been fed, and then died, the cause would still have been the removal of the feeding tube, because otherwise she could have lived to a normal life expectancy.
If you don't think this will ever happen to anyone again, you are very naive.
She swallowed gallons of saliva without aspirating. Some of her nurses testified that they gave her jello and water without her aspirating years ago. I know the argument goes that swallowing saliva is reflexive and not a conscience act but we will never know if she could or couldn't because the judge, as a state actor, ordered nothing to pass her lips. Do you think we should give state those powers?
The Schindlers don't have to be unbiased, nor did the Schiavos, they simply should not be allowed to be a guardian if their interests may conflict with the person they have been appointed to guard.
You asked questions based on the specifics of Terri's case, not the applicable law.
Just please remove the Nazi flag and Auschwitz pictures.
PLEASE!
They are out-of-bounds for any civil discussion and any casual lurker will think he's stumbed into some trash site like Stormfront.com
Then you need to change the laws in the state of Florida.
In Florida, end-of-life issues are handled at the probate court level, and there are no juries in probate courts in Florida.
Again, the screaming at the judges here is misplaced. The focus should be on the Florida legislature. Wanna bet that, a year from now, nothing, absolutely nothing, will have been done to the law that allowed this horrible turn of events?
PLEASE!
I second that request.
Bump to that.
You think there are no other patients who are, or may be, in the same situation?
Agreed.
In September of 1990, she was brought home, but following only three weeks, she was returned to the College Park facility because the "family was overwhelmed by Terry's care needs."
On 18 June 1990, Michael was formally appointed by the court to serve as Theresa's legal guardian, because she was adjudicated to be incompetent by law. Michael's appointment was undisputed by the parties.
The clinical records within the massive case file indicate that Theresa was not responsive to neurological and swallowing tests. She received regular and intense physical, occupational and speech therapies.
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.
The timeline jumps around a bit but, so to put it in order, Michael is made guardian in June 1990, Terri goes home in September 1990. Both Michael and Mrs. Schindler were partners in the care of Terri, so when Wolfsen writes that the "family was overwhelmed by Terri's care needs," I assumed he was talking about both Michael and the Schindlers.
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.