Posted on 01/22/2006 11:35:40 AM PST by LouAvul
SAFETY HARBOR, Florida (AP) -- Terri Schiavo's former husband has married his longtime girlfriend, friends and family members say.
Michael Schiavo and his longtime girlfriend, Jodi Centonze, were wed Saturday at a church in Florida. The bride's brother says it was a very emotional ceremony.
Schiavo's former wife, Terri, had suffered severe brain damage more than a decade ago and died last March after her feeding tube was removed.
Michael Schiavo had argued his wife was in a vegetative state, and would not want to be kept alive artificially.
...snip.....
The newlyweds first met in a dentist's office and began a relationship after Terri Schiavo was already in a nursing home. They have two young children.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
That reminds me of Fr. Pavone talking about the flowers in a vase of water, sitting inches away from Terri as she was dehydrated to death. The cut flowers had more rights than Terri.
Or maybe this is yet another example of that twisted theology someone was talking about earlier. You know, we are two really mixed up humans! Are we even humans?? Maybe we're just blobs of cells that have completed differentiation and are near our end stage of (gulp) existence!! Do blobs have souls?
Oh, just listen to me blubbering on again! I think I'm mutating!!!
The unwashed masses understand more than you think. Just because someone thinks it's wrong to murder disabled people, or even dying people, does not mean they're stupid. You can explain it all day long, and some people will still think murder is wrong. Go figure!
Only by clowns. It's an honor to be laughed at by the same people who laugh at President Bush, Jim Robinson, Jesus Christ, and a host of others we would all do well to emulate.
If you're going to accuse Jim of allowing death threats to be posted on Free Republic, you should supply links to those posts, and ping the person you're accusing.
You obviously have evidence all the courts did not. Please elaborate..
If you believe she was actually "alive" at the time they stopped giving her water. Maybe being alive means something different to you than it does to me.
Perhaps some of her brain was still there but none of it necessary to obtain a cognitive life that "according to her wishes" would have kept her alive. Whatever brain was left was slowly dying and the brain tissue continued to deteriorate.
And who are we to say what God would want or not, so why play HIM?
We say what God wants all the time. It says what he wants in my bible. He wants us to live our lives to the fullest before we eventually join him for eternity. God does not make things happen, he merely allows things to happen and if he wished Terri to stay alive he would have allowed it.
You seem to be of the opinion that a damaged brain is no brain at all.
Untrue - But most neurologists saw her brain damage as basically having no brain at all. Thousands of people are living today with brain damage and are able to do many things a cognitive person can. So your assumption that brain damaged is somehow a death sentence in my life is a wrong assertion.
My nephew has a terminal illness and I see his life worth living damaged or not. It is a shame when people like you think that lives that are damaged should be destroyed or put down.
My prayers for your nephew and his family. Is his life worth living for himself or is worth him being with you here on Earth as long as you can keep them alive. If the person is unable to know whether they have a life or are alive due to lack of brain function then it only ends up being the family who say why his life is worth keeping on artificial life support. If your nephew was told that prolonging life through artificial means will only further deteriorate his abilities and cognitive brain then you would one day have to make the decision whether to further harm him by keeping him from what would have ultimately happened if humans didn't intervene with a breathing and feeding tube.
God help you and those who believe this awful lie. It is not compassionate to dehydrate someone who isn't dying, it is murder!
No, I do not believe it was compassionate to dehydrate her to death, as you are saying that she was not dying and that not giving her water is what killed her. She was dead already. I don't find it compassionate to take a husbands and wifes right to say what their spouse wanted in circumstances like these to be trampled upon by the Libs and parents to enforce machines to keep her alive in a state that she was unaware of her own life.
I pray for your nephew and hope God decides he should live a cognitive life until he joins him in heaven. Once you find you are only delaying the inevitable by using machines to keep the "body" functioning and that there is no hope of recovery then perhaps you will make the right decision for the nephew and not a personal opinion that you fight medical science to sustain somewhat life occurrences such as a moving finger or a moving eyeball. I am not speaking of giving up right away. Fight for Life, not for lifelessness reversed through artificial means. Not for 13 years or more if evidence of recovery is unobtainable.
I could speak the same of your unorthodox definition of the word "alive"
Why not post your facts after making such a statement that proves me so wrong. You will find perhaps that the little brain she did have left was not dead? OK. I guess . We need the three munchkins.
As Coroner, I must admit
I thoroughly examined it.
Her brains not only merely dead,
It really, most sincerely dead.
""And as for the insurance money, he spent it all on her care. ""
You're 0 for 2. Maybe you should check out the facts before you spread any more rumors.
I did post facts of where the money was spent. Perhaps you missed that post. Most of the money went for lawyers and courts to fight what was Terries wishes and in her best interest as to her wishes.
Your facts to the contrary? Oh, I see you didn't post any in your reply to say I didn't know the facts.
Monies will go to pay back medical bills and medicaid from the guardianship. That is fact.
I think it's a pretty safe bet that she didn't want the disabilities inflicted on her, but that's a far cry from wanting to be tortured to death for it. Evidence presented in court indicates she would not have wanted to be killed. Three strikes!
I haven't seen this evidence but I would assume that it came from her family who were obviously doing everything and anything in their power and higher powers to fight against her right to not have her body kept alive so that she wouldn't have her family miss her.
Looked like foul balls to me.
Does it have to square? Can't, and shouldn't this issue be on a case per case scenario? Otherwise it is way to easy to make jumps from lifesupport to brain dead.
Michael was in court and the doctors told that her bulimia is what caused her collapse and that thier negligence to catch the prognosis is what started her on life support and that "Terri would have wanted to live, not die at the hands of bulimia".
He held out hope for recovery as many would but when he found out that recovery was unobtainanble that's when he stated her wishes that she would not want to be braindead for life. I don't believe they said, if I go into a coma, don't do anything to try and help me. It was more like, Since nothing can be done for me, please pull the machines that do it for me if getting better is out of the question.
And, no, no one confirmed that Terri had had bulimia at any time
Then how did he win the malpractice suit?
Yes, and I am waiting to be flamed for mentioning this.
I am curious as to what the record is for complaining about something that has already been settled. You may be in line for breaking it.
Do you? It is not possible to objectively state that Schiavo's testimony is "weightier" than Schindler's. Your assertion that it is, as if this were objective fact, is in reality a statement of your own opinion. You think Schiavo's testimony carries more weight.
Also the statements she made in the presence of Scott Schiavo...
You missed the part where I imparted the amazing revelation that Scott Schiavo is the plaintiff's brother.
Why don't we quote your post in full?
It still won't justify you putting words in my mouth.
The judge who heard all the sworn testimony determined that he had "clear and convincing evidence" as to Terri's wishes. This is the legal standard approved by the citizens of Florida.
If you wish to dispute this over and over again, be my guest.
"Still, it wouldn't be such a big deal if they had just offered the woman food and water by mouth, but Judge Greer nixed that."
Because it had been previously determined, in 1990, 1991 and in 1992, that Terri could not swallow voluntarily.
Yes, she could swallow, but not voluntarily. Which is a requirement when being fed orally.
What make you believe that a person who couldn't swallow in the 90's could suddenly swallow 10 years later? You have an example of a similar case?
Micheal Schiavo and George Greer conspired to murder and did murder Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Those are the facts.
Bravo! Very well said (#58)
What I do understand is that Terri had caregivers who said that she enjoyed sucking from a washcloth, and that she was fed small amounts of soft foods at one point. I'm not absolutely certain of the time frame, but I think it was while she was at Sabal Palms. I'd have to go back to review. Is it possible that she began to regain some skills? Yes. Is is probable? No.
How interesting that you think I meant Terri regained anything suddenly. Nothing could be further from the truth. Of course, this is my opinion, so you can do with it what you wish, but I am of the opinion that Terri may have been gradually emerging from a persistent vegetative state over a long period of time, and was at the point of the minimally conscious state at her death. Of course, this can never be corroborated, because Judge Greer refused to allow Terri to be tested for this state. The legal reason is clear. The very first lawyer for the Schindlers, Pamela Campbell, made a glaring error by not questioning whether Terri was in a true PVS or not. By not contesting it, Terri was legally deemed to be PVS. Without contesting her diagnosis, Campbell might as well have signed Terri's death warrant herself.
Whether it was medically the case would have to have been borne out by tests that were never used on Terri, especially an fMRI (functional MRI). Why were they not used? Michael had no need to show that Terri had any more capability than PVS. He wasn't going to spring for it, for sure. There may have been a point where Michael would have had Terri tested had he known about the advancements in neurology, but I feel very confident saying that the boat was moving away from the shore whether Michael went along for the ride or not. That's my way of saying that once George Felos was on board, there was nothing Michael could do to stop Felos from pursuing Terri's death. Felos made himself perfectly clear in his writings that can be found on the internet (his bios about himself, his aspirations to complete a second book with Terri's litigation as the central theme). Felos was looking for (and found in the Schiavo case) another notch in his attorney's belt.
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.