Question for Legal Minds (Terri's case)

[7thOF7th]

I have a question for the qualified legal minds in the forum. The question is, if Terri Schiavo passes from a court imposed order, will this absolve or render immune from prosecution her husband if it is later found that he was responsible for her condition? Another question is, If she was to continue on the feeding tube but later succumbed to her injuries, would this be considered a homicide if it was found in an autopsy that her injuries were inflicted by her husband?

[walford]

It is doubtful that most people who marry would consciously agree to put their spouse in the position wherein if they are disabled they would grant near arbitrary authority to spend funds allocated for health care on euthanasia lawyers, deny antibiotics, halt dental care, restrict parental visitation, forbid swallowing training, withdraw nutrition when the diagnosis is disputed etc.

This case dramatically illustrates the fact that at least in Florida, this is precisely what one is doing when signing on the dotted line of a marriage license.

Consider this precedent if you're contemplating marriage: Is this a person with whom I would trust my life more than my parents?

I would be unwilling to marry someone who I could not trust in this manner. I suspect most people would agree.

Certainly Terri Schiavo's situation demonstrates the consequences of the law putting the life of another in the hands of any one individual. I know that it is unenlightened of me, but I prefer that an innocent disabled person be afforded the same burden of evidence and available appeals as is afforded an accused mass-murderer.

[Judith Anne]

Additionally, ankle and knee fractures.

Sure sounds like a trauma patient to me.

[Dog Gone]

I just find it inconceivable that someone could have a pelvic fracture, for example, and this never have been noticed for years?

Did her family never visit or talk to her during her marriage? How do you recover from this without medical treatment?

These almost certainly had to be injuries after Terri couldn't talk. These almost certainly have to be medical red herrings to make any sense at all.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I would like to add to those questions.

If by removing the feeding tube (which is artificially supplied sustenance) and then ordering that no food or water even be attempted to be given to said person.

Is this tantamount to murder?

Food and water is not artificial life support. I would argue that it's not artificial even through a tube, but let's for arguments sake say that the tube is artificial. Denying that same person the ability to be given food and water naturally. Is it or is it not murder?

[Judith Anne]

None of those injuries were noted on her initial hospital admission.

They were found after she complained of pain during PT and a bone scan was done. Dates above, I can't recall at the moment, but I think it was 1993. The Schindlers didn't get the records and didn't learn of those fractures until 2002. I imagine they were horrified.

I think, if I recall correctly, that Greer ruled that the statute of limitations on assault/battery had expired, and ruled no additional look at whatever investigation was done at the time.

[supercat]

Food and water is not artificial life support. I would argue that it's not artificial even through a tube, but let's for arguments sake say that the tube is artificial. Denying that same person the ability to be given food and water naturally. Is it or is it not murder?

Let's just say that if I were on the jury, they'd need a barrier to keep me from ripping M"P"S [Michael "Peterson" Schiavo] limb from limb.

[CitizenM]

I know this is a little off your exact topic, but I am trying so hard to think of something that might create some way for someone to stop this killing.

I just sent this fax to Gov. Bush. Now, be nice...no criticism of Bush allowed. This is not for battle. We must all refrain from being negative and hope he can still do something. I hope this helps:

March 28, 2005
The Honorable Jeb Bush, Governor Florida

Urgent: To Save Terri Schiavo

Dear Governor Bush:

Please consider this comment:

Could Terri be saved by a contest that she was psychologically imbalanced when she allegedly said she did not want to live on life support? Could this be challenged now to try to save her life?

Consider this:

Last night Geraldo Rivera on FOX News had a segment where he interviewed a woman who is a specialist who deals with bulimia. The reason was is that this is the condition that is being purported to be the cause of Terri’s heart stoppage. I offer these thoughts:

1. The original diagnosis for Terri's death was nutritional deficiency/bulimia.

2. Later Michael Schiavo won a lawsuit because the doctors mis-diagnosed her and did not recognize the bulimia problem.

3. Schiavo supporters and the media are continuing to offer this as the cause of her "collapse."

Ok...the question – and a possible way to get her a new court hearing, and stop this starvation/dehydration:

1. Bulimia is, basically, a psychological disorder. Bulimics have a very poor self-image; they feel they need to be perfect; many are never cured because the psychosis is so deep. They often die from this psychosis and the eating disorder it causes.

2. In that state of psychologically connected obsession, how could anyone's comment, about such a serious issue as life support could be considered rational?

3. Most medical professionals agree that those afflicted with this disorder are not mentally healthy, often are depressed, irrational.

4. How can any legal system support the desires of a woman who was, evidently, psychologically unbalanced at the time of the "supposed" comment?

If they are going to insist this as the cause, couldn’t it be insisted that the Court be forced to revisit this case, because the decision by Judge Greer did not consider her mental state?

God bless Terri. God bless you for your efforts.

Signature It seems to me this might open the door for a legal investigation/debate, whatever that could, in the meantime, require that Terri's feeding tube be reinserted.

[skr]

If she received broken bones from hospital treatment (the bone scan was in 1991, the initial incident was in 1990), wouldn't the parents have known if the hospital had any responsibility, since they must've visited her during the year in between?

[Brandon]

This case dramatically illustrates the fact that at least in Florida, this is precisely what one is doing when signing on the dotted line of a marriage license.

Anyone who gets married without being aware of these things is an idiot. And anyone who would marry someone who they didn't trust with this power is an idiot squared.

Marriage is a unique institution in our society. It is considered to be so solemn, private and intimate that courts may not inquire as to the private communications between husband and wife. No such "parental privelege" exists. Ironically, it is many of the same people who have championed the uniqueness and sanctity of the marital relationship vis a vis same sex marriages who now are howling that really it ought not to be the spouse who makes life-and-death decisions for those unable to make their own decisions, but the parents.

It's a funny world.

[walford]

It is doubtful that people realize that they are granting near arbitrary authority to deprive a spouse of dental care, parental visitation, rehabilitative therapy, withdrawal of nourishment/hydration if the patient's condition is disputed etc.

Michael Schiavo even thought he had the discretion to allow his wife to die of a urinary tract infection in 1993 [soon after the malpractice award]. Amazingly, Florida law actually prohibited that.

My wife and I are drafting documents to see to such life or death authority does not solely rest on each other's shoulders. [I shall post a version of it when it is done.] We are humble enough to know that such a responsibility is beyond our respective capabilities.

A condemned criminal's life does not rest in the hands of any singular individual. Neither should it be the case for an innocent disabled person.