Posted on 03/23/2005 5:31:11 AM PST by conservativecorner
You have probably heard Michael Schiavo’s attorney George Felos say things such as this about Terri Schiavo’s brain:
"CT scans just don't lie. When you look at that picture, you see a big black hole filled with water where her brain used to be," Felos said. "There is no cognition, no thought process, no awareness."
Now the doctor at CodeBlueBlog has found the CT scan that Felos is referring to, and what the doctor has discovered is both shocking and wonderful: Felos is wrong, the courts have been wrong. Terri’s brain is not damaged as much as we have been led to believe.
Update: The doctor has also looked at Terri's bone scan report, and concludes that "someone either was physically abusing Terri or they dropped/mishandled her severely."
CodeBlueBlog:
The most alarming thing about this image . . . is that there certainly is cortex left. Granted, it is severely thinned, especially for Terri's age, but I would be nonplussed if you told me that this was a 75 year old female who was somewhat senile but fully functional, and I defy a radiologist anywhere to contest that.
I HAVE SEEN MANY WALKING, TALKING, FAIRLY COHERENT PEOPLE WITH WORSE CEREBRAL/CORTICAL ATROPHY. THEREFORE, THIS IS IN NO WAY PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE THAT TERRI SCHIAVO'S MENTAL ABILITIES OR/OR CAPABILITIES ARE COMPLETELY ERADICATED. I CANNOT BELIEVE SUCH TESTIMONY HAS BEEN GIVEN ON THE BASIS OF THIS SCAN.
The worrisome, no alarming thing, for me, was that I heard a bioethicist and several important figures on the major media describe Terri's brain as MUCH WORSE. One "expert" said that she had a "bag of water" in her head. Several experts described her as a "brain stem preparation"
These statements are wholly inaccurate. This is an atrophied brain, yes, but there is cortex remaining, and where there's cortex (?life) there's hope.
If you starve this woman to death it would be, in my professional and experienced medical opinion, the equivalent of starving to death a 75-85 year old person. I would take that to the witness stand.
Wouldn’t you love to see the CodeBlueBlog doctor get the chance to take the witness stand and explain that Terri doesn’t have a "bag of water" in her brain? Spread the word about what the doctor has discovered -- and if you have an in with the Schindlers or their attorneys, please direct them to the CodeBlueBlog web site, where they can contact the doctor.
I just found Terri's 1991 bone scan and I believe she was I just found Terri's 1991 bone scan and I believe she was I just found Terri's 1991 bone scan and I believe she was abused, physically.
Link to bone scan.
Correction - she did have therapy, until a few months after the malpractice awards, at which point the systematic denial of therapy began.
Please keep posting about your hatred of lawyers, though, because I think it actually helps improve the opinion of the professions.
Lawyers are prosecutors, who do their best to put murderers and rapists in jail. But you hate them.
Lawyers fight for Second Amendment rights in the courts. But you hate them.
Countless conservative lawyers go to court to fight against government abuses, to stop greedy lawsuits, or to protect the rights of the innocent. But you hate them too.
Hey, do you also hate the lawyers who are trying to keep Ms. Schiavo alive? Just curious....
Wolfson said he completely respects Dr. Hammesfahr's conclusion that Terri is NOT in PVS.
However, Wolfson could not give weight to Hammesfahr's opinion in court. Only 'Judge' Greer could.
Greer threw out Hammesfahr's testimony and evidence, because when Greer demanded that Hammesfahr produce a videotape of a patient in a condition "identical" to that of Terri, and who later improved, Hammesfahr could not immediately do so.
As I posted earlier, the doctor who implanted those electrodes long ago urged Michael Schiavo to have them removed.
Michael Schiavo never did so.
Nor has Michael Schiavo permitted Terri to have routine dental or gynecological care, medication for infections, or routine therapy.
See a pattern here?
You really should not chose to argue over a fact that you do know the answer beforehand:
1. http://nobelprize.org/help/faq/index.html
Has X been nominated as a candidate for the Nobel Prize, or where do I find a list of Nobel Prize nominees?
According to the Statutes of the Nobel Foundation, information about the nominations is not to be disclosed, publicly or privately, for a period of fifty years. The restriction not only concerns the nominees and nominators, but also investigations and opinions in the awarding of a prize.
Moreover, a congresscriter is the one who nominated him.
2.From the Nov. 2002 Opinion regarding his testimony:
Dr. Hammesfahr operates his clinic on a cash basis in advance which made the discussion regarding Medicare eligibility quite irrelevant. A lot of the time also was spent regarding his nominations for a Nobel Prize. While he certainly is a self-promoter and should have had for the court's review a copy of the letter from the Nobel committee in Stockholm, Sweden, the truth of the matter is that he is probably the only person involved in these proceedings who had a United States Congressman recommend him for such an award. Whether the committee "accepted" the nomination, "received" the nomination or whatever, it is not that significant. What is significant, however, and what [undermines] his creditability is that he did not present to this court any evidence other than his generalized statements as to the efficacy of his therapy on brain damaged individuals like Terry Schiavo. He testified that he has treated about 50 patients in the same or worse condition than Terry Schiavo since 1994 but he offered no names, no case studies, no videos and no tests results to support his claim that he had success in all but one of them. If his therapy is as effective as he would lead this court to believe, it is inconceivable that he would not produce clinical results of these patients he has treated. And surely the medical literature would be replete with this new, now patented, procedure. Yet, he has only published one article and that was in 1995 involving some 63 patients, 60% of whom were suffering from whiplash. None of these patients were in a persistent vegetative state and all were conversant. Even he acknowledges that he is aware of no article or study that shows vasodilatation therapy to be an effective treatment for persistent vegetative state patients. The court can only assume that such substantiations are not available, not just catalogued in such a way that they can not be readily identified as he testified.
Respecting one's opinion means little...in his own report, he agrees with the conclusion that Terri is PVS. Read his report and then get back to me (no conspiracy theories, please).
Lawyer, right? JAG?
From a legal point of view- which course would be wiser for Terri's family- asking the 11th to hear this en banc- or going to the SCOTUS?
Oh really?
May 1990... Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy
July 1990... Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center
November 1990... Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies
January 1991... Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon
July 1991... Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy
All this information is available on the web.
Have to try en banc, since there was one dissent, and some hope.
Personally, IMHO, I think that the Congress tried to get cute, made an assumption that was completely errant, and is going to be on the losing side in this one.
You hit the nail on the head! I actually heard Brian Wilson of Fox News (I think that's his name) ask a guest whether they will be able to reinsert Terri's feeding tube "back into her arm" if ordered to do so by court order! A feeding tube in the arm? Also, having only observed video of Terri, it seems to me that she is not persistantly vegetative, that she can communicate, but that she is severely brain impaired. I also heard Eleanor Clift refer to her as "brain dead". Now, there are people that would argue that Eleanor makes comments that would lead us to believe that ELEANOR is brain dead, but I don't think that one can say that Terri is brain dead. Personally, I feel that starving and dehydrating her is cruel and inhuman.
For some odd reason, you apparently assume that lawyers are all on the same side. Most lawsuits actually have two sides to them (yes, its true!), and for every money-grubbing ambulance chaser on one side, there's an attorney on the other fighting him.
And no, its not just about money. Most of those who choose between plaintiff or defense work do it as much for philosophical reasons as for money.
Most people know that, though, so keep up with the lawyer bashing. You're so one-sided that it discredits your position. So thanks!
Is there any PROOF that Terri wanted to be starved to death? I'm not a doctor and I am not going to pretend I know one iota about what you guys are referring to, but the question above remains the crux of this case.
Is that suppose to mean you are more credible or something than this doctor? Is Jim Noble your real name? Where do you practice medicine?
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf
You are not alone.
Maybe we can get a hobby clubbing baby seals for respectability.
In any case, the diagnosis of "PVS" is extremely difficult to make with accuracy. All doctors I've seen on both sides of the argument stress that proper diagnosis takes many, many hours of clinical observation.
The only doctor who spent many hours observing Terri in person was Dr. Hammesfahr.
Please read
New York Times Magazine: What if there IS something going on in there?
This is a fascinating and revealing article about new research regarding patients diagnosed to be in "PVS" -- in a newspaper that is not known to be a conservative or pro-life bastion.
You may be surprised at the new MRI evidence of complex thinking activity going on in the minds of severely brain-damaged PVS patients.
The doctors in the study were shocked and have had to revise their thinking about PVS.
You really should make it clear that you are exerpting from a polemic by Dr. Cranford that appeared on a blog. Us physicians on one side of opinion (ditzy "vitalists") are readily discredited, but Hemlockers are always objective, right?
The court thought there was proof.
Why did Terri's husband get to make the decision about whether she should live or die?
Michael Schiavo did not make the decision to discontinue life-prolonging measures for Terri.
As Terri's husband, Michael has been her guardian and her surrogate decision-maker. By 1998, though -- eight years after the trauma that produced Terri's situation -- Michael and Terri's parents disagreed over the proper course for her.
Rather than make the decision himself, Michael followed a procedure permitted by Florida courts by which a surrogate such as Michael can petition a court, asking the court to act as the ward's surrogate and determine what the ward would decide to do. Michael did this, and based on statements Terri made to him and others, he took the position that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures. The Schindlers took the position that Terri would continue life-prolonging measures. Under this procedure, the trial court becomes the surrogate decision-maker, and that is what happened in this case.
The trial court in this case held a trial on the dispute. Both sides were given opportunities to present their views and the evidence supporting those views. Afterwards, the trial court determined that, even applying the "clear and convincing evidence" standard -- the highest burden of proof used in civil cases -- the evidence showed that Terri would not wish to continue life-prolonging measures.
Somewhere I've seen a page that talked about exactly what she said about being kept alive by artificial means. The other people who testified were (I think) Michael's brother and his brother's wife.
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.
