Posted on 03/26/2005 12:11:03 PM PST by TexasRainmaker
First, this case has boiled down to Michael Schiavo's testimony that it was Terri Schiavo's wish not to be put on life-prolonging technologies, including feeding tubes.
He and his attorney said Terri made it clear years ago that she would not want to live in such a condition -- even though she never made a living will. They said she once made the comment to her best friend after seeing a movie in which a character was in such a state. "She said, 'No tubes for me,' " Michael Schiavo said.
Her feeding tube was inserted on February 25, 1990. Michael Schiavo petitioned the courts in May of 1998 to have the tube removed.
Wouldn't that mean he was actually acting counter to her wishes for over 8 years?
In fact, it wasn't until the settlement money from the original lawsuit was paid, that Michael Schiavo had a DNR placed in Terri's medical chart. But if is contention is that this was her pre-injury wishes... why did he not object to the initial insertion of the tubes shortly after the injury?
Second, despite the fact that courts have ordered the feeding tubes removed pursuant to the questionable wishes as relayed by Michael, why does that include surrounding the Hospice with armed guards and prevention of the parents from taking in their own food and water to supply to their daughter?
Even if the court is acting in a manner so as to follow her alleged wishes not to have life-prolonging technology, how on earth does this include preventing regular food and water from being given to her?
So sorry, kingattaz - I was on another site and I just copied and pasted it before I read your thread. Thanks SO much for responding.
no problem....i hope that helps :)
It doesn't matter even if she DID say "no tubes for me". I'm not from the US, but doesn't the law there still state that euthanasia and suicide is still illegal?? If Dr Kervokian (sp?) was put in jail for helping people die who ASKED to die, why could Michael not be charged with the same crime? Anyone know the law here, is euthanasia legal or not??
Excellent post & point!
None of you guys got it right. It was because, during those 7 seven years after her "accident" there WAS NO LAW STATING THAT FOOD AND WATER is considered medical treatment. AFTER Mikie and George Felos got food and water to be considered life support did he start saying that this was Terri's wishes and petitioning the court (Greer) to have the feeding tube removed and to "let her die". I'd REALLY like to know how they got that law amended to included feeding tubes for PVS patients. Anyone out there know the history of this law???. THAT'S why Michael didn't say anything about Terri's "wishes" for seven long years!
See my post #20 - I found the information.
Where were all these "witnesses" when all this began. They werte non existant because they weren't there. God, this is getting more like DU every day.
When you've tried for years with NO success, it's time to let her go.
You're missing the point. If he is right and she said "no tubes for me" then he's been working against his wife's wishes for all these years and that's pathetic....especially now that he's claiming moral superiority in "keeping his promise to carry out her wishes"...
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.