Posted on 03/28/2005 12:38:34 PM PST by Slyfox
I’m not proud of this, but the parallels to Michael Schiavo are undeniable.
When I was eight years old my little sister Joan was barely three. She could talk but no one could understand her. I remember teasing the crap out of her just to see her reaction as she went to dad to tell him how badly I was treating her. His reaction? “What’s the matter, honey? I can’t understand you.”
She would then come back to me and complain about my treatment of her. And, what did I do? I teased her some more. It was really funny at the time. What a feeling of power I had. Dad couldn’t come back to me and give me any grief because he had no idea I was doing to her.
A few years later, I was at a park playing on a merry-go-round. I must’ve been almost eleven. A couple of deaf kids got on and were signing to each other. They were minding their own business, when a older guy jumped on and noticed these two deaf kids talking to each other with one hand and holding on with the other. He was a big guy, well, bigger than me and he began to tease them. He’d bump into them and thump them on the head. I could see them getting agitated and I felt sorry for them, but I did nothing. These two deaf kids were also mute and the bully could not understand them. They tried to tell him to leave them alone. The more he teased the redder their faces got. They finally left the park.
Needless to say, I felt really bad. Because, I knew the powerful feeling of teasing the helpless, but I could also feel their frustration. I learned a lot about bullies that day and a lot about myself. I vowed that I would never treat another human being in such a way ever again.
We are now witnessing a bully getting his way while his victim can say nothing. Imagine for yourself Terri receiving a visit for Michael, with or without a vial of regular insulin. Imagine him entering the room intent on unloading his feelings upon her. He blames her for his state in life. He points his finger at her. He gets in her face. He promises her that things will change.
What a feeling of power he has! He can say anything to her and she cannot tell anyone about it. No one can stand in his way. It is absolutely perfect!
When he leaves the room he smiles to himself completely contented. However, when he leaves the room, with or without a vial of regular insulin, she is very upset. She has no one to confide in because she can not relay to anyone what had just taken place. All she can do is get depressed and stare out the window for a few hours.
Teasing someone who can not effectively communicate is a tremendous rush when you get away with it.
Yep, it sure is.
I think Michael Schiavo is way beyond bully at this point.
Question: Was Ms Schiavo an insulin dependent diabetic at the time of her hypoxic episode in 1990?
But what if it was court-ordered bullying?
And what if 68% to 88% of Americans polled supported the bullying?
It would be wrong to ignore the court and stop the bullying, right?
Because we're a nation of laws and courts, right?
Good thing that a lot of FReepers weren't around when slavery and segregation were being fought. A fair number would approve of your bullying were it ordered by a prick in a black robe.
The lesson in all this is not to trust your fate to the legal system, medical system, political system -- and certainly not the media, if one wants a rational outcome. It means a need for greater self-sufficiency and self-reliance, which begins of course, by making better discriminations and decisions.
Generally, it is not a good idea to marry the first and only person one ever dates. And then when the marriage goes bad, it's not a waste of the years put into it, to get out of it, at whatever cost, or it could cost you your life. There are no guarantees of a happy outcome -- no matter what the demagogues promise. We all take our best shot and make the best from what we know.
Let her will to live, inspire us to make the most of our own lives.
"A bit harsh and judgmental, as well as unfair."
Harsh, yes. So were the Ten Commandments.
Judgmental, yes to that, too. I'm very judgmental. In this case my judgment is pretty clear in observing a number of FReepers who have told me that it is okay for Terri Schiavos adulterous husband to want her dead so he can inherit the remainder of her trust fund that was established by a legal settlement for her care.
They think it is unlawful for the Bush boys to intervene in Terri's death but have no answer for me when I ask them exactly what law the judiciary is citing in sentencing a living person to death without a trial? There is no law, by the way.
And is it unfair of me to say that certain FReepers are condoning murder when certain FReepers are condoning murder?
No sir, it is just stating the uncomfortable truth.
"most respondents were not following the case and mis-characterize her as being on life support (she was not)."
Artificial feeding falls within the medical definition of life support.
You may not agree with it, but it is incorrect to say that it is a mis-characterisation of the situation.
This is a great analogy and the court system is designed by bullies for bullies. The sly-est one wins. The only thing I can say is to hope and pray you never have to enter the court system because it is a black hole. There may be good judges but they are becoming the exception.
"The sly-est one wins."
And the one who files the right motion at the right moment on the right paper. Who knows the right people to get the right law passed so that the judge can rule on the right motion after the golf game. Who acts the best before the jury and knows the right procedure and knows how to dress well and has the right judge. Who is a good actor and has the best smile. Who has the best political contacts and heaviest clout. Who is the most adept at reading the situation as it develops, and can introduce this evidence but keep this piece over here as a trump if needed, or ignore it altogether if necessary.
Let's face it. Since Felos got just under $400K of Terri's rehab $$ and Greer didn't enforce the injustice of it, the law had nothing to do with this. The 'law' is through the looking glass.
The RN would then check on Terri and would notice symptoms of low blood sugar, and Terri would be "crying hysterically" (I didn't realize vegetables cried, much less hysterically). Blood sugar wouln't even register on the meter, indicating life-threatening hypoglycemia.
After administering glucose in Terri's mouth (she swallowed that, didn't she?), she checked the contents of the trash on a hunch, and found insulin bottles carefully wrapped in other paper. She then discovered needle marks under Terri's breasts and in her groin area. It happened on multiple occasions per caretaker's testimony. Greer however, deemed the info "Not Credible," along with testimony of at least two other nurses. Just one other piece of the puzzle the appeals courts never got to review, as it was never admitted into evidence. As I said on another post, it's as if the Schindlers never even showed up.
Michael is a very big man with a vile temper. He must have been quick to bully and pick on people when he was young, and there is reason to think he battered his wife, who is only half his size. Today, one would call him a classic sociopath, which is the same old bully with adult cunning; but completely lacking the moral principles of manhood.
Felos had 5 to 7 years to prepare for this case. He stepped down from the board at the hospice shortly before Terri entered. I would be willing to bet that the right-to-die crowd were just waiting for their Jane Roe to come around. When she showed up it was just a matter of time.
Looks like that doctor who got sued by Michael ought to turn around and sue the pants off Michael for not doing with the money as he was supposed to. After the book deal and movie-of-the-week, Michael should be rolling in dough.
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.