Posted on 04/07/2005 2:59:57 AM PDT by schmelvin
"Not bad enough to kill, but bad enough to argue over dishes they'll never use."
There's something about a death in the family that makes people go absolutely goofy. My experience is that's it's usually someone by marriage instigating the crap.
"You know your mom/dad would want you to have those dishes, you should raise hel*."
Remember that $100 you lent your brother 800 years ago? You should get his car. LOL
US congress? While we're at it, let's just abolish states' rights.
I agree with you. We should try everything in our power to save Mae.
I have also notified AARP. I'm hoping they'll get involved in this the way the disability groups got involved in Terri's fight.
Don't forget, this Judge for Mae in Alabama is NOT an Attorney!
And the others who pretend they don't see what the concern is are as well.
Who will take an action item to file a complaint of Senior Abuse? State is in Alabama.
I have witnessed some truly goofy stuff. And I can't blame it only on inlaws.... one was an aunt who comes from the ogre side of the family ;~D
But I had to feel for my step-dad when his first wife (before we knew him) died. After the memorial, relatives came back to the house and started trying to pack things up. They said... what are you going to do with the furniture? "Huh? he said? I'm going to sit on it! I'm still alive, and I still live here!" He had to shoo them out.
nic glad to see you over here.
Trying to find the fax 4 free postings here, I came upong this post. Sorry that it's a bit off topic:
Friday Fax Relay - UN Disabilities Negotiation/Right-to-Die
Ravings of John C. A. Bambenek ^ | 2-4-05 | C-FAM
Posted on 02/04/2005 11:45:12 AM EST by jbamb
FRIDAY FAX
February 4, 2005 Volume 8, Number 7
Controversy Surrounds UN Disabilities Negotiation
Today the United Nations closes the fifth in a series of two-week drafting sessions intended to produce an internationally binding convention on the rights and protection of people with disabilities. Despite mounting pressure to finalize the text, which the UN has been drafting since mid-2002, much controversial work remains. UN negotiators addressed only a fraction of the overall draft, and most of the language that pro-lifers find troublesome remains in the document.
Among the most controversial passages is an article that pro-life advocates believe grants a right to die. The text makes illegal all "medical or related interventions," possibly including life-saving nutrition and hydration, carried out without the "free and informed consent" of the person concerned or his legal representative. Interventions without prior consent may only be carried out if they are in the "best interests" of the person concerned.
A spokesman for the National Right to Life Committee addressed the drafting group to ask for the removal of this language, saying the language "would also prevent life saving interventions for persons attempting suicide." According to a statement issued by a pro-life coalition at the conference, the "best-interests" exception is also hazardous because it "allows a very subjective judgment to govern whether or not a person with disabilities should live, and would not protect the disabled person from assisted suicide or euthanasia."
Another point of contention is an article requiring that the disabled must have the "means necessary" to exercise their "reproductive rights." Among other states, Colombia objected to this language because UN enforcement committees define "reproductive rights" as synonymous with abortion.
On ongoing problem is definitional as it is not yet clear which groups will fall under the convention. There is no definition of "disability" and no groups are currently excluded from the convention. In contrast, the Americans with Disabilities Act specifically excludes "homosexuality and bisexuality" and "transvestitism, transsexualism, pedophilia." Despite its possible application to these groups, some countries, including New Zealand and the EU, strongly supported this language.
Several countries expressed concern that the convention should not create new rights that have not previously been agreed upon in internationally binding legal documents. The Holy See said that "our purpose here is not to create new rights, nor to diminish the existing rights of persons with disabilities, but rather to preserve the human rights of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others."
The UN is set to resume drafting the convention from August 8-19, 2005.
Copyright 2004 - C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute). Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.
Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 427 New York, New York 10017 Phone: (212) 754-5948 Fax: (212) 754-9291 E-mail: c-fam@c-fam.org Website: www.c-fam.org
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1335957/posts
IT IS A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD!
SHEESHK!
PLUS, THE FAMILY WANTS THIS INFORMATION OUT!
What you think all court decisions are supposed to be private?
So if a judge continues to rule the wrong way- we never know and keep alecting him?
YOU REALLY DON'T GET IT! THIS IS A REPUBLIC!!! NOT AN OLIGARCHY!
THE JUDGE IS IN GA!!
IT IS ALL IN GA!
Mae's brother and sister and nephew live in ALABAMA.
"He had a conflict of interest"
Her dad had financial problems.
There was money received in the mal-practice suit for Terri's care.
Were he the guardian would there be a conflict of interest?
Very good. And make sure she also understands that it's obvious that having a Living Will is NOT going to ensure that her wishes are followed.
It has been suggested that people use the "Will to Live" instead. Isn't this ridiculous? You now have to have it in WRITING that you want to live. If you don't have it in writing, that's an excuse to kill you. If you have a living will that doesn't cover every single situaton, spelled out, they'll use any ambiguity to kill you. Of course, by necessity, it is ambiguous, as none of us can read minds and know what illness/disability will befall us in the future; we don't know how laws will be changed after we can no longer speak for ourselves and then have laws applied to us retroactively; we don't know if the "reasonable person" standard will be met by a judge whose reasonableness is unreasonable.....it's absurd.
The bloggers who exposed the forged memos and dug up dirt on John Kerry were:
1) Dealing with matters that had been thrust into the public arena by CBS (via its broadcast) and by George Bush and John Kerry when they chose to run for public office, thus legally giving up much of their right to privacy (if a court finds you to be a "public figure" which these men obviously are, a whole different set of rules apply, re slander, libel, use of image, etc.).
2) They were not getting information from a public official who was divulging private information that s/he had access to only as a result of the position. Some long-retired secretary of a long deceased military officer sharing her vague memories about matters involving someone who is now President of the United States by his own choice, is hardly comparable to a judge currently involved in a very private family dispute sharing "breaking news" on the matter with any stranger who calls up and asks for it. Most of the information on John Kerry was either from public records that were legally available, or from private citizens recalling events in their own past and choosing to make those recollections public.
Mae is physically in Georgia, her siblings are in Alabama. Shouldn't all phone calls and filings be to Georgia?
Everybody, can we please get focsed here on MAE?
Or would it be better if I started a new thread that was a thread dedicated to Action?
I didn't mind the scuttlebutt while waiting for validation. But I am now satisfied that Mae's story is true, and am hoping we can focus on her.
What does everybody think best, Start a new call to Action Thread, OR keep on this one but ask that the posts be directly realted to helping Mae and a decrease in "table talk" as my card playing friends would say. What is best? Time to vote.
City Contact Information:
Tom Hall, City Manager
Meg Kelsey, Assistant City Manager
City Hall - 3rd Floor
200 Ridley Avenue
Tel: 706.883.2000
Fax:706.883.2020
Lukken, Jeff - Mayor 706-883-2010
Dekmar, Lou - Chief of Police 706-883-2612
Edmondson, Rev Willie - City Councilman 706-882-7817
Gore, Dr Tom - City Councilman 706-884-2641
Hall, Tom - City Manager 706-883-2010
Moore, George - Mayor Pro Tem 706-884-5923
YES!!!
Hi, ExPat.....I think you've been corrected about the state in which this is happening....the elderly lady's in GEORGIA; the judge is in Georgia, but the "guardian" is in Alabama.
: )
KEEP
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.