Posted on 03/25/2013 5:13:32 PM PDT by Morgana
As Holy Week begins and we reflect on the passion of Jesus Christ, it is especially appropriate to remember another person who eight years ago at this time was subjected to a tortuous, brutal and heinous death – one whose anniversary falls this year on Easter Sunday: Terri Schindler-Schiavo.
And just as the Church now ushers in our new Pope Francis, I am reminded how two days after Terri’s death we also lost our Holy Father. As Pope John Paul II lay dying at the Vatican his aides would later tell the Schindlers that when he learned of Terri’s death, it was “the final blow to his broken heart.”
For most pro-lifers following Terri’s case of “legal” murder by her estranged husband Michael and his right-to-die advocate attorney George Felos, the verdict was a haunting reminder of the “lawful” murder of millions of our innocent preborn. In fact, many began calling it the Roe v. Wade of euthanasia.
But in Roe v. Wade few remember that it was actually a legal precedent in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) that set the stage for current abortion laws. In Griswold, the Supreme Court ruled that the denial of contraceptives was unconstitutional under an alleged “right of privacy.” Who would have thought that Griswold, combined with a later alarming Florida legal precedent, would predetermine Terri’s fate?
In 1986, Estelle Browning, an 86-year-old woman, suffered a stroke that left her severely brain-damaged. Unable to swallow, a feeding tube was inserted by attending physicians. Browning, however, had a written advance directive, stating she didn’t want artificial sustenance if she became terminally ill. In 1987, the court denied her cousin’s petition to remove the tube, basing its decision on Florida’s Life-Prolonging Procedures Act, which allowed patients to refuse medical treatment only under specific circumstances. Browning, the judge ruled, did not qualify.
After Browning’s natural death in 1990 the Second District Court of Appeals overturned this decision based on the “right to privacy,” and the Florida Supreme Court upheld the ruling. According to Justice Rosemary Barkett, who wrote for the 6-1 majority, “The right to privacy and freedom from intrusion into one’s own body is rooted in our nation’s philosophical and political heritage.”
In absence of written directives, the evidence of a patient’s wishes could also be determined solely by the guardian, which is called “substituted judgment.” This “judgment” is supposedly not what the guardian wishes, but what the patient (allegedly) desires. The only necessary qualifier would be “clear and convincing evidence” as simple as an oral statement, claiming that the person would not want to live. Once this is satisfied, the Court ruled, the State can not override the so-called “right to privacy.”
Ten years later, this “clear and convincing evidence” became the entire focus of Terri Schiavo’s case. However, the testimonies given from both the Schiavo and Schindler witnesses were contradicting hearsay, leaving Judge George Greer as the sole and final arbitrator of whom he chose to believe.
Media reports claimed that at least 19 other judges had reviewed the case, but in reality not one other judge heard any testimony whatsoever. The Courts simply rubber-stamped a legal decision, not an evidentiary one. In their view, Greer had acted in accord with the letter of the law, despite that the “clear and convincing” evidence was simple hearsay. The appellate courts only had to ensure that the law was followed—not that the evidence was credible—because hearsay is subject to opinion, not legalese.
During Terri’s final weeks, as the State Department of Children and Families attempted to take Terri into protective custody, attorney George Felos reminded Judge Greer of a startling fact: Even if Michael himself suddenly decided not to remove Terri’s feeding tube, it still had to be done, because the court had determined by “clear and convincing evidence” that this was Terri’s wish.
More appalling was Greer’s reaction to the Schindlers requests for swallowing tests for Terri as he angrily thundered, “I don’t want anybody putting anything into that girl’s mouth!” Horrifically, this statement would later be used to deny Terri the right to receive Holy Communion. However, food and water given orally is not considered medical care even by Florida’s weak definition.
In addition, sustenance provided artificially or naturally cannot be denied to a disabled person under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It states: “Nothing in the Act or this part authorizes the representative or guardian of an individual with a disability to decline food, water, medical treatment, or medical services for that individual.”
But because the Federal Court refused to hear simultaneous lawsuits brought by 26 disability groups decrying these and other violations, Greer’s ruling stood unchallenged. Not only had Terri’s nurses testified that they had fed Terri gelatin and pudding in the past, but Terri also easily swallowed the average one-liter output of saliva healthy people consume daily. That Greer would not allow oral feeding, swallowing tests or therapy simply codified his own intent to mandate Terri’s execution.
The second determination for ordering Terri’s feeding tube removal was the claim that she was in an irreversible persistent vegetative state (PVS) with no hope for recovery. Two of Michael’s and one state-appointed neurologist testified that Terri was in a PVS, completely contradicting 16 other medical professionals who attested she was not.
Judge Greer later admitted he didn’t bother reading any of those statements because he simply didn’t find them credible. Never mind that one of Michael’s witnesses, Dr. Ronald Cranford is an advocate for “End-of-Life Choices,” a group promoting euthanasia. Or that the court appointed witness, Cleveland neurologist Peter Bambikidis, a colleague of Felos, spent only 30 minutes examining Terri. In truth, Greer’s mind was set.
During subsequent hearings in early 2005, 33 others – including 14 physicians (6 who are neurologists) submitted testimony declaring Terri had been misdiagnosed, while none were submitted by Felos to contradict their findings. Again, Judge Greer refused to consider the growing and glaring evidence. Consider what neurologist Dr. James Gabel, M.D., M.S., F.A.H.A, reported:
“Terri Schiavo is not in a persistent vegetative state. The parts of Terri Schiavo’s brain which would allow her to perceive pain, her thalami, were clearly intact and visible on her CT scan images shown by her own husband, Michael Schiavo, on national television. The parts of Terri Schiavo’s brain, which would allow her to swallow on her own, were also intact, and, in fact, she did not suffer from medically significant dysphagia (swallowing difficulty). If she had, she would have been dead long ago from a condition known as aspiration pneumonia, an infection in the lungs which is the result of inhaling one’s own saliva.”
In short, Terri was not dying. She was not suffering or receiving any type of life support. She was simply disabled and unable to feed herself.
Terri could have been fed orally and by law she should have been. Granted, she might have needed swallowing therapy to stimulate the muscles in her throat that had not been used for many years, but this would have been a relatively short and simple treatment. Yet Judge Greer refused to even consider it, incredibly noting that “Terri might aspirate food into her lungs and die a cruel and painful death.”
The day before the scheduled removal of Terri’s feeding tube on March 18, 2005, the Senate Health Committee and the House Government Reform Committee issued congressional subpoenas requiring both Michael and Terri to appear before Congress for a March 28 hearing. That morning, while Hospice was being served with Congressional letters instructing them not to remove Terri’s feeding tube, Attorney Barbara Weller and Terri’s sister Suzanne were happily explaining the upcoming trip to an elated Terri. But unbeknownst to them, the opposition was quickly moving to seek Greer’s intervention. As the 2:00 PM deadline approached, Greer made an unprecedented ruling to ignore the Federal subpoenas and ordered Hospice to proceed with the tube removal according to the court mandate.
This would be the first instance of Congress’ utter failure to legally preserve Terri’s life. It is a federal crime to obstruct or prevent such witnesses from appearing and while members of Congress appeared outraged and threatened to charge Greer with Contempt of Congress, they did nothing to enforce the subpoena, nor did they punish Greer for his judicial misconduct.
In the final week before Terri’s death, Congress passed legislation that was immediately signed into law by President Bush requiring the Federal Court to do a “de-novo” review of the entire case. Yet once more, they did nothing to enforce the very legislation they passed.
Clearly, Judge Greer violated several Federal Laws and stretched the interpretation of Florida statutes as well. But in the end, it would be the appalling court precedent of Estelle Browning’s case that allowed him to do so. In truth, one relatively insignificant district judge usurped the authority of the State Legislature, the State Executive office, Congress and the President of the United States. He succeeded in condemning an innocent woman to death for no other “crime” than that of being disabled.
Eight years ago this might have been simply viewed as “the perfect storm”. Timing is everything, they say. But frighteningly enough with Obama-care looming, it is now an inevitable “climate change” – a mere glimpse of the government-mandated “futile care policies” descending upon us.
Without question, such laws, the courts, and tyrannical authority must be stopped. For if our society becomes one that judges on the basis of a “quality of life” ethic, that society will selfishly seek any means to rid itself of any imperfections or burdens—at any cost. In the words of Clemens Von Galen, the Bishop of Munster, Germany, who fought fiercely against Hitler’s euthanasia policies in 1939, “Once we admit the right to kill unproductive persons, then none of us can be sure of our own life.”
No better time than this week to reflect – Terri – we will never forget!
Yes, and like I said if the opposition to zerocare had any cajones, the entire fiasco that is zerocare could be stopped dead in its tracks.
But that would mean that rinos would have to vote to defund zerocare. Will never, ever, ever, happen.
I think you and I have a different view of selfishness and abuse.
I said that I would not agree to a feeding tube for somebody I love. To me that would be cruel, inhumane and selfish.
Let's agree not to name each other in a medical POA. :)
My dad was buried 25 years ago today. I had had to make the decision to not put him on life-support.
When an ultrasound showed "somethimg ?" around my mother's liver and the doc called to have more tests, I said that if she had something I didn't want to know until it caused her a problem because I didn't want treatment that was worse than anything she might have...at her age and with dementia.
Pain management was always my first concern with my parents and I have never regreted those decisions. I wouldn't want to be kept alive just to prolong my life. I'm not afraid to die.
I realize all that, but you assume that the governor of a state has the authority to overrule a husbands decision as to the medical treatment of his wife.....I don't think so.If you can, give me one example where this happened....I still don't think so.....
Timewasting non sequitur.
A feeding tube is not machinery. Any more than giving a baby a bottle is being kept alive by machines.
nonsense
Which question are you whining about? I don’t really have time to keep entertaining a jerk who thinks my husband should be starved and dehydrated to death. I’m a little busy keeping him alive at the moment. My free time is scarce, and I’ve wasted too much of it on you already. I generally avoid your type these days. I try to stay in a good mood, for myself and my husband. So I generally surround myself with people who don’t wish death on people like my husband. So if you’re feeling any guilt about the way you’ve treated your parents, don’t turn to me for comfort. I don’t have time for it.
That is the most absurd comment. Until ...
So I generally surround myself with people who don’t wish death on people like my husband.
Bless your heart.
No, not really. You were suggesting that a marriage license gives rights of ownership, up to and including the right to take the life of a spouse. That would be a bill of sale, not a marriage license.
What a stupid comparison! Apples to oranges.
No, you made the comparison. YOu said that keeping a person alive via feeding tube administered nutrition is keeping them alive “by machine”.
DOn’t worry, everyone except your fellow ghouls sees that you want disabled people murdered and that’s that.
Excellent comment.
“She’s my wife, I get to order her execution/murder”.
Are you saying now that you didn’t mean anything you said, or that you’ve changed your mind? You’ve wasted all day, arguing in favor of killing people whose lives you have declared futile, and now you hint that just maybe that’s not your position. Or do you mean it’s absurd that I don’t have an infinite amount of time to waste on you? Do you really think it’s absurd to have positive people in our lives? I know what you mean by your last remark. Real Southerners say that when they mean it, sometimes after saying something negative, but always when they genuinely mean “bless your heart.” Morons who hate southerners use it to mock real southerners, when they really mean “go to hell.” You’re an imposter, in more ways than one.
murder is not medical treatment, the state has done plenty to stop husbands from murdering their wives
Terri wasn’t on any machines hello
that’s you. Terri wanted to live, see?
See what I mean? You don’t agree that disabled people should be killed, so you must be stupid. It’s already an established fact that their lives are not worth living. You’re holding up the entire class with your stubborn refusal to embrace lesson number one.
terycarl, you are just plain wrong, wrong, it was a murder that jeb bush could have prevented but he pissed away until it destroyed the entire Republican party along with the individual Terri Schiavo
“I HAVE A CONTRACT!”
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.