During the evidentiary hearing ordered by the court of appeals, 5 experts addressed this issue.
The two experts hired by the Schindlers argued that Terry "has a small amount of isolated living tissue in her cerebral cortex." The other three experts, two hired by Schiavo and one hired by the court, claimed that there is no living tissue in Terry's brain cortex.
Although the physicians are not in complete agreement concerning the extent of Mrs. Schiavo's brain damage, they all agree that the brain scans show extensive permanent damage to her brain. The only debate between the doctors is whether she has a small amount of isolated living tissue in her cerebral cortex or whether she has no living tissue in her cerebral cortex. The evidentiary hearing held on remand actually focused on an issue that was not the issue we anticipated would be the primary issue on remand. The parents contended that Mrs. Schiavo was not in a persistent or permanent vegetative state. Both Dr. Maxfield and Dr. Hammesfahr opined that she was not in such a state. They based their opinions primarily upon their assessment of Mrs. Schiavo's actions or responses to a few brief stimuli, primarily involving physical and verbal contact with her mother. The three other physicians all testified that Mrs. Schiavo was in a permanent or persistent vegetative state. The guardianship court was most impressed with the testimony of Dr. Bambakidis, who concluded that Mrs. Schiavo remained in a permanent vegetative state.
All these experts had complete access to Terry's medical records, and they also had the opportunity to examine Terry personally. All these examinations were video-taped and entered into evidence.
Through the assistance of Mrs. Schiavo's treating physician, Dr. Victor Gambone, the physicians obtained current medical information about Theresa Schiavo including high-quality brain scans. Each physician reviewed her medical records and personally conducted a neurological examination of Mrs. Schiavo. Lengthy video tapes of some of the medical examinations were created and introduced into evidence. Thus, the quality of the evidence presented to the guardianship court was very high, and each side had ample opportunity to present detailed medical evidence, all of which was subjected to thorough cross-examination. It is likely that no guardianship court has ever received as much high-quality medical evidence in such a proceeding
Second District Court of Appeals in Florida.
The one who saw her once every 4 months during the last few years? The one who quit when the feeding tube went back in under Terri's Law?
"Small amount of isolated living tissue" doesn't sound promising, but perhaps Hammesfahr has similar precedent cases he can cite where improvement occurred.