Just who are the statists in the case of Terri Schiavo?

Second Distrcit Court of Florida ^ | 10/27/03 | jwalsh07

[jwalsh07]

The judiciary in Florida ordered the guardian, at this time Michael Schiavo, to remove the feeding tube.

They claim the right to do this because of the LAWS of the state of Florida. Well, the same legislature that endowed the judiciary with the dubious right of playing God has removed that right in this case.

My thesis is simple. If you support the judiciary ordering the death of citizens absent their informed consent or clear, convincing and consistent evidence that that would have been her choice, then you are supporting the statist position.

Fire away!

[jwalsh07]

The Schindler brief on why Michael Schiavo should not be the guardian.

[jwalsh07]

FYI

[jwalsh07]

Waht do you think of my thesis Marvin? :-}

[Maelstrom]

Couple of problems.

She isn't brain dead, and...

...with a little speech therapy, she wouldn't need a feeding tube.

...with a little physical therapy, she would be able to restore her health.

...with a little occupational therapy, she would be able to return home and possibly even work at a job.

These are problems for the husband and those who support his decision...
...for the rest of us, they're statements to the remarkable human spirit and the miracle of modern medicine.

To deny her sustenance...
To deny her the chance to receive therapy...
To deny her the chance to recover as much as possible...
...is murder.

[jwalsh07]

Yes, I would agree with you.

But there is more than one issue at play here. I have noticed that many of those here who take the side of removing Terri's g-tube seem to think that those supporting the Florida Legislature changing the law are statists. I'm here to dissuade them of that notion as well as convince them that the only people with Terri's best interests at heart in this discussion are her blood relatives and as such should have been appointed her guardian.

The judge ordering the g-tube removal is an abomination in more ways than one, IMHO.

[tessalu]

Psalms 38:"12": They also that seek after my life lay snares for me: and they that seek my hurt speak mischievous things, and imagine deceits all the day long.

God is a helper of the helpless, and in him we trust.

[T'wit]

>> It is about Theresa Schiavo's right to make her own decision

That's easy enough. Just ask her to dictate and sign an affidavit saying she'd like to be dehydrated to death and have her body burned, get it notarized [a statist element to be sure, but we can live with it], and present it to the judge.

[sharkhawk]

Did they order the removal of the feeding tube, or did they allow the legal guardian to make the decision. Subtle but important distinction on who is being the statist.

[jwalsh07]

From the text of the Appellate Courts decision linked above:

In Schiavo I, we affirmed the trial court's decision ordering Mrs. Schiavo's guardian to withdraw life-prolonging procedures. Schiavo I, 780 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert.

Do you approve of that?

[sharkhawk]

I don't approve of the court ordering the guardian to withdraw the tube. I do approve of the guardian having the right to do it. I don't want the courts involved in close issues like this. The court should choose the guardian, then back off.

[HiTech RedNeck]

It is a tragedy that Terri's right to life can be ceded with so little legal support to her guardian. And not even an "easy" death... this is about getting DRIED and STARVED damn it! (Literally, damn it... it is from hell)

[jwalsh07]

Schiavo 3 Oct 21,2001 opinion by the 2nd DCA

[sharkhawk]

These decisions are made by the legal guardians every day. She is not the only person having a feeding tube removed.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Quite true that this is already common. And quite probably, folks in better shape than Terri are getting this treatment on at least as skimpy a justification. But that doesn't make it any righter.

[sharkhawk]

My point is the family has the right to decide rather than the courts or the govenor. Most of the time they will make the right decision. When the government gets involved is when it gets messy. Normal law has the spouse is guardian, then children, then parents, then the state. If the rest of the family has a problem with the guardian they go to court. The court decides if there is a reason to step in. All steps were followed here, the parents lost. I feel for them, they are losing their daughter, but I fear more that the state will start sticking it's nose in where it doesn't belong.

[jwalsh07]

Florida Statute

744.309 Who may be appointed guardian of a resident ward.--

(1) RESIDENT.--

(a) Any resident of this state who is sui juris and is 18 years of age or older is qualified to act as guardian of a ward.

(b) No judge shall act as guardian after this law becomes effective, except when he or she is related to the ward by blood, marriage, or adoption, or has maintained a close relationship with the ward or the ward's family, and serves without compensation.

(2) NONRESIDENT.--A nonresident of the state may serve as guardian of a resident ward if he or she is:

(a) Related by lineal consanguinity to the ward;

(b) A legally adopted child or adoptive parent of the ward;

(c) A spouse, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, niece, or nephew of the ward, or someone related by lineal consanguinity to any such person; or

(d) The spouse of a person otherwise qualified under this section.

(3) DISQUALIFIED PERSONS.--No person who has been convicted of a felony or who, from any incapacity or illness, is incapable of discharging the duties of a guardian, or who is otherwise unsuitable to perform the duties of a guardian, shall be appointed to act as guardian. Further, no person who has been judicially determined to have committed abuse, abandonment, or neglect against a child as defined in s. 39.01 or s. 984.03(1), (2), and (37), or who has been found guilty of, regardless of adjudication, or entered a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to, any offense prohibited under s. 435.03 or under any similar statute of another jurisdiction, shall be appointed to act as a guardian. Except as provided in subsection (5) or subsection (6), a person who provides substantial services to the proposed ward in a professional or business capacity, or a creditor of the proposed ward, may not be appointed guardian and retain that previous professional or business relationship. A person may not be appointed a guardian if he or she is in the employ of any person, agency, government, or corporation that provides service to the proposed ward in a professional or business capacity, except that a person so employed may be appointed if he or she is the spouse, adult child, parent, or sibling of the proposed ward or the court determines that the potential conflict of interest is insubstantial and that the appointment would clearly be in the proposed ward's best interest. The court MAY NOT appoint a guardian in any other circumstance in which a conflict of interest MAY OCCUR.

------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly, MS's situation is one in which a conflict may occur because of his new family. The judge has not followed Florida Law in allowing MS to remain as guardian.

[logic]

No, but this is the only case we are aware of where the obvious is labeled 'Lie' and the obvious lie is being labeled 'Truth'.

I believe the husband beat his wife nearly to death and has bribed the judge to finish the job now that he got millions from her (or at least was lucky enough to run into a judge who supported him idiologically.)

Personally I think they both need to be lynched. This is the perfect example of how there is no justice in the American justice system. There is not even legal and illegal anymore, it boils down to little tyrants in each court room that do what they want when they want and if you're rich and lucky enough you just may get your way after two or three appeals (just don't hold your breath or you'll be laying next to Terri!)

[logic]

Why would the judge follow Florida law when he can't even follow common sense?

[HiTech RedNeck]

This is about much more than Terri's parents losing Terri; this is about Terri being made to lose her own life to starvation, when what she allegedly said she didn't want (to be on "tubes") might not even be necessary. Florida requires better proof to send murderers to Old Sparky (or New Needle).