Posted on 11/04/2003 4:45:08 PM PST by nickcarraway
Pinellas Park, FL (LifeNews.com) -- A Florida state court on Tuesday disallowed Terri's parents from entering the legal battle over Terri's Law. They wanted to join attorneys for Governor Jeb Bush in defending the legislation that allowed Bush to ask doctors to reinsert the feeding tube that is allowing Terri to live.
Bob and Mary Schindler, Terri's parents, were represented in the request by attorneys from the American Center for Law and Justice, a pro-life law firm.
"We're very disappointed with the court's ruling," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. "It is clear that state law permits the parents to get directly involved in a case to defend a state law that is keeping their daughter alive. It is unfortunate that the court did not find that the parents have sufficient legal interest in defending the state's actions -- actions that provide the only barrier between Terri and death by starvation.
Sekulow indicated the Schindlers may appeal the decision.
"We are currently examining all legal options available -- including an appeal -- for our clients. We will do everything possible to ensure that the interests of Terri's parents are represented in this case," he said.
Sekulow said the ACLJ is considering several options including filing a motion with the court to reconsider its ruling denying the motion to intervene; filing an appeal with the Florida Second District Court of Appeal; or, representing the interests of Terri's parents with the filing of an amicus brief on the issue.
In court papers filed Monday, Michael's attorneys said the legal battle is between Michael and Governor Bush and that, while Terri's parents have an interest in her well-being, they should not be a party to the lawsuit.
Attorneys for Governor Jeb Bush are expected to file a response to Michael's "Terri's Law" lawsuit this week.
The American Civil Liberties Union is aiding Schiavo in the lawsuit against Terri's Law.
Pro-life attorney Tom Marzen, who monitors end-of-life issues, told LifeNews.com he agrees the Schindlers have a right to be involved.
"The Schindlers should be allowed to intervene since their interests are certainly affected by the outcome of the suit," Marzen explained.
Michael's lawsuit also seeks a removal of Terri's feeding tube for the third time. The Schindlers' petition asks the judge to allow them to be appointed Terri's guardian in place of Michael.
Related web sites:
Terri's family - http://www.terrisfight.org
Ummm... Urine Deficiency Anemia ??? ;-))
.
and under the review post window:
Why not? It's what they're doing anyway. < /sarcasm > If they don't like the laws the legislature passes, they just overturn them. And we thought the people were in control of the government.
I would hope I was not comatose for 13 years
Terri hasn't been in a coma for 13 years. She "awakened" from her coma 4-6 weeks after her collapse in Feb.1990.
my wife would have pulled the plug 13 years ago
Which plug is that, again? Respirator?-Terri's not on one; hmmm ventilator?-nope, she's not hooked up to that either; well, how 'bout the heart machine? Looks like Terri doesn't require one of those either. Forgive me, which plug requiring electricity are you referring to? Terri's not hooked up to any machines, no electricity!
For your further edification, I recommend you review some of the documents that have been posted throughout these Terri threads. Are you aware that Terri used to be able to be fed orally, early on? However, apparently Michael was not concerned with Terri's so-called "no tubes for me" desire, because he gave the doctors permission to implant a portal to feed Terri with. You see she could eat, but it took a very long time, and the nursing staff needed to have things a little more convenient for them. They couldn't afford to spend all their time with one patient. So, it's never been true that Terri could never eat orally. She could, but after Michael received the malpractice award money, he stopped allowing her to have any more therapy. If he had provided her these necessary and constitutionally protected therapies, Terri may well be able to eat on her own by now.
I can't even understand why you've said in other posts that Terri is brain-dead, because the other night on Larry King Live, I distinctly heard George Felos admit on television that Terri was NOT brain-dead.
Now, if you would like to have things for yourself go the way you'd like them to, by all means, have a living will. If you feel like you would rather not be fed or offered water in your last days, fine! Specify it! No one here will argue with you about your right to choose what you want, and if it's in writing, it can't be contested.
But ponder this. Terri left NOTHING in writing. It can't be verified. Even IF Terri did mention something to her husband indicating that she wouldn't want to "live like that", does it mean that she would want to die by starvation and dehydration? Do you think she had some sort of crystal ball she looked in pre-collapse that informed her that "artificial life support" would mean anything other than heart and lung machines? The law was amended in 1999 to include food and water. How could Terri have known that and consented to that, when it wasn't even part of the law at the time of her collapse?
Allow me to venture a guess here. The answer is in the game. They could care less about Terri, Florida law, the courts, Michael or anything else to do with this case. They're in it for the sport of it. They like trolling and manipulating peoples' emotions, kinda like the HINO (they identify with him, which is probably why they take his side). It makes them feel superior. They have no God consciousness, therefore everything is framed in humanistic relativism. I dare say that the same trolls who dismiss Terri today as being a vegetable, would be taking the other side if we believed that killing her was the morally right thing to do.
Ummm...did you read all the way to the last paragraph?
Michael's lawsuit also seeks a removal of Terri's feeding tube for the third time. The Schindlers' petition asks the judge to allow them to be appointed Terri's guardian in place of Michael.
If this were merely a dispute over the constitutional separation of powers, you might be right.
But the lawsuit includes yet another demand for Terri's death by starvation. The Schindlers do indeed have a dog in that fight.
BTW, in the event that the Schindlers prevail tomorrow (I know the courts are stacked against them, but the Florida statutes make clear that sexual cohabitation with anyone other than a spouse is grounds for removal of guardianship--even when such cohabitation doesn't constitute adultery against the ward) would Michael still have a legitimate case? Or would he no longer be a party to this matter?
Do you think the legislature needs to be on call in case the judge declares that reproductive sex is not lewd and lacivious?
might be IS another troll. Read anything he's posted here or elsewhere.
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.