Florida Court Prohibits Terri's Parents From Joining "Terri's Law" Battle (ACLJ)

LifeNews.com ^ | November 4, 2003 | Steven Ertelt

[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

[Deep_6]

Re:
"..If you don't like Florida law, then why don't you change it!..."

There's nothing wrong with Florida's laws.... when the legislative
and executive branches aren't changing it to suit the needs of the day.

Change? There may very well be change... the coming election.

No-one likes justice to be interfered with at whim and after-the-fact.

If Terri's condition is deemed to be totally irreversible by well
renowned physicians; if the original decision to remove life support
is found to have been a valid choice.... Politicians that are using
this family tragedy for self gain will suffer, along with the political
party representing them.

 

[nickcarraway]

you allege a common law wife, have they shared finances,checking accounts, mortgages, credit cards? Ok, so they are not in a common law marriage.

Yes, they do share finances. Although I don't know all the details, there is comingling of funds. Remember they live together and share children.

BTW, only 11 states have common law marriage laws and Florida is not one of them

You are talking about legal recognition of common law marriage. That is irrelevant in this case. The fact is that his having a woman acting as his wife and having children with her and stating his intention to marry her gives him an overwhelming conflict of interest.

[nickcarraway]

I will never have an ex-spouse

I am glad you won't, but the sad fact of the matter is divorce and adultery are common in this country. Giving an ex-spouse power of life or death is not common sense. I know you aren't going to get a divorce, but pretend you were in that circumstance. Should the law give your ex power over your life?

[nickcarraway]

If Terri turned up dead, who would be the first suspect? A husband who has a mistress with children? You bet? How can we give the person, who under other circumstances, would be arrested, the legal right to do what he would have been arrested for?

[nickcarraway]

Besides, all your arguments depend on nullification of the law. We can't just ignore laws that are inconvenient. If you don't like the law, change it. Judges are not supposed to ignore laws. Especially when they have a financial connection to one of the parties lawyer.

[kenth]

...and the wife didn't have an advanced directive, so the state took her rights away and gave her husband the right to kill her.

Just awful when the nanny state interferes with a good wife killin'.

[gooleyman]

no horse in the race....

------

I understand what the husband gets out of her death: The money, the freedom to marry his new flame. I understand what the Save Terri group (of which I'm one) gets from keeping her alive: Namely the satisfaction of protecting innocent life which we count as precious.

The question I have for the rest of the Kill Terri bunch is this: What do YOU gain from her death? I simply don't understand it. You are actually working for NOTHING as I see it. Why do you do it? Just like I can't figure out what pro-abortion people get from causing as many unborn babies to be killed as they can. One of you please explain it to me.

[nickcarraway]

Florida law does not support guardians who have such a conflict of interest. If you think otherwise, lobby to have the law changed...

[Ethan_Allen]

"If you don't like Florida law, then why don't you change it! "

Maybe he's been working on it. Look what I just found:


I haven't read the entire thing. It looks like they are trying to delete the LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR portion of the Background Screening that is REQUIRED at THIS TIME of all guardians. LEWD AND LASCIVIOUS BEHAVIOR is defined as openly cohabiting with someone who is not one's spouse.

"Senate Bill sb0328
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
Florida Senate - 2004 SB 328

By Senator Saunders

37-84-04

1 A bill to be entitled

2 An act relating to employment background

3 screening; amending s. 435.03, F.S.; providing

4 additional criminal offenses and deleting an

5 offense that would disqualify a person subject

6 to level 1 screening standards from employment;

7 amending s. 435.04, F.S.; providing additional

8 criminal offenses and deleting an offense that

9 would disqualify a person subject to level 2

10 screening standards from employment; amending

11 ss. 943.0585 and 943.059, F.S.; adding the

12 Agency for Health Care Administration to the

13 list of agencies permitted to receive expunged

14 criminal history records and sealed criminal

15 history records; providing additional offenses

16 for which a person may not lawfully deny or

17 fail to acknowledge an arrest with respect to

18 an expunged or sealed record; reenacting ss.

19 39.821(1) and 400.414(1)(g), F.S., relating to

20 guardians ad litem and assisted living

21 facilities, to incorporate the amendment to ss.

22 435.03 and 435.04, F.S., in references thereto;

23 providing an effective date.

24

25 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:......."


http://www.flsenate.gov/cgi-bin/view_page.pl?File=sb0328.html&Directory=session/2004/Senate/bills/billtext/html&Tab=session&Submenu=1

[Polybius]

...... her husband has the right and the final say....

"Why can't Nicole's parents accept that simple fact? Thanks for telling it like it is, Legerdemain."

[nickcarraway]

I assume Florida also has laws against insurance fraud, lawsuit fraud, and perjury...

Michael swore before the court that he needed the money he was suing for to take care of hias wife and that he would need it for her natural lifespan. His testimony before Judge Greer contradicted that. Judge Greer has access to the earlier statements, which he is obligated to consider.

[nickcarraway]

Hey, they never know when they might need a legal way to get rid of an annoying spouse. If only O.J. knew about this, he could have saved a lot of money.

[Coral Snake]

The ONLY reason we have a state in the first place is to protect LIFE, liberty and property. If they didn't intend to protect these things the founders would probably given us the near anarchy that the Objectivist Libertarians crave.

[Deep_6]

Re:
"..If Terri turned up dead, who would be the first suspect? A husband who has a mistress with children? You bet? How can we give the person, who under other circumstances, would be arrested, the legal right to do what he would have been arrested for?...."

Wow!!

Is this like the "If a train is leaving Philidelphia at nine AM and a train
is leaving Southwest Georgia at five PM....." puzzle? 

I hate those, don't you?

Terri's husband is quite open with the fact he's "moved on". In fact,
he's apparently "moved on" years ago, after Terri was first diagnosed
as having an irreversible and all encompassing vegetated state due to
the lack of a cerebral cortex.

He claimed then, that Terri would not want to be kept alive by mechanical
means. [The feeding apparatus was placed as a temporary measure to keep
her body alive until a complete diagnosis and prognosis was rendered].

That feeding apparatus [life support] was permitted to be removed at the
discretion of her legal guardian [her husband]. Terri's parents have fought
that decision each time it arose. And each time, they claimed that Terri
was on her way to recovery.

It's been 13 years and Terri's brain is shrinking. There has been absolutely
no documented, proven indication of any reversal of the vegetated state she
was in at the time of the first diagnosis.

People have been finding fault with everyone involved that may have an
opinion that differs with Terri's family. Incredible.

Meanwhile.... Terri may or may not understand what's happening
outside that shell of a body; a coffin of sorts. But I'll bet it's not
very comfortable in there, if she is hearing anything, or can think..

It's worse than hell. It's government ordered purgatory.

 

[kenth]

There's nothing wrong with Florida's laws

None at all, except for that little section in the state constitution that guarantees Terri's rights. Or the contradictory section in the chapter on advanced directives that disallows euthanasia, but defines food and water as life support.

Politicians that are using this family tragedy for self gain will suffer, along with the political party representing them.

If any party politicized this, it was the democrat party. People of both major parties sided with Terri, while, with a minor exception, it was solely democrats who sided against her.

[GladesGuru]

She's right, and everyone knows it. The Sheeples Republic of FloriDUH has worked for decades to assemble such a bunch of knee jerk socialists and elevate them to the bench.

As with the Florida university system, crypto-socialists are the judicial norm, not the exception. Only an enraged citizenry and their legislature critters can cure the situation at this point.

[gooleyman]

I've been reading and replying to these threads for many weeks now and it always bugs me as to what these people can possibly have to gain by Terri's death. They don't know her any more than you and I do. Of what possible benefit could her death be to them? I'm sure they've seen the videos on terrisfight.org and it has no effect on them. They still want her dead!!! Sense to me it does not make.

I'm sure one of them will come up with some cock and bull story, but it simply CAN'T make any logical sense. It defies logic.

[kenth]

She might be uncomfortable. Let's kill her.

[gooleyman]

I repeat my question: What do YOU have to gain by her death?

[sport]

Well, you knew that they would.

"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.

Jay, you are up against a kangeroo court.

Sekulow indicated the Schindlers may appeal the decision

Jay,it won't do any good.

It is my opinion that the powers-that-be have decreed that Terri must die and be creamated in order to destroy the evidence of the crimes comitted upon her and against her.

Therefore so long as those who wish to save her, including myself, are fighting in State Courts, we are fighting a losing battle.

And I don't have much confidence in the Federal Courts at this point in time either.

For all the Duty-to-Die advocates, as the people in Denmark and Holland have learned the hard way, sooner or later, it rolls down to you.