LOL! 
Posted on 11/11/2003 10:17:59 AM PST by george wythe
Has Pearse changed his views in this case? THAT WOULD BE A NO.
Does Pearse now believe that his affidavit about Michael Schiavo's conflict interest is no longer applicable? THAT WOULD BE A NO.
You are dense, george
I beg to differ:
Was I missing something more clear to somebody on the inside of the case, like Pearse?Well, yes, I was. I didn't know that Pearse's views had changed since 1998. He no longer opposes the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.
Here's why:
Most of the medical testimony, given at trial and after Pearse issued his recommendations, concluded she would never recover.
The primary reason for Michael Schiavo's conflict of interest is gone. Only about $50,000 of the original $700,000 settlement remains. The rest reportedly went to Terri Schiavo's care and legal fees.
The case itself has been closely scrutinized by judge after judge, and their findings have been unanimous. The judges thought they knew what Terri Schiavo would have wanted.
They also found Michael Schiavo credible. Even with a conflict of interest, Pearse said, he could be right about his wife's wishes.
One day, this all must stop.
Pearse has a word for what is needed.
Finality.
That's what courts are supposed to provide, Pearse said. They are supposed to sort through our biggest disputes and put them to rest.
Once the governor and Legislature stepped in and pushed through Terri's Law, the courts were denied their usual role.
Pearse called the law stunningly bad policy.
Note to the GOP: Pearse is a Republican.
III. PROCEEDINGS ON REMAND -> THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER NO GEORGE. duh.
According to your post,
Opinion filed October 17, 2001
One more time:
In 2003, did the Second District Court of Appeals also agree with Judge Greer's ruling?
Yes
Judge Baird is the trial judge.
If I live in Homestead, and the governor injures me, I have the right to flight a law suit in Miami-Dade County.
I don't have to travel 8 hours to Tallahassee, especially if I'm elderly or sick.
The governor's argument might not hold any water.
-that Michael has said "Why won't that b*tch die"?
- upon hearing that his wife had an infection,(and attempting to deny her antibiotics) or if he was told her condition was deteriorating - he was heard to say "I'm going to be rich"?
How about her severe contractures-because he denied Range of Motion, excercises?
How about his statement about not even allowing her teeth to be brushed because "she doesn't eat"?
Don't tell me the vicious evil bastard doesn't know about the importance of these things . He's a nurse.
Where did this pig get his education from- The Dr. Kevorkian School of Nursing?
Do you find any of this disturbing?
I'm not trying to spell out every detail of what the law ought to be -- just making the point that the law needs to spell out enough detail to handle the difficult cases without leaving everyone wondering if decisions were made unjustly or with slimy ulterior motives. The law should be prepared to handle a situation in which, for example two parents disagree on what to do with a severely brain-damaged infant. The law might spell out a procedure for appointing a completely disinterested guardian to make a binding decision, or it might spell out that if either parent wanted the child kept alive then it must be kept alive. It's the lack of ANY clear procedures that enable a single judge or a default guardian with a conflict of interest to inappropriately steer the legal decision-making process.
LOL!
No, the anti-Schiavo nurse had a falling out with Michael Schiavo.
The head nurse does not support those stories.
I disagree with the columnist's opinions, but I have to accept her facts, unless another reliable source contradicts her.
The Schindlers did not recommend Pearse to Judge Baird? Why?
Now we know the answer.
Unless you have a source quoting Pearse as still in the Schindlers' camp, the record shows that Pearse changed his mind.
About what, exactly, George? Post a link to the Greer decision appealed/and the appellate opinion and then ask with specificity what it is they agreed with him on. The original issue, btw, is that Greer is a farce, not Gov. Bush.
I'm also interested in reading Freeper's opinions on the legal ramifications of this case.
If you keep making non-factual statements, you will be corrected.
Good night.
Hmmmmm...... first day, two posts and both wanting to kill Terri.
See a pattern????
And here's the thread for messages of support and thanks for Jeb Bush:
It is my own opinion that the door to death by starvation/dehydration should have never been opened. It is cruel and barbaric, but since it has, this seems to me to be a rational guideline:
If a person is not wanting food BECAUSE they are dying, then don't force feed them, but don't take away food and water when they're not dying because somebody else thinks they should be. It really seems pretty simple.
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.