Philly columnist changes mind on Terri Schiavo (details lead him to side with her parents)

World Net Daily ^ | Feb. 26, 2005 | World Net Daily

[ViLaLuz]

A Philadelphia Inquirer columnist who believes in the "right to die" has changed his mind about the Terri Schiavo case, pointing to "uncomfortable details" about her estranged husband that now lead him to side with the parents of the brain-damaged Florida woman, who are fighting to keep her alive.

John Grogan said in a column published today, "I no longer so blithely believe Schiavo's feeding tubes should be pulled and her life allowed to end. I'm no longer so sure her parents do not deserve a say in their daughter's future. I no longer am totally comfortable assuming her husband, Michael, who now has two children by another woman, is acting unselfishly."

Michael Schiavo has been living with his fiance Jodi Centonze since 1995 and has said he will marry her upon the death of his wife.

Grogan said he hasn't changed his opinion that everyone has a right to "die with dignity," but he believes that in the Schiavo case, the "devil is in the details, uncomfortable details that raise sticky moral dilemmas."

Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain damage in 1990 after collapsing. Michael Schiavo attributes it to a chemical imbalance caused by an eating disorder, but parents Robert and Mary Schindler believe he may have tried to strangle her.

Michael Schiavo contends his wife told him she never would want to be kept alive artificially.

But Grogan points out Terri Schiavo's heart and lungs function on their own, and she requires only a feeding tube that might not be necessary if she were given physical therapy.

The columnist notes Michael Schiavo, as her legal guardian, has forbidden any therapy.

"If [Terri] Schiavo merely required spoon feeding instead of tube feeding, would anyone seriously be arguing to withhold food and water?" Grogan asked. "Does not every human, no matter how incapacitated, deserve sustenance?"

Grogan also is concerned about abuse allegations against Michael Schiavo and believes they should be investigated.

The allegations "may be nothing but scurrilous rumor spread to damage his credibility," he wrote. "But what if there is even a tiny chance he is guilty of abuse? Should such a person be in a position to decide this life-and-death issue?"

When it comes to who is best to decide, Grogan wrote, it's clear that Terri Schiavo's parents "have proved themselves nothing if not fiercely loyal, utterly committed parents. They might be misguided. They might be in denial. But no one can argue their devotion. They have not given up. They have not stopped caring. They have not stopped loving. Who are we, as a society, to tell them they must?

Grogan concluded:

"Clearly, Schiavo's husband has moved on to a new life, and who can blame him? It's been 15 long years. But parents cannot move on. Parents cannot give up. Their child will always be the precious gift they brought into the world.

If the Schindlers want to dedicate the rest of their lives and resources to caring for their brain-damaged daughter, if they want to shower her with attention and affection she likely will never recognize, who among us will tell them they cannot.

It won't be me."

[pc93]

And Gondring and Hildy and KDD and... ad nauseum.

[ViLaLuz]

"The conclusion is as difficult as it is ,is it is time to let Terri Schiavo's body go. Her soul is long departed."

You have no way of knowing that. How could you say that after going on and on about unbiased evidence? You know that wasn't listed in the thousands of pages you reviewed.

And... what is so wrong with letting "Terri Schiavo's body" go to her parents?

[pc93]

Basically all these people do is depersonalize Terri and ignore what her true condition is and that she just needs a little love and rehab and therapy to improve even now. They are stuck on their own fears and ignorance. They are pawns of those who plot a murder and are for murder if not purposely then in their utter and complete ignorance. A real pity and a real slight towards that which is a real humanity.

[tuckrdout]

Where is the work? Links and or photos of the papers with your conclusions, please. I have read quite different conclusions.

http://www.hospicepatients.org/terri-schindler-schiavo-docs-links-page.html

Also, I would like you to provide documentation for this assertion: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1345963/posts?page=351#351

When did Terri have an EEG?

[nicmarlo]

have you read this AFFIDAVIT of Alexander T. Gimon, Ph.D? (He said, in part:

Dr. Gimon, a clinical neuropsychologist, says on page 12 of the affidavit: "Given the neglect which Terri has suffered...it is striking that her current cognitive functioning is as strong and varied in expression as it is. This indicates that sufficient brain structure exists for further cognitive and behavioral progress to be made. Terri is an excellent subject for a variety of cognitive treatment protocols designed to improve her neurological function, including neuroaerobics, physical therapy, recreational/occupational therapy, and speech-language therapy."

or this AFFIDAVIT of Dr. Jacob Greene?
or this AFFIDAIVT of Dr. Richard Neubauer?
or this AFFIDAVIT of Dr. William Scott Russell?
or, seen this Complete Report of Dr. William Hammesfahr?

And did you know this?

Experts Who Have Testified Terri Schiavo Could Improve with Therapy

Dr. William Hammesfahr
Dr. Alexander Gimon
Dr. Jacob Greene
Dr. Richard Neubauer
Dr. William Russell
Dr. Jay Carpenter
Dr. James Avery
Dr. John D. Young
Dr. William Maxfield
Sarah Green Mele – Speech Pathologist (Affidavit, pdf format)
Myra Stinson – Speech Pathologist

or read this Oct. 24, 2003, article?

Doctors dispute Florida woman is in persistent vegetative state

Three doctors appeared with Terri Schiavo's parents Friday to bolster their conviction that their daughter can recover from brain injuries that have kept her in what other physicians have called a persistent vegetative state for 13 years. "She looks at you, she can follow commands," said Clearwater neurologist William Hammesfahr, standing outside the one-story, brown-brick hospice where the 39-year-old Schiavo lives. Hammesfahr's opinion was echoed by Drs. William S. Maxfield and John Young, who have examined Schiavo at her parents' request during the long legal battle over her fate.

Maxfield, a radiologist, said CT scans from last summer show some damage but not the massive loss of tissue described by others.

"People ought to know she can be rehabilitated," he said.

[windchime]

"When it comes to who is best to decide, Grogan wrote, it's clear that Terri Schiavo's parents "have proved themselves nothing if not fiercely loyal, utterly committed parents. They might be misguided. They might be in denial. But no one can argue their devotion. They have not given up. They have not stopped caring. They have not stopped loving. Who are we, as a society, to tell them they must?"

Bump!

[PhilDragoo]

Excellent summary of significant medical professional support of Terri's positive prognosis.

[nicmarlo]

thanks, Phil. Just reposting info, spread around on so many threads. Makes it handier.

[tuckrdout]

Oh, it is giving me a start, alright! What a bunch of straw men you threw my way. Quackwatch? Absolutely nothing. Not a thing...Where are the medical reports? You said you had them. Where is the EEG, you said was "flat"...The EEG's in the discharge document are not at all "Flat" as you say! You are a fraud, sir. Your intelligent sounding words can not mask the fact that you are searching google for your information! Why not actually go to this link and read the reports there?

Did you even read the last link? Did you read the discharge report? Here is a quote: "WE FELT THAT AS THE PATIENT HAS SHOWN SOME IMPROVEMENT DURING HER HOSPITALIZATION, THOUGH SHE WAS NOT FOLLOWING COMMANDS, IN HER PHYSICAL AND MENTAL STATUS, SOME IMPROVEMENT WAS NOTED."

First link: "Dr" wolfson is a LAWYER a "Doctor of Law"...PHD..He did NOT include any EEG results.

Wolfson's "report" was a painfully flowery, self agrandizing document, which provided little information, and abundant "opinion". The opinion seemed very weighted with the Felos arguments, and ignored obvious discrepencies, such as the fact that Mike called his brother in law before he called the ambulance, and despite knowing CPR, mike never attempted to provide Terri with assistance.

Other than that, there was nothing in this report that reflected the sentiments in your post. Wolfson even reported that Terri had a "distict presence"---not a brainless, souless, flatline EEG body, as you stated.

I agree with him that Terri should have begun swallowing therapy. Wonder why this recommendation was never followed, eh? Perhaps because the point is not to do what is best for Terri, but what is best for the "right to die" movement; and Mikie Schiavo!

Wolfson's Opinion completely contrasts the opinion of the guardian ad litum, Richard L. Pearse Jr. from 1998, who stated;

In the opinion of the undersigned guardian ad litem, Mr. Schiavo's credibility is also adversely affected by the chronology of this case. For the first four years, following the ward's (Terri) accident, he aggressively pursued every manner of treatment and rehabilitation conceivable, as well as lawsuits to compensate the ward for her injuries in connection with with he presumable argued that she would require substantial funds for future care and treatment.

(Terri after "accident" before Mike gets money)

AT OR AROUND THE TIME (a couple of weeks actually) THE LITIGATION WAS FINALLY CONCLUDED, HE HAS A CHANGE OF HEART CONCERNING FURTHER TREATMENT WHICH LEAD, ACCORDING TO THE WARD'S PARENTS, TO HIS FALLING OUT WITH THEM. FROM THAT POINT FORWARD, THE WARD'S HUSBAND HAS ISOLATED THE WARD FROM HER PARENTS, HAS ON AT LEAST ONE OCCASION REFUSED TO CONSENT FOR THE WARD TO BE TREATED FOR AN INFECTION, AND, ULTIMATELY, FOUR YEARS LATER HAS FILED THE INSTANT PETITION FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF LIFE SUPPORT ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE APPARENTLY KNOWN ONLY TO HIM, which could have been asserted at any time during the ward's illness.

(Terri after Mike got money)

Since there is no corroborative evidence of the ward's intentions, and since the only witness claiming to have such eveidence is the one person who will realize a direct and substantial financial benefit from the ward's death, the undersigned guardian ad litem is of the opinion that the eveidence of the ward's intentions developed by the guardian ad litem's investigation does not meet the clear and convincing standard. Based on Migloiore V. Migliore. 717 so.2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), THE CREDIBILITY OF THE WITNESS IS A FACTOR TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING WHETHER EVIDENCE IS CLEAR AND CONVINCING.

Given the inherent evidentiary problems already mentioned, together with the fact that the ward has been maintained on the life support measures sought to be withdrawn for the past 8 years, IT IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM THAT THE PETITION FOR REMOVAL BE DENIED.

[windchime]

Thanks!  Good link.

Excellent summary of significant medical professional support of Terri's positive prognosis.

[nicmarlo]

September 27, 1999 Deposition, Michael Schiavo

Q.   Have you considered turning the guardianship over to
     Mr. and Mrs. Schindler?
MS:  No, I have not.

Q.   And why?
MS:  I think that's pretty self explanatory.

Q.   I'd like to hear your answer.
MS:  Basically I don't want to do it.

Q.   And why don't you want to do it?
MS:  Because they put me through pretty much h*** the
     last few years.

Q.   And can you describe what you mean by h***?
MS:  The litigations they put me through.

Q.   Any other specifics besides the litigation?
MS:  Just their attitude towards me because 
     of the litigations. There is no other reason.
     I'm Terri's husband and I will remain
     guardian.

After his attorney "talked" with him, Michael added, "Yeah. Another reason would be that her parents wouldn't carry out her wishes."

Others (namely her parents and brother) have contradicted Michael’s assertion that his wife would want her feeding tube removed. In addition, Cindy Shook, who had an affair with Michael shortly after Terri's "incident", gave a startling deposition. Regarding what Terri would have wanted she claims Michael said,

"How the h*** should I know we never spoke about this, my God I was only 25 years old. How the h*** should I know? We were young. We never spoke of this."

[See Michael Schiavo's former girlfriend speaks: Excerpts From Cynthia Shook's May 8, 2001 Deposition given in fear]

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

November 1992 Testimony of Michael Schiavo, Medical Malpractice Trial

Q.   Why did you want to learn to be a nurse?
MS.  Because I enjoy it and I want to learn more 
     how to take care of Terri.

Q.   You're a young man. Your life is ahead of you. 
     When you look up the road, what do you see for
     yourself?
MS.  I see myself hopefully finishing school and 
     taking care of my wife.

Q.   Where do you want to take care of your wife?
MS.  I want to bring her home.

Q.   If you had the resources available to you, 
     if you had the equipment and the people, 
     would you do that?
MS.  Yes, I would, in a heartbeat.

Q.   How do you feel about being married to Terri 
     now.
MS.  I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't 
     trade her for the world. I believe in my 
     marriage vows.

Q.   You believe in your wedding vows, what do you 
     mean by that?
MS.  I believe in the vows I took with my wife, 
     through sickness, in health, for richer or poor. 
     I married my wife because I love her and I want 
     to spend the rest of my life with her. I'm going 
     to do that. [emphasis added]

(Note: In January of 1993, a jury awarded Michael $350,000 for loss of consortium, and $750,000 went into a medical trust for all of Terri's future rehabilitative care, which was based on the testimony of Michael stating that he wanted to care for Terri for the rest of his life. If Terri should die, Michael would inherit the balance of the trust fund. Not only did Mr. Schiavo not provide Terri with rehabilitation, he has denied his wife any and all therapy, against Doctors' recommendations, since the 1993 malpractice award.)

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

November 1993 Michael Schiavo Deposition, Guardianship Hearing

Q.   What was her bladder condition?
MS.  She had a UTI.

Q.   What is that?
MS.  Urinary tract infection.

Q.   What did the doctor tell you treatment 
     for that would be?
MS.  Antibiotic usually.

Q.   And did he tell you what would occur if 
     you failed to treat that infection? 
     What did he tell you?
MS.  That sometimes urinary tract infection 
     will turn to sepsis.

Q.   And sepsis is what?
MS.  An infection throughout the body.

Q.   And what would the result of untreated sepsis 
     be to the patient?
MS.  The patient would pass on.

Q.   So when you made the decision not to treat 
     Terri's bladder infection you, in effect, 
     were making a decision to allow her to pass on?
MS.  I was making a decision on what Terri would want.

Q.   Had the bladder condition been treated?
MS.  Yes.

Q.   And was...what was the reason that the bladder
     condition was treated?
MS.  Sable Palms Nursing Home said they could not do
     that by some Florida law which wasn't stated.

[ViLaLuz]

"if this case weren't so tragic, that would, indeed, be hilarious. Unfortunately, what you said is also true. What does that say about our current culture?"

Remember quite a while back, John Lennon's murderer, Mark David Chapman went on a hunger strike? The courts decided to force feed him.

Force feed convicted murderers, but let the innocent starve to death.

[nicmarlo]

Force feed convicted murderers, but let the innocent starve to death.

If Terri were an animal, PETA and other groups would have intervened long ago based on her treatment being inhumane.

[tuckrdout]

What a difference a year makes, huh?!

I have been reading this discharge document. I notice that it says: "Enzymes did not reveal evidence of Myocardial Infarction." Which of course is a "heart attack".

Of course if Terri had had a "heart attack"--as opposed to her heart stopping-- 14 years ago, she most certainly would have had heart problems in the ensuing years. The heart would be weakened. Yet, 14 days of being starved, and dehydrated did not cause any heart problems

As I have said, her survival for all these years is one of the biggest evidences that she wants to live.

Also, reading up on the Supreme Court Ruling in the Nancy Cruzan case. The SCOTUS ruled, "that an incompetent person's wishes in regard to the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment be proved by clear and convincing evidence." ---Obviously this is not the case with Terri.

[nicmarlo]

Obviously this is not the case with Terri.

Unfortunately, that hasn't been obvious to "Judge" Greer; wonder why that is?

[nicmarlo]

How can "Judge" Greer find Michael's hearsay testimony that "Terri said she didn't want to be hooked up to tubes to be alive" to be "clear and convincing," when, in earlier civil litigation so Michael could get money from the insurance companies and doctors, Michael was so CLEAR AND CONVINCING to the jury when he testified that

HE WANTED TO TAKE CARE OF TERRI FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE,

that the jury awarded Michael and Terri $1.2 to take care of Terri for the rest of HIS life.

Sure makes me wonder how someone could be so CLEAR AND CONVINCING when they're talking from both sides of their mouth.

[PhilDragoo]

I say again, were any inmate of Abu Ghraib subjected to the persistent abuse which Michael Schiavo has inflicted on Terri Schiavo, Ted Kennedy would be on every cable news program leading the most fevered charge for the impeachment of this president as could be imagined.

Michael Schiavo reveals himself as a monster in these deposition exchanges.

[CHARLITE]

".... because a baby died outside the womb and still attached to the ambilical cord."

You are correct. The mother delivered her baby, then killed it, by stabbing the top of the baby's head with kitchen shears before severing the umbilical cord. I don't recall how the case was resolved, or if it is still pending. The story broke about a year ago.

However, my very liberal ex-friend, who is devoted to every opinion coming out of N.O.W., commented on this case in the following way (almost verbatim from about a year ago).

"The mother had every right to do whatever she wanted or felt she needed to do with her FOETUS!

I gasped and asked, trying to maintain some composure, "How can you call a newborn baby a 'foetus?'"

Without taking a breath or skipping a beat, she said indignantly, "It wasn't born yet! The cord was still attached, so it was just a foetus, and a foetus isn't a person. It's just tissue."

Do you remember Wesley Clark saying, during his campaign in the primaries, "A child isn't BORN until the mother says it's born!" ??

I can't think of another thing to say, except perhaps, God rest the soul of that child who was murdered by a mother for whom it was an intrusion and an inconvenience.

Char

[Ohioan from Florida]

Wolfson suggested that swallowing tests be performed, but that advice was ignored.

Have you read anything about Richard Pearse, or do you disregard his testimony, too? He was the GAL appointed in 1997/98 in case you're not familiar with his name. Look him up.

IMHO, you read and see only what you want to believe. I used to believe the lies I was told until I looked into this case thoroughly.

Let me ask you a question. If Terri could communicate that she is 'in there' and not really just a bunch of reflexes, would you change your position? Or do you wish for her death because she is brain-injured?

I expect an honest reply.