Posted on 03/15/2005 3:07:28 PM PST by ntnychik
March 15, 2005 — Fifteen years ago, Terri Schiavo's heart stopped due to a chemical imbalance, and she suffered severe brain damage as a result. Tonight in an exclusive interview: her husband, Michael Schiavo on his fight to have her feeding tube removed.
CLEARWATER, Fla. Feb 26, 2005 — It's been 15 years since Terri Schiavo's heart stopped beating for several minutes, causing severe brain damage that put her into what doctors call a persistent vegetative state. For almost seven of those years, her husband Michael has been fighting to stop her feedings, arguing that she didn't want to be kept alive artificially.
Terri Schiavo is now 41 and still in a hospice after myriad twists and turns in a dramatic legal and ideological battle that has pitted her parents against their son-in-law. Whether there's an end in sight is anybody's guess.
"It seems like the same news over and over," acknowledged Pat Anderson, a former lawyer for Terri Schiavo's parents. "It must be quite incomprehensible (to the public) that she is still alive."
There have been countless lawsuits, court hearings, appeals, news conferences and tears shed by her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, who promise to keep fighting. The case file at the Pinellas County Courthouse now fills 45 volumes.
"I don't regret a second of what we've been through," said Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, 40. "I'll make up for it when we save my sister."
Twice, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed by court order, and both times it was restored. The last time, in 2003, Gov. Jeb Bush pushed through a state law later ruled unconstitutional that authorized him to resume the feedings six days after they were stopped.
On Friday, state Circuit Judge George Greer set a new date for removal of the feeding tube for March 18, prompting the Schindlers' attorney to promise yet another flurry of legal filings.
Greer's ruling came on the 15th anniversary of Terri Schiavo's collapse on Feb. 25, 1990, when a chemical imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder stopped her heart, cutting off oxygen to her brain for five minutes.
Michael Schiavo said his wife never wanted to be kept alive artificially, but she left no written directive. He says he's fulfilling a promise he made to her, and he has spent most of a $700,000 medical malpractice award given to his wife for her care to pay his attorney.
Here ya go.
CALLER: Yes. Does it bother you that the death is so slow? Maybe Dr. Kevorkian-style would be a faster, more peaceful way? SCHIAVO: Removing somebody's feeding is very painless. It is a very easy way to die. Probably the second better way to die, being the first being an aneurysm.
And it doesn't bother me at all. I've seen it happen. I had to do it with my own parents.
And her wedding rings (melted to make jewelry for himself).
I doubt he's getting financial support from right-to-die organizations. Those organizations generally recognize the need for clear directives from the patient. Terri Schiavo makes a lousy test case for right-to-die law, since very few people think that the word of a slimy guy like Michael Schiavo should suffice as proof of a patient's wish not to have life-prolonging treatment in the event of severe disability. I firmly believe in the "right to die", and would certainly wish to be euthanized quickly (not starved and dehydrated to death slowly) if I were in Terri's condition, but I sure wouldn't give Michael Schiavo a penny.
And continuing that thought, suppose it's true that Terri would rather die than lie alone in an institution all day with nobody who cared for her. Does that imply that she'd rather have her "loving husband" put her parents and siblings through hell in his efforts to slaughter her, than have her parents take care of her, sing to her, take her out in the sunshine and fresh air, etc.?
Anyone who would believe Michael is doing what "Terri wants" must necessarily believe that Terri hates her parents and siblings very much.
Ah, but that's why it makes an "excellent" case. Since if Terri can be slaughtered, that clears the way for the many thousands of people whose death would be even the slightest bit less unreasonable.
If I may join the conversation...................
Click and read the following:
POLICE REPORT: http://www.theempirejournal.com/SPPD_Police_Report_022590.pdf
PATTERN OF DOMESTIC ABUST: http://www.theempirejournal.com/021505_pattern_of_domestic_abuse.htm
Michael Schiavo is a sadist who euthanized Terri's two cats, and far worse, admitted on the Larry King show that he had his parents starved to death when they were sick with cancer, etc., and abused Terri before the collapse, and continues to abuse her.
He won't allow her to have therapy to talk (she can say a few words), he won't allow her to have therapy to swallow better (she CAN swallow soft foods), he turns her family's pictures around in her room, won't allow her to go outside for some fresh air, won't allow sunlight in her room, won't allow her see the cute little dogs that are brought around to cheer patients, won't allow her teeth to be brushed, etc.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, melted down her wedding ring in order to make jewelry for himself.
He also killed her beloved cats, even after Terri's parents offered to take care of them.
| She's kept like a bird in a barren cage. 'Cos her husband keeps it bare. No pictures, no music, no pets, no TV. Her life is so lonely there. But Terri is loved by her family and by thousands from coast to coast. Though her life has been sold for corrupt men's gold she refuses to give up the ghost. From A Bird in a Barren Cage. |
No, removing Terri's feeding tube under the sketchy circumstances which surround this case, would only cause a backlash against any laws protecting the right to die -- and any serious right to die organization understands that.
What do you think of this from " TERRI SCHIAVO MARCH 2005 DAILIES ," post # 6,439
....Kenneth W. Goodman, co-director of the Florida Bioethics Network and head of the University of Miami Bioethics Program..... said the legislation would create barriers for people who want to control the end of their lives.
It also "misjudges" the medical use of artificial nutrition and hydration tubes, which are intended to be used as a "bridge" when someone suffers a debilitating medical problem until they can get better, he said. Goodman said those devices are not intended to be permanent.
Thanks!
Even now, the backlash would probably be greater if she recovers than if she is killed. Were it not for the recent publicity, that would certainly be the case: had she been killed, there would have been little backlash as few people would have known the truth.
That song sure sums it up.
With all of the support for Terri out there, it's so frustrating that we haven't been able her be freed.
"There's no sane reason NOT to believe what he's saying"
You have it backwards. There is no reason TO believe what he says. We go on the evidence, the weight of the case, similar cases, ethical and religious determinations. For HER, a Catholic, she showed no evidence of not believing the Church or Pope's teachings about life. She would have left, if she had believed otherwise. She stayed.
Schiavo refuses Terri's friends and family to be with her.
He does not provide evidence of her therapy, and has not had the tests done to show her condition. He is not there every day doing "Range of Motion" exercises to prevent muscle atrophy. He is not there reading to her and doing mental exerciss with her.
Instead, he is living with his fiance and 2 kids since 1996.
He does not give full disclosure. There could have been reason to believe him that perhaps she said she didn't want to live if incapacitated, but no longer. God has revealed who Michael is, through his actions, and the words he says cannot be trustworthy.
So how long should they be allowed? If someone is otherwise healthy but has needed a feeding tube for over a year, should it be simply pulled so as honor the "intention" that such devices not be permanent?
SR92 is a troll nothing more nothing less
imo
I agree with him for the most part. We hoped that my Dad would get better (nobody moreso than he!) and the feeding tube was needed in order for him to get his nutrition and hydration in order to fight the disease. We all hoped there would come a time he would no longer need it. Unfortunately that was not the case with him, but for many, many others it IS the case. There are thousands of people who are put on feeding tubes who eventually do not need them anymore because they get better and are able to eat and drink in a normal way.
Having experienced a loved one on a feeding tube I will argue that it is no way "artificial" the way a heart and lung machine is.
"wont allow" ???
Isn't it against the law for the hospital to allow a guardian to "not allow" things that are required for general health such as visits, antibiotics, teeth brushing??
The hospital staff administrators should be arrested by any citizen who knows where they live.
I've heard of children who have been living with feeding tubes since they were born.
A yes. MvM, where the Supreme Court said, in essence, "Well, we would find for party X, except that because in this particular case the proposed remedy would be moot, we find for party Y." Given that the proposed remedy was, in fact, moot by the time the case was decided, party X couldn't really object. And since party Y won, Y couldn't really squawk either. Hence the court managed to issue a precedent-setting opinion which nobody could squawk about.
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.