NEW Neurosurgeon WAS at Terri's bedside Today--says Terri is misdiagnosed

CNN 5:PM PT Anderson Cooper on | 3/23/05 | gentlestrength

[gentlestrength]

The spiritual advisor of the Schindlers, Bro. O'Donnell, said the Dept. of Children and Families has had a new physician examine Terri and that "he DID go into her room and WAS at her side and DID observe her."

Department of Children and Families, are the department if someone is being physically abused, or the elderly, and "they have the authority" to take her into protective custody.

He continued, "what is being done to her now constitutes" that, and that DCF should "be taking her into protective custody."

Cooper: "Aren't people being taken off feeding tubes all the time?" Brother O'Donnell: "When they're DYING. But she was not dying. She could live another 20, 40 years."

"She's the only person who has been COURT ORDERED to have her tubes removed. Not 'The guardian MAY" but the guardian 'shall' remove her tubes."

CNN checked on the facticity of this last claim, and found that "There is ONLY ONE other case, Nancy Beth Cuzan in which the court ordered the tube MUST be removed."

Dr.Sanjay Gupta says if Terri is in the minimally conscious state, her eyes open spontaneously. She must do one of the following: --follow simple commands (to show she can hear and understand) --give yes or no responses

[churchillbuff]

My aunt was dying of ovarian cancer. She had tried everything and there was no hope. In the end she was vomiting feces, which I had not know was even humanly possible. It was the worst death I've ever witnessed. Doctors ultimately inserted a feeding tube. She insisted that it be removed and stopped eating or drinking by mouth, which she was still capable of doing, although with disasterous results. Within a short period of time, she never struggled again or seemed to have any pain and died quickly after that. It was a blessing. """

INTERESTING, BUT NOT RELEVANT. Terri Schiavo is not in the last stages of terminal illness. She's not even ill - let alone have a terminal disease. But she IS one of thousands of people around the country who have severe brain damage. ARE WE GOING TO KILL THEM ALL? I don't see any logic that allows us to kill Terri but to spare the thousands of others who are in similar physical state - whether it's PVS or minimal consciousness, or whatever it's diagnosed.

THAT'S WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT -- whether we start down the path of killing severely disabled people because we've made a determination that they would be better off dead.

You point out that feed tubes are pulled with some regularity from terminally ill elderly people. Whether that's right or wrong - and it depends on the particular circumstances of each case - it simply is not relevant to the question of whether we should start withholding nourishment from brain damaged people who otherwise ARE NOT DYING. That would be a HUGE change in policy in the US. And yes, it would start us down the German road - because this is what Germany did in the 30s - it made a decision that the severely disabled were better off dead. That decision had consequences that didn't stop with the severely disabled.

[syriacus]

It's sad
I agree. Some people, especially bullies, are brazen enough to utter untruths and self-contradictions under oath and on television.

[Ciexyz]

I have a tape about the Nazi eugenics program...on the Discovery Channel.

There was also something on PBS recently, a multi-episode series on Auschwitz, which covered the early days of the T4 Nazi euthanasia program which later morphed into the concentration camps' annihilation program.

[stormer]

"And the neurologist that you claim to be incredible (boy everyone is!!) is a Nobel Prize nominee - not exactly considered a hack."

I have seen this posted elsewhere - I think there may be a problem with this claim:

Each year there are 100 to 250 nominees for each prize. It should be noted that the expression "nominated for a Nobel Prize," when used to establish someone's credentials or expertise in a certain field, is not an essentially meaningless expression. Although anyone can be nominated, not anyone can nominate anyone else for a Nobel Prize. For example the website of the Nobel Foundation (http://nobelprize.org/) says that in the case of the peace prize the following people may nominate:

Members of national assemblies and governments of states
Members of international courts
University rectors
Professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology
Directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes
Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute

...the Nobel Prize nominees are not publicly announced and they are not supposed to be told that they were ever considered for the prize. The records are sealed for 50 years. This is done to avoid turning the awarding of the prize into a popularity contest. Due to this secrecy it is questionable whenever someone uses a Nobel nomination as a qualification (how could you check it?).

[syriacus]

Three other judges watched the tapes and read the testimony and looked at the test results. They talk about it in the 2DCA ruling I linked to.

Since those judges were not in court, as a presiding judge, to direct the questioning of the "expert" witness, a brand new trial would have been a good idea.

It's quite likely that the presiding judge, Greer, could not see the subtle changes in Terri's face when her mom came close to her.

Most of us, who have been in love, can recognize the "love" look in Terri's eyes and see the softening of her face. Terri is not PVS and it's ridiculous to say, as Cranford did, that Terri has a flat eeg. She is at least functioning at the level of an animal and, most likely, at some higher level..

Here's a nice "one-two" punch that can be used by husbands who want their wives dead.

1. Greer ordered that Terri's tube be removed at a certain time. He didn't rule that Michael could remove the tube.
2. Michael was not in the room when Terri's tube was removed. I think that was arranged so that no one could ask if Michael was ultimately responsible for ending Terri's life against her wishes.

Husband doesn't "order" starvation. Husband isn't around when starvation is begun. Bingo--husband's hands are clean.*

Here's hoping the Kill-Terri people can live with themselves in a few years when the facts come out and we learn that Terri's rights and the applications of the latest medical findings were denied her.

*I found it interesting that Felos decided to spread around the guilt a bit, by publicly thanking the ACLU and others for helping Michael in his cause.

This is sort of like Murder on the Orient Express -- there are so many people involved in her killing that you can't find the guilty one.

[newcats]

SHE HAS OT EATEN IN HOW MANY DAYS

Sorry if this sounds crass, but she has not eaten in 15 or so years.

[Time4Atlas2Shrug]

Yes, I have since read that it was a congressman who nominated him. What a bad choice for a witness when there are others they could have chosen.

[Time4Atlas2Shrug]

Hey, you stole my line.

I love your tagline about the ACLU and the liberal media being America's enemies. I guess you've changed your mind on that one considering they are touting your ideology of erring on the side of death in this case.

Again, whatever makes your ideology work.

[Trinity_Tx]

I said: It is a "right to refuse treatment" case.

You reply: Excuse me???? Where is Terri's notarized, witnessed and signed advance directive? Without that, and without asking Terri directly, there is no "right to refuse treatment" in question here!


Don't get all snippy with me. I'm just giving you the facts.

If you don't like them, snipe at the US Supreme court - read Cruzan (links on my profile) then at least read the Florida court decisions I keep citing.

[Trinity_Tx]

You were wrong because you said "the doctor that Greer relied on spent only 45 minutes with Terri".

Verity told you to read the Wolfson report, because it's one way to show that Greer didn't just rely on that one doctor. There were 2 other neurologists in that trial alone who agreed with him. (Not to mention every single other doc she has had - 8 of them neurologists)

If anyone is at fault, it is Pat Anderson, the Schindlers' atty for choosing such easily impeached alternative med doctors.

[Trinity_Tx]

Thank you. : )


I wish they'd push for everyone to have advance directives, and then tighten up the standards.


Back when Terri collapsed, advance directives were very rare.

Terri will be a heroine if it draws attention to the issue and people make their wishes known who might have otherwise been wrongly treated.

[Time4Atlas2Shrug]

I know, but if a GAL was to be appointed when a decision had to be made, I think this life and death decision would definitely qualify. I think the Schindler's had a great case for a due process failure.

Thanks, I'd love it if you'd send me that info. on Hammesfahr, though the point is unfortunately moot at this point. Governor Bush will either intervene using executive authority, or she will die and everyone will forget about her by next week. Sorry for the cynicism.

What I really hope comes of this entire thing, besides her life being preserved, is that our elected representatives will have a fire in their belly regarding the overreaching power of the judiciary. They have become the final arbiter in most people's minds and that is not the way our Constitution was designed. Article III and especially Article IV, specifically, assign the power of law and the judiciary is not given power over Congress or the ability to decide what the laws are. It only gives the Supreme Court the power of appellate jurisdiction of law and fact "under such regulations as the Congress shall make" (Art.III). Throughout this article the clear intent is to give Congress control over the judiciary.

I guess I can only hope that our Congress wrests some control back.

[Trinity_Tx]

So you'd be willing to inject her or put a bullet in her head?

I'd be more than willing to inject her, *if* the only alternative were to watch her die slowly of dehydration. That We The People pretend the latter is any better than the former is the height of hypocrisy, imo.

[Time4Atlas2Shrug]

I'm sorry, I have no link. I heard an interview with whoever the spokesperson was (I'm not sure if it was their consel or an official spokesperson) on the radio. I think it was on Hannity and he asked about the tape which, I believe Drudge played Sunday eve., and that was his response.

[Cboldt]

I wish they'd push for everyone to have advance directives, and then tighten up the standards.

Probably be smart to tighten up the standards first. Given the way words are twisted after the fact, my advance directive is going to recite "use heroic measures, and if that doesn't work, leave me out in the snow." ;-)

I wouldn't trust a doctor or the legal system to make the appropriate choice, that's for sure.

[Trinity_Tx]

"it's ridiculous to say, as Cranford did, that Terri has a flat eeg."

Even Hammesfahr said her EEG showed no recognizable acivity.


As for Greer and the higher courts (notice that they instruct Greer to set the date to pull the tube) ordering it instead of Michael, that is because Michael gave up his right to make the decision and let her parents come in on equal footing with him and let the courts be the decision-maker. It's all explained in the 2DCA ruling.

[imskylark]

I did read the report. I know about the other doctors. I am talking about the doctor everyone is interviewing as the 'doctor'. I don't know how you can consider a doctor who spent several hours with Terri, has been nominated for Nobel prize in medicine for his work with brain-damaged patients as an easily impeachable source. I don't know about the numerous other doctors that don't believe she is PVS. I was also simply remarking on someone's implication that spending only 90 minutes with a patient means nothing when this doctor spent only 45 minutes and the judge trusted his judgement. That was it. That was all I was talking about.

[Trinity_Tx]

They are interviewing him, but we were pointing out that he wasn't "the doctor Greer relied on" - it is an important distinction.



Hammesfahr is lying about his status as a Nobel Prize Nominee and has been asked to stop saying he is. He complained about the cost if changing his letterheads.

Hammesfahr was seriously impeached at trial by both his "report" on Terri, and by trying to say he had a confirmation letter and oops just forgot* to bring it (the court asked him to). Turned out to be a note from the secretary saying they sent a letter. And his congressman wasn't even on the panel of people who can nominate. Look at my posts from last night and a link to a thread that has more links.

(*like he forgot/couldn't locate the records of all those patients he said he had who were like Terri.)


The guy is a used car salesman of doctors. He ads in National enquirer. His patent is merely giving common vasodilators to people who need more blood flow to the brain - it works great on some things, but he pushes it as a miracle cure for other things based on nothing.

Even Glenn Beck, a major Terri supporter cut short his interview with hammesfahr, apologizing to the listeners because he couldn't get straight answers from the guy and said he didn't trust him.

As soon as I come out of this fog, I'll reseach and organize everything and put it on my page. right now, i'm going back to bed.

[imskylark]

"Hammesfahr is lying about his status as a Nobel Prize Nominee and has been asked to stop saying he is."

This is interesting.

There are still many doctors who say she is not PVS as well as those who say she is. I believe we should err on the side of life. Who are we to play God? I don't think anyone should be kept alive with ventilators and such who are already dead and will quit breathing as soon as they are unplugged. Terri isn't dying. We are killing her because she is not what people consider a viable human being. Where does this end? That really troubles me. Where do we draw the line as to who is worthy of life and who isn't?

[exDemMom]

This is a "patient controls their own body" case.

It may be defined as such (by Felos et al.), but I think the reality is that all this talk of Terri's "wishes" and of her "controlling her own body" is just a way of sugar coating her murder. I don't think I'd be nearly so frustrated and angry about the whole deal if those getting away with killing Terri would just be HONEST about it for a change. (In case you missed it: Michael did admit to Larry King over the weekend that he does not know what Terri wanted.)