Posted on 03/24/2005 1:45:24 PM PST by reformjoy
If he (Greer) has overstepped his authority with this action (stopping people from giving her water by mouth) and violated Terri's civil rights could Jeb Bush get him thrown off the case and an emergency order to let her parents give her water or ice chips? That may give her enough hydration to get her to a new Florida court and a new trial and custody order. Greer has been the major problem all along.
Don't only cry for Terri Schiavo; she'll be alright after she dies. Weep for our country because Terri's death may be a precedent for worse things to come.
I understand your sentiment. But, yes,
I am sad for Terri. I suppose "all of us
will be all right when we die." (That would
make abortion okay too...wouldn't it?)
I understand what you are saying, that we will
pay the price in our country for all of this.
I just can't make her death "a good thing" for her,
or put a positive spin.
It's really archaic that her husband has these
rights over her body, and then the courts gained
control.
So many people, even in divorce custody fights, realize the horror of letting a power-crazy judge decide what's right and what's wrong.
Sometimes you have to compromise to save someone
and to save your rights to your children outside of
court-ordered control.
I do wish Terri's parents had found a way to compromise
with Michael, before it all became so ugly.
The worse image is of Michael Schiavo sitting next
to Terri's bedside to make sure the parents can't get in.
This man is really wicked and mean.
Mean, mean, mean.
And why wouldn't "the law", i.e., the judge consider new evidence from the DCF today? The judge was willing to interpret as he wished. The judge who is legally blind, literally and figuratively.
Amen.
The killers are making it more difficult for them also by saying that this is what Terri wanted when they know it's a lie. To top it off the (death) attorney for Michael had to gall to tell the Schindler's they needed to just "let it happen" and "reflect on it". I wanted to slap that little puke!
Could this truly be a time when we will have some great symbolic, spiritual, "message" that will be so clear, so obvious and so shattering that it will rip the veil of darkness and cause a great epiphany to occur in the hearts and minds of non-believers and cynics worldwide? Think on this:
The world is so troubled now - the unrest, dissention, criminal, and immoral behavior are at a pinnacle. Our emotions are racing over events that cause even the most logical of persons to search for answers, and question the reason for the suffering and extreme ugliness that we have been observing in the past few months. Even those who understand that there is a tremendous battle being fought on the spiritual level between good and evil find it constantly challenging to hold onto complete faith in God's power over such strong forces that are now at hand.
Terri's fight is a prime, planned event of the devil's most devious, deceitful, design. It is not a coincidence that these two people are suffering together while the whole world watches. Whatever the outcome, whatever the time of their deaths, we must all remain ever vigilant, be most fearfully aware, and pray with the greatest fervor than at any other time in our own recent history.
>> Fill us with the courage of the Holy Spirit as we face our enemies who wait steadfastly to steal our faith and our belief in Gods profound love. Amen.<<
Oh yes. I read on another thread that individuals at the Hospice could refuse to deny Terri water.
If the Holy Spirit was heard by each person, they might
do something, anything, to stand up for Terri.
The Authority over us isn't the Law...
It is God.
**Giving her water** isn't an extraordinary form of life support!
So why is the court supporting the denial of WATER?
This is all so crazy and wrong.
And another great Christian leader, the Reverend Billy Graham, has been fading in recent times. He said at his last speaking engagement, "I think I'm going soon..."
Another example to remind everyone to never hire Judicial Watch as your attorney. These guys don't even have the imagination to make up the law let alone being given the responsibility for finding the truth.
I have a question and a theory:
Q: If Terri was put on a feeding tube because she had a problem swallowing was it a problem that was just slowly getting worse, or was it impossible for her to swallow at all? I have read over and over that some nurses fed her jello, and she took some liquid by mouth.
Was it that a feeding tube simply was less labor-intensive for the hospice center, than having a nurse sit with her for long periods of time feeding her soft foods? The tube relieved them to do other things.
If that is the REAL case, one can see why the Judge and so many others are being so adamant about reviewing this issue from any different perspective, or based on any different information about Terris history or present condition. The possibility that a feeding tube in some patients is merely a convenient way to provide nourishment could be a very alarming expose about this issue. There may be thousands of people on feeding tubes who can be hand-fed, but are not simply because of a manpower problem at our nursing homes, hospitals, and hospice centers everywhere. One can certainly understand then, if Judge Greer has connections with that hospice, such as have been mentioned, he is so fearful about any change in managing Terris life.
There are three questions about what a feeding tube actually is:
1. Is a feeding tube considered a "medicine" in a sense but in this instance the patient is not getting better?
2. Or is it something that is standing in the way of a natural death?
3. Or, is it something that is simply making life easier to sustain?
If it is used as the latter which I suspect is the case in Terris situation: Then the tube could be removed, but the former, natural way of receiving nourishment should have been attempted. Terri should have been hand fed, provided liquid and if she did not have any ability to swallow, and therefore did, indeed, die that would have been a natural death, and God would have taken her, not a human.
However, if she can be sustained on a diet of jello, pudding, soft foods and liquids even it does take hours to feed her then that is the life God has left her to live, and no one has a right to decide it should end. Allowing her to be hand-fed and hydrated takes the decision out of the Court's hands, out of Michael's hands,(she would no longer be living "like that" hence his alleged memory of her saying that would not matter) out of the parent's hands and leaves in in the hands of God to determine.
If Terri could survive, albeit in a very difficult manner, without the feeding tube, then her husbands statement about her alleged wishes would have no bearing. She would not be on an abnormal method of life support, she would be eating, but it would be very time consuming to feed her.
That, perhaps is/was his fear and the bottom-line for his decision. He might have been told that no facility could keep her and spend hours feeding her in a normal manner so his choice was: take her home and become the constant caretaker; or put her on a feeding tube and wait to see what happens, and how long she would live. The prospect of longevity of life may have been ,initially ,thought to be very short. However, once on the feeding tube, and if it then appeared that she would to live that way longer than anticipated, he then used the excuse that Terri did not want that lifestyle.
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.