Terri Schiavo Before dehydration
Posted on 03/28/2005 5:12:30 PM PST by Maurice1962
WASHINGTON - She was a girl who laughed easily at her uncle's lame jokes. A girl so naive that she wrote to John Denver, asking him to come sing at her wedding, who went to Disney World for her honeymoon and believed that a good life meant that one day she'd be able to vacation there every year with her kids.
She was a girl who loved animals and worshiped cute television stars, paying homage to heartthrobs Starsky and Hutch by naming two gerbils after them. She daydreamed about working for a veterinarian when she grew up, or maybe just being a dog groomer.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
A document's source is a very 'telling' piece of information, in and of itself.
Any internet source with "terrisfight.org" is generally going to be information the Schindlers have posted that supports their position. They would not post anything there that runs contrary to their position. Same goes for a site that ends with "JusticeforterriSchiavo."
Worldnet has definitive conservative views, but does not necessarily recognize other points of view.
I've read information from a variety of sources (including the pro-Schindler/anti Schiavo and "neutral" information on either side). Unfortunately I didn't mark it as a favorite to refer to and share with you right now.
I'd have to spend some time looking for the timeline, but I remember that it wasn't until about 2 years AFTER the infamous malpractice suit that Michael Schiavo found himself with a new love. If I remember correctly, he was extremely dedicated for five or more years. When I get the time, I'll try to find the *other* timeline and post it to you.
Regards,
TROLL ALERT PING> ADMIN GET THE NAZIS OUT OF HERE.
Ops4 God BLess America!
Timelines can have missing elements that can affect your interpretation. Here is a timeline posted by Univ of Miami (miami.edu). It seems to be all-inclusive.
http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/timeline.htm
The problem with *other* timelines (particularly those from the *schindler* *save terri* sites, is that some elements could be missing, and/or have been lumped together. I've even seen articles where a paragraph contained two separate events, but these events were lumped together as one (seeming to transfer seamlessly from one event to another). Reading accurately is critical to understanding as well as to gleaning the truth.
My timeline was my own based on documents I cited. Terrisfight.org may have "pro-terri" information, but court docs and affidavits (which is what I told you I got from the site) are organized and easy to find which saves time searching through the FL court website. The AOL site I posted, as I said is exhaustive and has everything the author has been able to find: pro Michael, pro Schindlers, news articles, court docs, blogs, commentary, etc. She is pro Terri, but has not let her POV get in the way of material. She is building an archive of EVERYTHING relevant.
I began supporting the "let her die" side, but changed my mind based on the following: how soon after Terri's accident he became SERIOUSLY involved with other women (Cindy Shook's very real fear of MS is also important, I think), how long he's been with his fiance and the 2 children they have (FWIW I don't blame him for getting on with his life, but it would by its nature divide his loyalties which would make him a less than ideal guardian for Terri), the date when he "remembered" his wife's wish to die vs. prior testimony in the malpractice suit, the degree to which he went to deny Terri any kind of stimulation, interaction or therapy (based on affidavits of 3 nurses NOT allowed to testify, but who have no loyalties to either side and had the integrity to come forward despite knowing they would lose their jobs). Regardless of how "controlling" you say the Schindlers are (and you've provided no proof of that), they don't have divided loyalties and are willing to care for Terri. Michael could be rid of her without having to kill her.
As to the "control" issue, from the night Terri was admitted into the hospital, they were greeted by Michael's lawyer who had them sign power of attorney over to Michael to make things "easier". They did so without hesitation. Michael has had complete control over Terri's medical records (even her "heart attack" cannot be verified because no one has seen those records). As an aside, given the evidence of trauma from her bone scan, the doctor who was sued providing evidence to get the charges against him reversed, and the testimony of his former girlfriend, I would think if he had evidence of a heart attack and low potassium, he'd make those available. Terri's parents had to go to court to be able to view the records about her treatment. He has, at various times, barred them from even visiting her and they had to petition the court for permission for that. These are part of the official court record and cannot be disputed. He asked for and was granted control over her body even after her death and asked for and was granted the stipulation that Terri could only have communion twice while she is dying (as if a crumb from a wafer and a drop of wine are going to make the difference in how fast she dies). Michael also said on Larry King, he was doing these things because with their litigation they had put him through hell, so he was doing some of this to put them through hell, too. I don't care how much he hates her parents, were he the "caring" spouse he's supposed to be, he would not deny her the rites of her church...since she went every Sunday he had to know how important this would be, whether she can understand it or not.
Given this, I fail to see how the Schindlers have been able to be "controlling" about anything. They could nag, bitch and moan but from day one he made sure he had control. Frankly, I can't imagine any husband having a LAWYER greet his spouse's parents at the hospital to sign a document making sure he has control since as her husband he would anyway. Funny how he had the presence of mind to call a lawyer, but not to adminster CPR (documented by the paramedics who found her face down the same way she fell) or call 911.
It seems that you have combined several of our discussions in your more recent post.
It is possible (I'm not doublechecking it tonight) that some of the data (court records, etc.) is not listed on the Terrisfight.org site. Omission of certain documents could (if any are indeed omitted) affect complete understanding of the situation.
I checked the AOL site. I did not come to the same conclusion that her POV did not get in the way. POV can be subtle, especially when you tend to agree with the basic position.
Have you read Wolfson's GAL report. It is pretty comprehensive and dispels many of your presumptions regarding how soon Michael Schiavo began dating, and the *why* behind his *realization* that Terri had said she didn't want to live in the permanent vegetative state.
Did you know they'd been trying to get pregnant, and the doctors that Michael Schiavo sued (with the Schindler's blessing and concurrence) were gynecological doctors?!
It's all in the Wolfson GAL report.
Have you seen the tape of her? She does respond. She brightens considerably when her mother talks to her. She is brain damaged not brain dead. She has tried to talk. She said I wannn as in I want to live when told what was going to happen to her.
I just spent the weekend with several people who were paralysed, they don't walk, they don't use their arms, should we withdrawn food and water from them?
How do you know she has no feeling in her body? I feel as strongly as you the other way, I feel she does have pain. Why would they put her on pain killers during her periods if she has no pain, why morphine if she has no pain. Her nerves were not damaged just her brain.
Here is a thought that I hope will be considered even by those who agree that Jeb and W have done all that they could within the law.
Michael Schiavo last week invited both the President and the Governor to visit his wife. I think they should go.
And bring her water.
Some argue that the Governor would be dangerously disrupting the balance of powers between the branches of government if he took executive action. Arresting him for bringing water would be such a breech as well, but it would be by those serving the court.
Fifty have already been arrested trying to bring Terri water. Go, Mr President. Go, Governor. Bring her water.
I don't believe the Bush brothers have the spine to visit her. I am really disappointed in them. I would never vote or support anything Jeb runs or markets. He is an absolute disappointment.
These men go to the line and make their statements an inuendo, but when the chips are down they go running.
I bet if there were an oil well on the horizon they would be all over it.
I'm sure this is probably true if you read the commentary, I never have, but the depth of resources and articles is incredible. If you take just today (29th)for example, there's a letter from a neurologist regarding Terri's situation. You would probably consider it biased as pro Terri since he discusses the tests that should have been done and the reasons why, referencing a basic neurological textbook. The second item is a public apology letter to LifeNews.com who wanted something shared from their website removed. Next is a Sun Sentinel article, and AP article from CA discussing the amount they spent caring for comatose prisoners, links to various articles on CNN (including the wacko who was arrested for trying to solicit someone to kill MS, which hardly makes the pro Terri side look good). The next article, from Newsday discusses the conflicting testimony and includes quotes from a bioethicist as an expert in these kinds of "right to die" issues and a couple of articles about the near showdown between Jeb, the state police and the police guarding the hospice. Oh, and if you look at her links on the left, she links to such resources as Abstract Appeal and this one from the U of M, which is hardly biased in Terri's favor: http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/Schiavo_links.htm. I'd say that's pretty balanced.
Have you read Wolfson's GAL report. It is pretty comprehensive and dispels many of your presumptions regarding how soon Michael Schiavo began dating, and the *why* behind his *realization* that Terri had said she didn't want to live in the permanent vegetative state.
I have no "presumptions" about when Michael started dating. There is the sworn affidavit of the girlfriend he dated for almost a year beginning in the latter part of 1991. There is a motel receipt from a trip they took together. There are documents from a real estate agency when they were looking for a house to purchase together. And there are Michael's own words (there's a chart above) from his 1993 deposition:
Q. Are you presently involved in a romantic relationship with anyone?
SCHIAVO: Yes I am.
Q. Are you involved in an intimate relationship with this person.
SCHIAVO: Yes I am.
Q. Is this the first relationship that you’ve been involved in since your wife has been in a coma?
SCHIAVO: No.
Q. How many other relationships have you been involved in?
SCHIAVO: I was in one other relationship. [Note: this "other" relationship would have to be the one with Cindy]
Q. Was it an intimate relationship?
SCHIAVO: Yes.
What Wolfson seems to be referencing (and chosen to believe despite his claims of pouring over everything since this is obviously conflicting testimony), is MS's January 2000 court testimony:
Q: Mr. Schiavo, since Terri’s incident, did you have any intimate relations with another woman?
SCHIAVO: Yes, I did.
Q: When did that occur?
SCHIAVO: Approximately 5 years after the incident. I don’t know the exact dates.
Q: How long did this relationship last?
SCHIAVO: Approximately 8 months.
Q: Do you currently have an intimate relationship with a woman?
SCHIAVO: Yes, I do.
Q: How long have you known her?
SCHIAVO: 5 ½ years.
Either 1) Michael has a rare memory disorder where, unlike the majority of the population, facts become clearer as time goes on; 2) He changes his story to suit the situation; or 3) He's told so many lies to so many different people he's having a hard time keeping his stories strait. The fact that Wolfson ignores these obvious discrepancies...EVEN IF ALL HE HAD WAS MICHAEL'S WORDS, automatically makes his report suspect. Reading through it, I got the feeling he was Michael's guardian rather than Terri's as he seems committed to making his report fit Michael's case. If you compare this to Pearse's report, Pearse didn't give one wit about Michael or the Schindler's, his focus was on Terri.
As to Michael's "realization" of what Terri said...that "Time Clarity Disorder" again, Wolfson DOES NOT talk about Michael's remembering Terri's wishes, but Michael's OWN realization that it was time for Terri to die, though Wolfson writes as if Michael was the hero of a dime-store novel:
By 1994, Michael's attitude and perspective about Theresa's condition changed. During the previous four years, he had insistently held to the premise that Theresa could recover and the evidence is incontrovertible that he gave his heart and soul to her treatment and care. This was in the face of consistent medical reports indicating that there was little or no likelihood for her improvement."
And:
Michael's decision not to treat was based upon discussions and consultation with Theresa's doctor, and was predicated on his reasoned belief that there was no longer any hope for Theresa's recovery. It had taken Michael more than three years to accommodate this reality and he was beginning to accept the idea of allowing Theresa to die naturally rather than remain in the non-cognitive, vegetative state. It took Michael a long time to consider the prospect of getting on with his life [Note: if Michael's previous testimony is to be believed, this statement is untrue] – something he was actively encouraged to do by the Schindlers, long before enmity tore them apart. He was even encouraged by the Schindlers to date, and introduced his in-law family to women he was dating. But this was just prior to the malpractice case ending.
As a rebuttal, and if Wolfson didn't read these he wasn't doing his job, are the MEDICAL REPORTS from Terri's treatment prior to his winning the lawsuit that indicate HE saw improvement in Terri's condition (makes one wonder what she could have accomplished had he allowed treatment to continue). Not only does this reveal MS's duplicity, but Wolfson's as well. Now, I know this link is to a "conservative" sight, but it's just a list from her medical records. It documents, not only Terri's improvement, but Michael's witness to them: http://wuzzadem.typepad.com/wuz/2005/03/terri_schiavos_.html
Did you know they'd been trying to get pregnant, and the doctors that Michael Schiavo sued (with the Schindler's blessing and concurrence) were gynecological doctors?!
This I highly doubt, but only one doctor was a gynecologist, the other was a general practitioner. Again, if you read his prior sworn statements (see above) you'll see evidence of his "memory disorder" again. In the first instance he can't remember whether or not she'd been to the doctor for anything. In the next, which coincidentally happened to be the malpractice trial, he seems to recall "over 130" different occasions when Terri went to the doctor and/or hospital.
The other reason I doubt they were "trying to get pregnant", and Wolfson's oversight here is probably because he's a man, is that she would have talked to her friends and (especially if they were close) her sister. I wouldn't be surprised to hear she didn't tell her parents, but my sister and I tell each other EVERYTHING. Also, women talk with other women about issues going on in their lives. Get a group of 5 women together who know each other fairly well (like co-workers, for instance) and if one of them were having fertility issues, the subject would be sure to come up. Women have NO qualms about discussing these kinds of things with each other to get/give each other support and get advice (even if none of these 5 co-workers had gone through this, invariably one of them would have a neighbor who had a cousin that went through the same thing before they tried "XYZ" treatment that worked). However, the only testimony we have from friends and siblings is that she was going to leave Michael and wanted a divorce. So, while she may have seen a doctor for some problem, I doubt it was infertility.
If the Schindler's gave Michael their blessing about the lawsuit (and there's a whole new can of worms, beginning with the emergency room doctors who found NO evidence of a heart attack), since as you say they didn't know the Schiavos were trying to get pregnant, its because the took him at his word. At that point, even though he was involved in a serious relationship (something they obviously didn't know about either since they were encouraging this young man that they loved and trusted to "get out and date") they hadn't heard conflicting testimony, Michael was still providing Terri with physical therapy and he wasn't trying to kill off their daughter, so the fact that they would be supportive of his lawsuit isn't surprising. At the time, remember, MS was still telling everyone that every dime would go to Terri's care and rehab and not to a lawyer who can miraculously channel the thoughts of PVS patients by looking into their eyes.
Cindie
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.