Who is Terri Schiavo

MSNBC.com ^ | 3/25/05 | Jennifer Frey

[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.

[mabelkitty]

IIRC, his brother was the only one who suggested she had an eating disorder. The article clearly states she went to a well-known diet clinic for healthy weight loss.

[mabelkitty]

I see it more hopeful.
Because this is such a passionate and divisive issue, Terri's death may ultimately save the rest of us.
No other judge in the entire country will be allowed to quietly kill Americans from the bench (and under the radar) as he/she sees fit. And watch Texas law change quickly.
It won't happen while she is dying, but it will happen this year.

[TheCrusader]

"The only view that matters is that of the law and according to the LAW he is her guardian."

Yeah, and he's one hell of a 'guardian'. He has spent a generous portion of his wife's monetary settlement to pay for the lawyers who helped pull her feeding tube. May he become YOUR guardian one day.

[filly]

We are taking the first step down a very slippery slope by allowing Terri to die.

---

The Nazis decided that it was a waste of time and money to support the handicapped. During Hitler's "cleansing program", thousands of people with various disabilities were deemed useless and simply put to death like dogs and cats.

"In the postwar world, Auschwitz has come to symbolize genocide in the twentieth century. But Auschwitz was only the last, most perfect Nazi killing center. The entire killing enterprise had started in January 1940 with the murder of the most helpless human beings, institutionalized handicapped patients..." Henry Friedlander, The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution
Read more

---

[Major_Risktaker]

Atty. Gwyneth Stanley - $10,668.05
Atty. Deborah Bushnell - $65,607.00
Atty. Steve Nilson - $7,404.95
Atty. Pacarek - $1,500.00
Atty. Richard Pearse (GAL) - $4,511.95
Atty. George Felos - $397,249.99
1st Union/South Trust Bank – $55,459.85
Michael Schiavo - $10,929.95
Total: $545,852.34

______________

Diogenesis, you forgot
the brief case that Atty.
George Felos slipped to me
in chambers.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The only view that matters is that of the law and according to the LAW he is her guardian.

One day a "guardian" may decide you're not worthy anymore. Don't think it can happen? Keep hiding your head under the pillow like you're doing and watch it.

[humblegunner]

She daydreamed about working for a veterinarian when she grew up, or maybe just being a dog groomer.

That kind of requires being sentient and moving about a bit.

[LauraleeBraswell]

Troll


go to www.terrisfight.org and watch those videos.


I can't stand ignorant people.

[brewcrew]

Sponges are invertebrates.

LBNOL (Laugh, but not out loud). Too many downers the last few days. :(

[T'wit]

>> according to the LAW he is her guardian.

No, he has conflicts of interest that should have disqualified under the law, which is not unconditional. He also failed time after time to fulfill his duties under the law, but was always excused by Judge Greer. Greer, in turn, failed repeatedly to remove Michael Schiavo as required, and to appoint the guardian ad litem specified by law.

Welcome to Free Republic. I hope you will read up on the case and stock up on facts. We have done more research on the case than you're likely to find anywhere.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Just looked at a few of those videos and you're right, she's definitely aware of who her mother is. I wonder if the judge even saw any of them?

[LauraleeBraswell]

When my sister first heard about Terry Shiavo she said something to me along the lines of "Well, it's a very difficult situation, I understand both sides"

And then I showed her videos. As soon as people see the videos they know. You can see the life in Terri, you can see it in her eyes.

My sister has since been upset by the case. We all have.

[bperiwinkle7]

Dear creature, for you are that, anyway, besides being wrong. Occam's razor cut's both ways.......Michael simply wants Terri dead because it became inconvenient for him for her to live. He had a better lawyer, and a group behind him who are pro-euthanasia with a set-up for a profit taking when this becomes common. He did not reveal her wishes to die to the jury who awarded Terri 1.2 millions of dollars to...die right away? no, be supported and cared for and rehabilitated with.... You are apparently 1. IGNORANT of easily obtainable facts and, 2. just signed on today to say grating and stupid things.
see ya.....
ps.
wickedness is simply and cleanly wicked.

[LauraleeBraswell]

We would all feel very different about this if it was a respirator and Terri was in a 16 year coma. Breathing is an involuntary action and in that case you just hit the OFF switch and it's over. Starving someone to death is completely different.

[cwb]

"As sad as it sounds, this is why parents shouldn't be making these decisions. Their love for their child clouds their rational judgement."

---

Whoa! And the love of a spouse is that much more rational? I don't know what kind of relationships you've been in, but that in itself is a rather irrational statement. Hell, I know spouses who have actually lost the "Will" to live when they've lost their life-partners...something that Terri has obviously not lost, yet.

[bperiwinkle7]

shoo! go away!

[claudiustg]

---The only view that matters is that of the law and according to the LAW he is her guardian. ---

One of the major points that Jesus made over and over was that the law is not enough, that love completes the law.

[gardencatz]

And why is it that you refuse to open your eyes? Let's for a minute suspend all the stuff you call conspiracy theories and deal JUST with Terri's "wishes". Michael and his family ONLY remembered Terri wanted to die after his medical settlement and when he was involved with other women. During the malpractice trial he was DETERMINED to take care of her for the rest of her life, which in his estimation would be about 50 years. Tests and brain scans had already been given to her, he knew her condition, but said NOTHING about her wish to die. Supposedly, he became a nurse just so he could take care of Terri. THAT testimony is documented in the court records. No one has to speculate or try to remember words said many years in the past.

Then, wonder of wonders, after he swore in open court that he wanted to care for her whatever her condition for the next 50 years, he suddenly remembers her "wish" to not be kept alive. Prior to that he told several people (including a girlfriend he had while Terri was in the hospital) that he had NO IDEA what her wishes were because they never discussed it. The girlfriend, who was quite fearful of Michael, nevertheless gave a sworn affidavit to that effect. That, too is part of the written record. Other people who spent time with Michael (but weren't allowed to testify) also said they heard him say he didn't know what she wanted. But all of a sudden, he remembers EXACTLY what she said. Not only that, but he also goes from having NEVER discussed it with Terri to remembering MORE THAN ONE occasion when they had specific conversations. Coincidentally, his BROTHER and sister-in-law also "suddenly" remember Terri's wish to die. And the sister-in-law remembers several conversations. At the very least this deserves a bit of skepticism because either he lied at the malpractice hearing or he lied at the hearing(s) to end her life.

On the other side, you have Terri's friends and family testifying that this is NOT what she would want. We also know she was a devout Catholic and "pulling the plug" is against her religious beliefs. Now I know you Michael supporters believe his words might as well have been spoken by God himself and he, of course, said Terri wasn't very devout, but HER OWN ACTIONS before her "accident" belies this comment. She went to church every week, she was well known to her priest as she had been going there for 4 years. Another of Terri's friends, who NEVER changed her story, recalled a conversation she had with Terri after watching a movie about Karen Ann Quinlan. It had always stuck in her friend's mind because of how adamant Terri had been that taking Karen off of the respirator was morally wrong. Terri's words, "where there's life there's hope" had always stayed with her. Judge Greer chose to DISCOUNT this testimony because he ERRONEOUSLY thought Terri said this in 1976, the year they pulled the tube, he believed Terri's friend was mistaken about the date. However, he later admitted he was wrong about the date and realized Terri said this as an ADULT. Naturally, he insists it WOULD NOT have changed his opinion.

You also have 2 guardians ad Litum FOR TERRI (not on the side of the parents or Michael) who believed she should be given more tests. One wanted a swallow test, which was NOT done in spite of what Michael says (otherwise her Guardian would not have had to request the court order one) and the other thought she should have an MRI and/or PET and more extensive evaluations. BOTH were discounted by Greer and LET GO and Greer then assumed the ad Litum position himself (this seems a conflict of interest at best).

At the very least, you have conflicting testimony. Given that, perhaps before deciding to "believe" the husband, following the advice of the discarded guardians might be a practical option BEFORE ruling in favor of death. When testimony conflicts this dramatically, the error should be on the side of life, otherwise the judge is assuming the role of God (or Pan or the Great Wood Elf, or whatever you believe). After all, if she is alive, the issue of whether to terminate her can always be revisited, but death is permanent and once she is gone NO mistake made against her can be corrected.

There is also the very serious matter of the government (and the courts are the government) infringing on her religious rights by condemning her to a fate that goes against her churches teachings. When constitutional rights are infringed upon, especially by those who cannot protect themselves and we do nothing, we weaken our own rights and strengthen the power of those who strip them from us. The sickening part is he further interfered by deciding how many times she could receive communion while she was dying. You reveal the ignorance of your argument when you refuse to acknowledge these basic and verifiable issues.

Cindie

[tallhappy]

We would all feel very different about this if it was a respirator and Terri was in a 16 year coma. Breathing is an involuntary action and in that case you just hit the OFF switch and it's over. Starving someone to death is completely different.

Agreed. One of the most troubling aspects of this has been the intellectual dishonesty and purposeful obsfuscation meant to make it seem as if Terri Schinlder's situation is equivalent to what you describe.

[bperiwinkle7]

here, here!!!!!