Replies

I have not, I just returned from spending a few days in The Big Apple, and avoided any sort of news outside the weather for a week or so.

But I will tell you what I think about this case...if the nutjobs allow reason to intervene.

The laws need to be retooled BY THE LEGISLATURE, if the argument is that no one should ever be legally denied food and water lacking written instructions to that effect, then tool the law to state that.

But the government should never, ever take the ultimate responsibility for reaching the decision to end life away from the next of kin; you can't rewrite traditional law as a reaction to an unusual case such as this, and in cases where the next-of-kin can't come to an agreement, then one must ultimately have the legal last word.

More importantly, the decision should NEVER be handed over to any outside agency, it should always stay with the next of kin.

James Adams was convicted of first-degree murder and executed in Florida's electric chair in 1984. It was later determined that Mr. Adams was not guilty of committing the crime he was found guilty of at all.

The fact that an innocent man was executed does not negate the societal benefit that I believe being able to sentence people to death brings to my State.

I see the Schiavo case in the same light.

Tighten the laws, make whatever changes are needed, but don't destroy the system.

Krauthammer argued that where there was a disagreement between the spouse and the parents, and no living will, the party who was willing to care for the person in PVS state should prevail. I agree with Krauthammer. He has it exactly right in the sense that I agree with him. Within certain constrainst as outlined, choose life, choose the nurturing party, where there is a lack of certainty of the preferences of the PSV person, chosen with thought and gravitas, by virtue of having to pen and sign a written document.

My friend, the system failed to function for justice. There were too many conflicts of interest with the judge (Greer) and with the grossly abusive husband. The entire finding of facts was kept with Greer despite very questionable connections and conflicts of interest that would have allowed other courts to bring in new evidence and cite the charges, and those other courts merely rubber stamped the rulings of Greer by effectively blocking anything that would reflect negatively on Greer or the court system or the Hospice program, or the guardianship (Greer even appointed himself her guardian at one point while still hearing the case and appeals in his court!). To top off all that, when the U.S. Congress fashioned a bill to settle the habeas corpus issue and allow a Federal court to do a de novo trial of ALL evidence, Federal Judge Whittemore ignored the bill and rubber stamped the entire past history of the flawed process, effectively ignoring the conflicts of interest, the evidence to the contrary of a PVS diagnosis, and the abuses of Terri's once husband.

In short, Terri was executed without anyone ever proving beyond a reasonable that Terri actually wanted to die after becoming severely disabled ... and even the most heinous murderers get that standard of proof before execution.

"I have not, I just returned from spending a few days in The Big Apple, and avoided any sort of news outside the weather for a week or so. "

That explains it. I did not follow this case over the years either -- in retrospect I am ashamed of it, I should have, but didn't. I started to pay more attention the last several months and I didn't have "an axe to grind". But the more I found out, the more suspicious circumstances (including the circumstances around Terri's collapse), motives and more uncertainties were revealed.

Ask yourself -- if MS just wanted to go on with his life, why didn't he just let Terri's parents have Terri and surround her with love? As someone put it, maybe MS wasn't afraid that Terri won't recover, he was afraid that she might, and might remember what he did to her.

The only legitimate purpose of the system is to protect the inalienable rights of the individuals who are within the system. The family is the basic unit of society, with more priority than government. However, when the family is causing death, the State has a legitimate interest in preserving life.