"Conflict of interest"???
Terri's husband sought EVERY avenue of help for Terri for 3 years, even went to school to become a nurse to care for her.
I was ONLY after he became convinced her situation was hopeless that he gave up.
Who do you people think you are judging this man?
The claim is made he tacked when the judgment money came in. In the end, it doesn't matter that much to me, I make my decision on other grounds, but which is it? What is the time line?
"Terri's husband sought EVERY avenue of help for Terri for 3 years, even went to school to become a nurse to care for her."
Yes, WHILE his malpractice suit was going on.
The minute it was over, he started to do everything he could to kill Terri.
1992
Aug - Terri awarded $250,000 in malpractice settlement.
Nov - Terri awarded $1.4 million in malpractice trial.
Nov - Michael Schiavo awarded $600,000 in malpractice trial.
1993
Feb - Michael Schiavo denies recommended rehabilitation treatment.
Feb - Schiavo and Terri's parents have falling out regarding lack of therapy for Terri.
Feb - Schiavo withholds medical information from Terri's parents.
Feb - Schiavo posts Do not Resuscitate order in Terri's medical chart.
Jun - Schiavo threatens Schindler family with lawsuit.
Aug - Schiavo orders medical staff not to treat Terri for potentially fatal infection.
Sep - Bob and Mary Schindler petition courts to remove Schiavo as Terri's guardian.
Nov - Schiavo admits in deposition that he knew withholding treatment of infection could result in Terri's death.
....
1995
Sep - Schiavo orders Palm Gardens not to treat Terri for potentially fatal infection.
1996
Jun - Terri's parents obtain court order for access to Terri's medical records.
1997
May - Judge Shames approves Schiavo action to remove Terri's nutrition and hydration.
Jul - Schiavo's engagement to Jodi Centonze announced.
Aug - Attorney Felos's letter notifying Terri's parents of action to remove Terri's nutrition and hydration.
The charge of conflict of interest applies to the court's judgement the Michael Schaivo was a fit guardian now, in 2005, not when he was behaving honorably and pursuing nursing training to care for his disabled wife.
Whether despair made him callous, or finding another woman, or the lure of money, he did not continue on the noble path. He did not give guardianship of his wife over to her parents whose love was obviously greater than his, but 'remembered' her purported desire not to live a she had become.
Giving up would have meant passing her care on to someone else, he did more than give up, and worse.
It was only after receiving MONEY that he "gave up."
Yes, for three years he did "everything" while he was pursuing a malpractice suit. He testified in court that he planned to take care of her for the rest of her life and it was estimated that she would live to be approximately 51 years old in her condition. During this initial therapy, she was able to say a few words, move her limbs and even do basic walking movements with a therapist on parallel bars.
Within a few months of settling the lawsuit, Michael STOPPED ALL THERAPY (including basic comfort therapy, like range-of-motion therapy to prevent her muscles from atrophying and stiffening) and stopped any medication for illnesses (although he did still allow pain medication). He demanded that she not have a TV on, and the radio could only be turned to one station. Nurses could not place a washcloth in her hand when her fingers began to curl ("therapy") or give her a wet washcloth to suck on. (All this according to several affadavits from nursing staff.)
He stopped this therapy without approval from the court (which he apparently needed, according to guardianship laws) and against the medical recommendations of Terri's doctors. After she did not die from a couple of urinary tract infections, he finally remembered four years later (yes, seven years after the accident) that she had once said that she would have wanted to die if she were ever in this situation. Without therapy, she had deteriorated, her muscles atrophied, limbs and appendages curled, etc.
Meanwhile, he did not file the annual plan of guardianship required by Florida guardianship laws, he did not file the annual financial reports required by law (he filed some years, but not all). He got a lawyer (Felos) who knew the system and was able to play a better game (using lawsuit money) than the Schindlers (using their own money to pay legal fees).
During court proceedings, the 2 Schiavo doctors said that Terri was PVS and the 2 Schindler doctors said she was not. The court appointed doctor (a right-to-die advocate) said PVS, and based on one extra vote on the PVS side, the judge found as "fact" that she was PVS. The court-appointed guardian recommended that Terri be given a swallowing test, but it was never done. No other tests (including MRI and PET scan) were approved by Michael, as the guardian who could approve medical tests and care.
I could go on, and on, and on, but you may be one of the 9% of respondents who seemed to agree that disabled persons should be put to death, although the poll did not specify how "disabled" you had to be to be worthless.
So, sorry for wasting your time and giving you a little bit of info. There is more out there if you care to read state and federal legal filings....
If you choose to believe MS is wonderful, it's your perogative.
Hmm - well, I wont touch on the nurse part - there are certainly curious things he did with syringes ---testified too
but lets get on to Her situation. Why not then just let her parents take her?
Of course he'd have to divorce her to marry his live in, and they couldn't marry in his church as a divorced man, and then there's the money in trust for Terri and a life ins pol?
Of course, we have to remember that he cared so much for her that, once he won the millions of dollars to "take care of her" he promptly ordered all therapy, stimulation, even medical treatment stopped...not even any more trips outdoors in her wheelchair. etc etc etc.
Hey, don't you have some papers to get notarized?
Because he has deliberately inflicted far more agony on Terri in the years he's been trying to have her killed than she would have experienced in decades living with parents who actually loved her.
It's quite interesting to read the court testimony from the medical malpractice lawsuits -- how he said he wanted to become a nurse so that he could take care of Terri forever, because he loved her no matter what.
I understand if he later decided he wanted to move on with his life. In fact, the Schindlers encouraged him to do that so they could take care of Terri. But I do not understand -- or forgive -- his "DOH! Silly me! How could I forget? She told me she never wanted to live like this! . . . now stop giving her antibiotics, and oh yeah, stop feeding her."
His recent actions just underscore what I'd seen in his earlier actions.
I think I'm an American citizen who's entitled to form the opinion that Michael Schiavo is a vicious, cruel cretin in thrall to bad philosophy. Who do you think you are?
It was ONLY after NOBODY could offer any hope that he gave up on her and decided to let her go.
Correction: he decided to kill her. He could have "let her go" at any time, and walked away. In his selfishness, he decided to kill her.
I am sick to death people judging this man with hysterical and meanspirited accusations.
What's your relation to him?
[And the fact is that evidence must be clear and convincing.] And the courts decided it was.
"courts" = Greer. And yes, that's what he decided. And he was wrong, which is why he is coming in for criticism. Understand now?
The law has always been that the spouse has the first word on decicions like this.
To quote a great debater, "You are wrong". The law has seldom allowed people to make a "decision" to kill their spouse.
If I am a vegetable and and water is all that is keeping me trapped in a such a miserable state of limbo, then by all means deny it. It's preferable to suffering years on end.
If one is a "vegetable" they cannot be "suffering". This was just one of the many glaring self-contradictions of the pro-killing faction.
The courts determined that this was Terri's wish per her husband's testimony...several times over many years. I don't know if they were right or wrong and neither do you.
Once again you use the plural "courts" to describe a single Judge.
You're right that neither I nor you know whether HE was right or wrong and that is the point. Absent clear and convincing evidence she should not have been killed, even under the bad law as it is written.
But with morphine to make sure it was painless, I would prefer this to years of being a vegatable with a tube stuck in me and needing people to wipe my butt everyday.
This is an autobiographical statement which has nothing to do with Terri Schiavo. Unless you are honestly saying that she needed to be killed to preserve what you imagine you "would want" in some low-probability hypothetical situation? Which would be astoundingly selfish on your part.
The medical experts said Terri's brain had liquified.
No they did not. Your understanding of the case appears to be very shallow and cartoonish. Had her "brain" "liquified" we wouldn't be talking about this, she would have been declared dead long ago.
I believe they can and do suffer in their soul being.
You "believe" that they "suffer in their soul being", eh? Is this the sort of objective, rational, law-based considerations that inform your view?
. I don't see any reason to keep a person here when they are just as much gone already. I don't see the point.
That much is clear. So when you "don't see the point" of not killing someone, why, let's just kill them. Got it!
Maintaining her in this state of limbo for years could very well have been more cruel than just letting her go now.
"could very well have been"? based on what? the "suffering in her soul being"? Yeah that's scientific.