DCF: Terri Schiavo Not Abused, Exploited

ABC/AP ^ | 4.16.05

[ambrose]

DCF: Terri Schiavo Not Abused, Exploited

State Agency: Terri Schiavo Was Not Abused or Exploited by Either Side of Her Family

By VICKIE CHACHERE

The Associated Press

Apr. 16, 2005 - State investigators found no evidence that Terri Schiavo had been abused or exploited by either side of her family, according to documents released by Florida's Department of Children and Families.

The agency investigated 89 complaints dating back to 2001, when Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for the first time and the legal battle surrounding her right-to-die case intensified.

The calls alleged that the brain-damaged woman was being mistreated by her husband and her parents for financial gain. One complaint alleged that Schiavo's parents were selling videos of her through a Web site; another said Schiavo's husband wasn't spending money intended for her rehabilitation.

But investigators said they found no evidence that either her husband or parents were exploiting her, and often noted in their records that they found Schiavo well cared for on their visits to her Pinellas Park hospice.

The agency released the records Friday under court order.

Schiavo, 41, died last month after her feeding tube was removed for the third time, ending a bitter court battle between her husband, Michael Schiavo, and parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, over whether she would have wanted to live in a vegetative state.

The repeated allegations of abuse were based partly on bone scans showing Terri Schiavo suffered fractures and statements she made to family and friends that she was unhappy in her marriage.

Schiavo's husband has denied harming his wife. His lawyer said the fractures resulted from osteoporosis caused by the woman's years of immobility and complications of her medication.

Robert Schindler declined to comment there on the release of the DCF documents. An attorney for Michael Schiavo did not immediately return calls.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright © 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures

[unbalanced but fair]

Oops. It's late' Should read:

Just because many people believe something, doesn't necessarily make it so.

This applies to both sides of any issue.

[ClancyJ]

Why do you bother? It doesn't matter what comes to light, the conspiracy people will turn it around and make it fit their theory or theories. It is a waste of time and effort.

Have you got a clue why? You are right it is a waste of time and effort.

No matter how much you sugar coat any of it - the fact is that Terri was murdered by the state, her constitutional rights were denied her since she was denied the right to life, and she got a death sentence without committing any crime.

I don't like the state murdering its citizens because the state does not feel they should live any longer. I do not like euthanasists rewriting laws to prevent some from living, and I do not like the precedent set by this case.

Just remember this F A C T. Terri WAS NOT DYING until they removed her hydration and food. She was not offered food/water by mouth, therefore, the state killed her.

And if you think any parent is going to quietly sit by while the state kills their children and says "No, you cannot take care of your son/daughter, they have to die", you might as well get used to hearing the ranting and raving.

[ClancyJ]

we'll just laugh at you.

And I should care that people who cannot understand why so many of us are so upset about the murder of Terri choose to laugh at us?

Why? Seems I would care more about finding those that understand how important this was and are willing to see that the death culture does not win in getting to rid our country of all the "undesirables" on their whim. Seems I would be interested in locating others to fight the out-of-control judiciary.

But, you guys can just enjoy yourselves laughing.

[ClancyJ]

So my response is the same in that the law allows for her death or murder.

And you agree that the law has the right to murder its citizens even when it violates their constitutional rights?

Are you asleep? Now, tell me again, exactly what are you promoting as you fight liberalism?

[ClancyJ]

What is going to neutralize us is the fact that we have found out that those that were our compatriots in the fight against liberalism, actually did not think like us at all. Now, we don't know who our compatriots will be. That is what will neutralize us.

I don't intend to sit by and allow euthanasists to obtain the power to determine who lives and dies and when. I won't stand for a government telling a mother that she cannot have her child because they have to kill it.

Now, those that want to retain the right to kill off relatives as they see fit and go to any lengths to guard their guilt-free state are just not quite what I expected as compatriots in the fight against liberalism. Seems they have bought into pure liberalism already.

[PFKEY]

And you agree that the law has the right to murder its citizens even when it violates their constitutional rights?

Are you asleep? Now, tell me again, exactly what are you promoting as you fight liberalism?

What I am saying is that according to the law her constitutional rights have not been violated.

If that were the case then someone would be indicted for violating her rights.

I don't see where this supposed violation has anything to do with fighting liberalism.

Can you explain to me how this case has anything to do with liberalism?

I'm not saying that it doesn't I just haven't thought of it in those terms.

[ClancyJ]

Did you get to see the "Juggler for Jesus" in person?!

Oh, so now we have the state able to determine that an American citizen cannot live - even though they are not dying. So, the state kills her.

And.......no "Juggler's for Jesus" are allowed to protest. What about the constitutional rights of the Juggler's for Jesus. Are you taking those away too?

Boy, you are P o w e r f u l.

[ClancyJ]

Randy Neugebauer 19th District, Texas

Great man - hope you thanked him. I agree totally with his comments. Guess that makes me a radical wacko pro-life embarrassment.

So be it - this is something well worth being an embarrassment for.

[ClancyJ]

But, doesn't the patient have the right to determine the quality of life they want? Isn't this solely in their hands and no one elses? I wouldn't want someone else to decide for me how I should have to live.

Yes, the patient should have this right - however, in Terri's case, nothing was written down and we are just using MS's "hearsay" evidence to kill an American citizen. There is a 50/50 chance she wanted to die like that. Based on MS actions it was doubtful he really had Terri's interests in mind. And the desperate need to see her dead proved that there was a lot more going on behind the scenes.

This is exactly why we are so upset. We do not believe the state has the right to commit murder on an American citizen AND we see that there is an agenda to progressively further euthanasia for the undesirables a step at a time.

And, there are now glimmers that even the Living Will can be ignored by "doctors" if they chose. Should a person have to end up with the vultures wanting their estates, or wanting them dead, circumventing their wishes?

FYI - Here are the progressive steps the Florida end-of-life panel has instigated into law without oversight. For the "skirting of the Living Will" see the last paragraph (Posted by mercyme on another thread)

In 1998, the florida legislature created the Florida Panel on End-of-Life Care for the purpose of revising the 765 statute for end-of-life issues. They were charged with coming up with the findings for changes in the law for the Florida legislature. Their findings were made law

Bill CB/CB/SB 2228, which revised the 765 as of October 1, 1999, also gave the authority to the End-to-Life panel to make findings for the legislature and that these findings were to made into law.

The legislature essentially gave them the authority to dictate to the legislature what changes to put in their bills. So the role of End-of-Life panel was not simply to make recommendations, but had the authority to determine what changes would be made into law.

The 765 law was revised in 1999 to include "end-stage condition" as a reason to withdraw life prolonging procedures along with persistant vegetative state and terminal illness. This was also put into law. Geldart also redefines terminal illness as not just conditions that cause death, but "irreversible" conditions or conditions "with no reasonable chance of recovery". Felos used this definition for the argument that Terri is terminal because she has a "irreversible" neurological condition with no "reasonable hope for recovery".

Geldart also details the the change in law that permitted nutrition and hydration to be considered medical treatment and the changes to life-prolonging procedures in the absence of advanced directives. Project Grace member William Leonard then points out a common scenario in Florida in his article: an elderly couple moves from out of state to Florida and then one spouse dies within a year 's time. Leonard then expands the definition of family to a neighbor, friend or caregiver who is now in the position of articulating the wishes of the elderly person to withdraw medical treatment, rather than "some distant relative".

And indeed the 765 law was changed to allow an "friend" to say that the person wanted life-pronging procedures withdrawn without a written directive. This also effected the outcome of Terri's case. Authors of Project Grace advocate for terminal sedation (Basta), withdraw of nutrition and hydration (Basta), and the refusal of physician to provide "futile" treatment as unethical even with advanced directive asking for treatments (Doty).

They also state that advanced directives providing for treatment should not carry the same weight as directives withdrawing care, and advanced directives should not compel the physican to provide them, regardless if the patient needs them (Doty). Doty is part of the Florida Bioethics Network as well as Project Grace. One of the changes in the law in CB/CB/SB 2228 includes the Bioethics Network as part of the process of withdrawing care. "

[ClancyJ]

Funny that you are so obsessed with slandering the Schlinders. Have a little compassion if you can. Think of how you would feel if you had a disabled daughter that you loved and you were told 'No, you cannot take care of her because we are going to kill her'.

Now, what if they did want MS to give them part of the money. I would bet, by this time they knew he had a "live in" and they were getting suspicious of him.

Even if not - so what. Does this mean they must sit quietly by while their daughter is killed? Give me a break.

Just how many parents do you think will sit quietly by while a disabled daughter is killed? Remember - it is only hearsay that she ever said she did not want to live like that AND she was Catholic.

[ClancyJ]

We sure don't need anymore out of state snowbirds here even for a vacation. They stink up the place.

Proves my point. They have "plans" for the elderly in Florida.

The motto must be "Bring me your tired, your aged, your broken bodies and we will give you 'rest'".

[ClancyJ]

She didn't care one way or the other.

And you know that - how? No one knows what is inside a person's mind, no one knows for sure.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Did you see the protestors in Atlanta?

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Bring up these issues with the FL legislature.

[ClancyJ]

The Schindler's actually wrote this all by themselves? Or is it part of an orchestrated PR campaign.

Who the >>>>>> cares?

Why do you hate the Schlindlers? What great sin did they commit? Loving their daughter? Fighting to keep a loved daughter and care for her?

I thought we liked loving parents. Or, is it now that we love the parents that kill their children? I just cannot keep up.

[ClancyJ]

But usually when they remove a feeding tube, they offer food by mouth. To not offer food (and indeed to deny it) is murder.

There is also a very big difference in removing a feeding tube from one in the dying stages so as not to prolong the death process and removing a feeding tube from one who is not dying and instigating the death process.

One is a heart-wrenching decision to assist the one dying and the other is killing, murder.

This is the very big step that has been taken in the Terri Schaivo case.

[ClancyJ]

What I am saying is that according to the law her constitutional rights have not been violated.

Yes, that is true. But that law also ignored a Florida state law that says you cannot remove a feeding tube from a disabled person. That law also ignored a federal subpoena and a federal law calling for a review of the case with new eyes. So, apparently the law can be interpreted as one wishes.

Liberalism

Yes. The liberal agenda is government control of everything, taking away every moral concept, removing religion and religious beliefs, instilling the "State" as the ultimate authority and more and more power over the lives of all Americans.

This case has set precedents that have aided the euthanasia movement. Hearsay evidence is now on the books as acceptable in Florida. Watch for massive onslaught of public education that it is right for man to judge the worth of another's ability to live. All easily say "I would not want to live like that" and thereby justify removing the tube, etc., etc. This will be utilized by the euthanasia movement to instill the "State" having the ability to rid the country of the undesirables. It has just happened in the Terri case. And on FR some are mocking and laughing at those of us who think this is a bad thing. Ridiculous and I am highly disappointed in their true values and their ability to understand what is even going on.

[ClancyJ]

I am not in Florida, but surely will investigate what my state is doing on end-of-life issues.

The people of Florida should be up-in-arms with outrage. They should throw that congress out. They are the ones that did not save Terri and they didn't because of the powerful influence against the law. There is a strong base of Scientology believers in that very county as well as the euthanasia movement. Florida is a retirement state and a magnet for those wishing to feed off the assets, property and get rid of the elderly.

I am really afraid we have seen the tip of the iceberg in how our elderly are being ushered out the door in America.

[PFKEY]

Yes. The liberal agenda is government control of everything, taking away every moral concept, removing religion and religious beliefs, instilling the "State" as the ultimate authority and more and more power over the lives of all Americans.

The Liberals accused 'us' of the very same notion of government trying to control everything when Congress and the President got involved in a State matter.

[presently no screen name]

I didn't post that - just replying to someone that did.

This applies to both sides of any issue.
Yeah, so, what's your point?