Posted on 06/19/2005 6:04:50 PM PDT by wagglebee
Dr. William Hammesfahr, nominated for a Nobel Prize for his work in Medicine, has been recognized by agents for Medicare, the federal government, and others for new approaches to helping the brain injured.
Dr. Hammesfahr has been identified in helping patients with chronic brain injuries from many causes actually leave long term disability, and return to work.
Dr. Hammesfahr was identified the first physician to restore deficits caused by stroke.
Dr. Hammesfahr has released the following statement in response to the autopsy report on Terri Schindler Schiavo:
We have seen a lot on the autopsy of Terri Schindler Schiavo in recent days, that I feel needs to be addressed. To ignore these comments will allow future 'Terri Schiavo's' to die needlessly after the wishes of clinicians and family are ignored.
Considering that there were so many physicians and therapists who were willing to step forward to treat Terri Schiavo, from university based practitioners to those in private practice, it clearly shows that the mainstream medical community across the board, those involved in treating patients, knew that they could help Terri.
The record must be set straight. As we noted in the press, there was no heart attack, or evident reason for this to have happened (and certainly not of Terri's making).
Unlike the constant drumbeat from the husband, his attorneys, and his doctors, the brain tissue was not dissolved, with a head of just spinal fluid. In fact, large areas were "relatively preserved."
The purpose of the therapies offered by so many, from major universities, brain injury centers, and from private practice physicians, is to improve and restore quality of life, and function, which the mainstream medical community clearly tried to get to her.
I have had a chance to look at Dr. Nelson's analysis of the brain tissue, and essentially, as a clinician, these are my thoughts.
The autopsy results confirmed my opinion and Dr. Maxfield's opinions, that the frontal areas of the brains, the areas that deal with awareness and cognition were relatively intact. To use Dr. Nelson's words, "relatively preserved." In fact, the relay areas from the frontal and front temporal regions of the brain, to the spinal cord and the brain stem, by way of the basal ganglia, were preserved, thus the evident responses which she was able to express to her family and to the clinicians seeing her or viewing her videotape. The Spect scan confirmed these areas were functional and not scar tissue, and that was apparently also confirmed on Dr. Nelson's review of the slides. Dr. Maxfield's estimates of retained brain weight were apparently accurate, although there may have been some loss of brain weight due to the last two weeks of dehydration.
Dr. Maxfield and myself both emphasized that she was a woman trapped in her body, similar to a child with cerebral palsy, and that was born out by the autopsy, showing greater injury in the motor and visual centers of the brain. Obviously, the pathologists comments that she could not see were not borne out by reality, and thus his assessment must represent sampling error. The videotapes clearly showed her seeing, and even Dr. Cranfoed, for the husband, commented to her that, when she could see the balloon, she could follow it with her eyes as per his request.
That she could not swallow was obviously not borne out by the reality that she was swallowing her saliva, about 1.5 liters per day of liquid, and the clinical swallowing tests done by Dr. Young and Dr. Carpenter. Thus, there appears to be some limitations to the clinical accuracy of an autopsy in evaluating function.
With respect to the issue of trauma, that certainly does not appear to be answered adequately. Some of the types of trauma that are suspected were not adequately evaluated in this assessment. Interestingly, both myself and at least one neurologist for the husband testified to the presence of neck injuries. The issue of a forensic evaluation for trauma, is highly specialized. Hence the wish of the family to have observers which was refused by the examiner.
Ultimately, based on the clinical evidence and the autopsy results, an aware woman was killed.
s/Dr. W. Hammesfahr
[Dr. Hammesfahr was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology in 1999. The Nomination was for work started in 1994. In 2000, this work resulted in approval for the first patent in history granted for the treatment of neurological diseases including coma, stroke, brain injury, cerebral palsy, hypoxic injuries and other neurovascular disorders with medications that restore blood flow to the brain. It was extended to treat successfully disabilities including ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Tourette's and Autism as well as behaviorally and emotionally disturbed children, seizures and severe migraines.]
Florida law is exactly what is wrong in this case.
It has no right to kill citizens. It is being revised to change the death criteria without any knowledge of citizens and without (IMO) any authority. In addition, the lawmaking on end-of-life issues was turned over to an end-of-life panel to recommend AND input as law their findings.
These are unelected people making laws without supervision or knowledge of the citizens. I would think this is not constitutional.
And, the method of making such laws needs to be investigated in each state as I am suspicious of the intent, method and fact of making these laws.
Please enlighten us...what exactly was this "attack" you speak of?
I'm sorry, but I don't see any examples of the Shindlers being treated "horribly through this whole mess." They've had their days in court, their case has been heard.
I'm sorry for their loss, but nobody can seriously suggest that they didn't get a fair shake. The case was highjacked by disinterested parties with an agenda, but they sure seemed to court that in their despiration (Jesse Jackson, the quack doctor with forged Nobel qualifications, etc).
It may not seem that way to you but the Second District Court ruled on appeal that:
"The trial court determines whether the evidence is sufficient to allow it to make the decision for the ward to discontinue life support. In this context, the trial court essentially serves as the ward's guardian.
The problem with what you say is that nobody's suggesting that removing feeding tubes is wrong. They're only saying that it's wrong *in this case*.
That makes your viewpoint hard to accept. Not even Jeb or W are going that far.
So, OK, that means she hadn't suffered a blow to her head causing swelling and an increase in intracranial pressure which would cause the midline shift. Her decerebration was caused by anoxia, a loss of oxygen due to her cardiac arrest. She had the symtoms of decerebration. I'm not sure what your point is.
Now, now, no need to bring facts and/or reason into some of this discussion.
She got her 15 minutes of fame and hasn't been heard from since.
LOL.
I appreciate it as well, earthdweller.
Euthanasia is the murder for convenience of a human who happens to be weak, extremely aged or diabbled .
There is NO comparison.
Was what the Third Reich did with it's euthanasia laws murder? Or to the Jews and Gypsies? In both cases they were "under color of law". The Germans are great on form and process!
Was the Holocaust illegal? Was it murder?
Or was it just "assisting in the death of innocents" -- some non criminal, non felony, non misdemeanor, slightly off-color social offense?
diabbled == disabled.
What did the police report say? There was no indication of an obvious abnormality.
Well, then, as we have seen all through this tragedy - the dang law needs to be changed so that a person has a chance before they are killed!!!!!!
I can't imagine any lawmaker coming up with a stupid law that allows a judge to be guardian and judge over the same person and try the case. For one thing - it is a total waste of tax dollars.
Gee - we have a trial date, lawyers appears on both sides, and the judge speaks up for the victim and then goes and sits on the bench to rule on what he just said (after the lawyers earned their salaries with any pertinent questions).
I wonder if one of those pertinent questions might be "why in the heck are we having a trial for you to play both sides?"
TS was attacked? Huh. I guess all that family gathered around her bed after she was admitted to the hospital missed it. And I guess it took them years to catch on because they certainly extrolled MS's virtues for many years.
Simply amazing the lengths to which freepers will go to make stuff up vs. believing under oath testimony.
This thread is about the autopsy. We're talking doctor statements.
Cheshire diagnoses Terri as minimally conscious not semi-conscious as I stated previously. According to him, she is definitely NOT in PVS.
He examined her on her fifth day of STARVATION/DEHYDRATION. Thus, it isn't unreasonable to believe that had Cheshire examined her before the STARVATION/DEHYDRATION, rather than on it's fifth day, her consciousness would have been even further heightened.
He says she indeed at times, responded to her environment and people around her.
He mentions how when he walked into her room she looked directly at his face.
He also mentions how after physically expressing some discomfort when Hammesfahr presses her with a sharp object and stops after he removes the pressure and the object, Hammesfahr turns to her family and says he is now going to roll Terri over. Upon hearing this, Terri grimaces and and makes ah, ha sounds which tells Dr. Cheshire, that Terri cognitively understood what Dr. Hammesfahr said.
Cheshire says much of Terri's cerebral cortex was in tact. And there are several other interesting findings.
Too bad Cheshire's conclusions received so little attention.
OK, I won't mention it again...LOL.
Not everybody is a non-dying person. Many are in the dying process and the decision is made (which I will not do in the future decisions) to prevent prolonging the death (that is not caused because they initiated it by pulling the tube.)
Or - she was not dying until they pulled tubes giving her food and water and did not offer her food or water by mouth. This by the way turns it into murder - same as if they had locked her in a room without food and water for two weeks.
You cannot call something murder in one place and merely pulling a tube somewhere else. It is the same.
What ever it was that spurred on her loss of oxygen to her brain, from what I can tell it is still an unknown at this point in time what type of attack she had.
Why would it kill you if Terri swallowed her own spit? You protesteth too much.
People lie under oath. My only point is that just because someone is "sworn" under oath, it doesn't mean a person doesn't or won't lie. Unfortunately.
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.