Posted on 06/19/2005 6:04:50 PM PDT by wagglebee
I wasn't talking about Dr. Cheshire. I was talking about Dr. Maxwell. The one hired by the Schindlers who could not distinguish between PVS and a coma at trial.
You're spot on there. The money was the issue here at least with the Schindlers. Also no one has adequately explained why, if MS was so evil, that he didn't go for one of those multi-million dollar deals to just turn Terri's care over to the parents.
I've been on these threads a LOT and I don't remember anyone else saying such a thing.
Ping!
I personally think that MS did not turn over care of Terri to her parents because they testified under oath that even if they knew she wouldn't want to be kept alive that way, they would keep her alive.
Also, they testified under oath that even if she needed multiple amputations as a result of the poor circulation that often accompanies PVS patients, they would keep her alive.
It's beyond gruesome; she had no cognitive ability and it's not life. Not matter how much we wish it was otherwise.
But that's purely speculation on my part why MS didn't just turn her over to her parents.
About Dr. Maxwell?
...I can tell you that I would not trust my in-laws to decide what I should have for dinner- let alone if I should live or die. But that is me...
That would be me too. My wife is a wonderful person, but her siblings have shown a propensity for dysfunction at times. It's not that they are evil, it's just that I have seen them operate with a lack of common sense and judgment at times. I'm not close to any of them.
I brought up the point though not to pass judgment on in-laws in general, but because I think it's a given most of us would trust our mother, and probably even an old friend over our in-laws.
If I recall correctly, Michaels testimony was objected to as conflicted. So was Mrs. Schindler and Terri's old friend who testified. That left only Michaels Shiavo's brother and wife to decide Terri's fate.
To me that is very troubling. Also troubling is the Medicare fraud involving Suncoast Hospice (not to mention that the goul Felo's was on the board of that company shortly prior to handling Terri's case).
For starters, no Doctor in his right mind would have stated that Terri had six months or less to live, which is a requirement under Medicare for payments to be made for Hospice.
I think the fraud thing will eventually come out, and it really needs to. Suncoast is guilty of fraud and murder for money. Slow, cruel murder at that.
Yes.
Not to mention all of the BS about her being blind. If she was blind, there was no way she could follow hands and balloons; unless she had some other perceptive skill, which would still rule out brain death.
Her doctor, I believe it was Gambone, never signed the hospice form and he quit the case.
I was just in Florida in April, dealing with this very thing. My mother was on Medicare Part B. I was told she was switched to hospice care because she had cancer. I informed them that she'd been cancer free for 10 years so what was their justification? I got heming and hawing. I was told that Medicare cases are reviewed every 6 months to determine if death is imminent or likely in 6months and that it's a medicare rule. They then told me that my mothers case was up for review. The day I flew home, she was switched back to Medicare.
You thought wrong.
Perhaps it's a pattern?
So you've never read that allegation. What should I do about that? LOL
It's in the transcripts. Here is Maxwell's testimony, which is rebutted by other testimony:
http://home.comcast.net/~trinity_tx/maxwellfelos.htm
http://home.comcast.net/~trinity_tx/bambakadisfelos.htm
http://home.comcast.net/~trinity_tx/cranfordfelos.htm
Hammesfahr stated some time ago that she couldn't see farther than 12 to 18 inches from her face and that was the reason that she lost interest in objects.
Before her collapse, Terri wore glasses and contacts.
You are the one who talked about the fact that suicide was accepted.
I just said it is not.
And your claim about thousands withdrawing care. Let me ask - are they doing that because someone is dying?
Or, are they doing that because they think it is time for that person to die - because of expense, greed, suffering or whatever. Exactly what reasons do you think make it ok for you to decide to initiate a death on another person?
I would like to hear how you justify your willfully killing other people. It is wrong and is not being done all over the country. If it is, they better watch out because they could be charged with murder.
Apparently you are one of the ones that just does not have the power to realize the difference in a person dying and further efforts are stopped to prevent extending the dying process and those that come along and say - grandma is old, she has heart problems, let us just have a talk with the nurses and have them pull that old feeding tube to let her go now.
One is to save prolonging death when it arrives and the other is making a person dead when death has not come calling. One is called killing - the other is just not prolonging a life that is in the dying process.
So - if you are not able to tell the difference - maybe we do need laws that will spell out that the only people whose plugs can be pulled are those that are dying. If they are alive - they still are American citizens and have the right to live.
Good grief - now I understand the rage at our defense of Terri. I guess some on FR really do believe it is ok to kill a non-dying woman as of course someone gave them that authority. Just wonder who that SOMEONE is.
I only read the first sentence. And it was so wrong that I discontinued reading.
I've not talked about suicide with regard to this case.
You thought wrong.
Saundra was correct. The Schindlers petitioned the court to have her buried in Florida and the petition was denied. MS must have changed his mind. There was a flurry of petitions at the end. Another was that she not be cremated.
...Her doctor, I believe it was Gambone, never signed the hospice form and he quit the case...
Three signatures are required under Medicare. The attending physician, the patient or the guardian, and the Hospice agency.
Suncoast is toast.
Hammersfarb was, is and will remain, a grifter. You should cease using him in your arguments, unless, of course, quoting a liar, cheat and con-man are okay with you.
I'm aware of that already.
My mother is in a nursing home and not a hospice but I was told that she was considered a hospice patient by ONE doctor who wasn't even hers. It was either the medicare doctor or hospice doctor. And this is Tallahassee. Guess they've got quite a "deal" going on down there and to heck with rules.
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.