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.]
You're right. That's cruel.
An example of an extreme view.
Here is an example of an extreme view on the other side.
Scientologists believe (1) that a disabled person is in such a state due to his or her own failings, (2) the disabled person will deliberately move in the direction of death, and (3) disabled people (Individuals who score low on the emotional tone scale) will also bring death to those around them. (See L. Ron Hubbard's book, Self Analysis, chapter 4)
One of Scientology's major goals is to change society's views about death, dying.
Bob and Mary Schindler showed unconditional love for Terri. You can see it in their eyes and in their actions. Terri was adored by her mother and she was the apple of her father's eye. They are grieving over the loss and I am amazed that anyone would hurl insults and vindictive comments their way. It is truly amazing.
Bringing in the Scientologists is a straw man, unless you have actual proof - not the usual round of conjecture and speculation that passes for evidence here - that such a stupid whackjob cult had anything to do with this matter. The reference Peach made was not "an example of an extreme view," it was what happened.
The Flag Service Organization, located in Clearwater, provides the highest level of Scientology training and is the largest single Scientology "church" in the world. Scientology brochures claim that Clearwater Florida has the "largest community of Scientologists in the world." Back in 1998, Scientology generated from 1.5 to 2 million dollars of income per week. This material success enables them to maintain ownership of tens of millions of dollars worth of property (about 40 buildings) as well as many businesses:
To date, the church owns more than $50-million in Clearwater-area properties and is nearing completion of a $50-million Mediterranean Revival-style building nicknamed "Super Power." Additionally, the church now has 565 hotel rooms in and near downtown for visiting Scientologists who consider Clearwater their spiritual mecca.
(source: Scientologists Settle Death Suit)
That's called a coincidence, not proof.
Footnote: Of the Schindlers, there has evolved the unfortunate and inaccurate perception that they will "keep Theresa alive at any and all costs" even if that were to result in her limbs being amputated and additional, complex surgical and medical interventions being performed, and even if Theresa had expressly indicated her intention not to be so maintained. During the course of the GAL's investigation, the Schindlers allow that this is not accurate, and that they never intended to imply a gruesome maintenance of Theresa at all costs.
Of Michael Schiavo, there is the incorrect perception that he has refused to relinquish his guardianship because of financial interests, and more recently, because of allegations that he actually abused Theresa and seeks to hide this. There is no evidence in the record to substantiate any of these perceptions or allegations.
Until and unless there is objective, fresh, mutually agreed upon closure regarding measurable and well accepted scientific bases for deducing Theresa's clinical state, Theresa will not be done justice. There must be at least a degree of trust with respect to a process that the factions competing for Theresa's best interest can agree. To benefit Theresa, and in the overall interests of justice, good science, and public policy, there needs to be a fresh, clean-hands start.
The Schindlers and the Schiavos are normal, decent people who have found themselves within the construct of an exceptional circumstance which none of them, indeed, few reasonable and normal people could have imagined. As a consequence of this circumstance, extensive urban mythology has created toxic clouds, causing the parties and others to behave in ways that may not, in the order of things, serve the best interests of the ward.
...Yes. She was so much the apple of her father's eye that when asked in court if he'd keep her alive even if she didn't want that, he responded that he would.
He further responded that he'd keep her alive even if she needed to have all her limbs amputated as a result of poor circulation.
That's not love....
The first question goes to her fathers belief that Euthanisia is unacceptable. His answer is spot on with the Catholic Church. The Schindlers are Catholics, are they not?
The second question is a hypothetical one, and not worthy of a finding of fact imo. If the Schindlers lawyer did not object to that question, he probably should have.
If someone wanted to kill your kid, how many lost limbs would it take to convince you that it was time to give in and let them kill them?
Btw, quadraplegics are allowed to live. Brain damaged people are allowed to live. There is no law anywhere in this country that states that they must die because of their disability.
Both questions are irrelevant. What is relevant is a person's desire to refuse medical treatment, or have it refused for them (in Florida at least) by practically anybody in the absense of a medical directive by the patient.
So, you want to say her father didn't love her because of his religion (over one billion served, kind of like the McDonalds slogan)or based on a question which is not only hypothetical but irrelevant to law?
Well, you already did.
I believe you my friend.
I understand why your side must destroy him. I can't hardly wait for June 28th, when you all must destroy Mark Fuhrman. See you then....
I am not blinded by emotions, I asked you very simply how your counter argument has anything to do with a comment I made with respect to conspiracy theories, instead of throwing around insults why don't you explain how a statement about conspiracy theories has anything to do with your comments.
How about a history lesson for you? Here is part of Michael Schiavo's court transcript before he got the money.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't trade her for the world," he replied. "I believe in my wedding vows. ... I believe in the vows I took with my wife, through sickness, in health, for richer or poor. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that."
"Few more medical analysis experts for you to digest. Don't bother posting to me about them - I am not into medical analysis as it is beside the point in Terri's case for me. She was alive not-dying and some decided she had to die - a travesty.
Excerpted from today's NYT Letters to the Editor section:
Jeb Bush's Move in the Schiavo Case (6 Letters)
To the Editor:
Re your June 18 editorial about the Schiavo case:
We did not need an autopsy to know that Terri Schiavo had hopeless brain damage, or to know that many of her body's systems were normal.
Her family loved what was left of her and asked only to be permitted to care for her at their own expense.
My question is, Who or what was better served by her passive execution by water deprivation rather than by the first alternative?
Carl d'Angio, M.D.
Mount Vernon, N.Y., June 18, 2005
To the Editor:
Terri Schiavo's autopsy report claimed that she was probably blind. Supporters of the decision to starve her to death have hailed this finding as bolstering their argument that withdrawal of her feeding tube was ethical.
Their reasoning is hard to follow.
If Ms. Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state, blindness is a meaningless diagnosis. Only sentient people can see, and only sentient people can be blind. And if she were blind, then she was sentient, and the diagnosis of persistent vegetative state was a genuinely fatal mistake.
The lapses in logic aside, it's chilling to assert that it's more ethical to starve a handicapped person if that person is blind. This is what passes for ethics among advocates for euthanasia.
Michael Egnor, M.D.
Stony Brook, N.Y., June 18, 2005
The writer is vice chairman of the department of neurological surgery, SUNY, Stony Brook
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ..."
What insults are those, Sandra? The truth about their own words?
That is the most incoherent statement Ive read all week. Are you less conscious than Terri was?
It doesn't say that the Schindlers had to admit in court that they'd previously seen the bone scan. Their counsel conceded that "the report was available and in possession of the Respondent's several attorneys over time" but that doesn't mean that the Schindlers knew about or saw the bone scan until 2000 or 2001. It seems the court conceded that point.
It says "The affidavits in support of the Emergency Motion relating to this bone scan simply established that that affiants did not have actual knowledge of that report, although counsel in argument conceded that the report was available, and in possession of Respondent's several attorneys over time."
There has been no suggestion that the bone scan was secreted or the information withheld intentionally from anyone."
Now this sentence about room temperature, I don't understand what it implies. I've never heard "room temperature" refered to in a legal document.
"The affidavits as they relate to room temperature do not remotely suggest an issue for the court to pursue."
"The court concludes that while it might be interesting to pursue the issue of trauma as it may have occurred almost twelve years ago, that has nothing to do with Teresa Marie Schiavo in 2002 and the Mandate of the Second District Court of Appeal in this cause rendered October 17, 2001."
It is after all.....on the internet. :)
I did see some markings on the page where someone had written arrows to point out the part of the abuse allegations being interesting and I also saw where the pages had been faxed to a Kinko's which is presumably where this Abstractappeal picked them up at.
Thank you.
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.