Posted on 07/06/2005 10:50:06 AM PDT by 8mmMauser
Several bloggers have drawn attention to a strange lead in a Washington Post story about the Terri Schiavo autopsy results. The June 16 Post story by David Brown said that "Terri Schiavo died of the effects of a profound and prolonged lack of oxygen to her brain on a day in 1990, but what caused that event isn't known and may never be, the physician who performed her autopsy said…"
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
I know B.S. when I see it, and MS is as full of it as that other fertilizer salesman, Scott Peterson.
perfect!
I've read darn near everything that has been presented here on FR. After reading your nitpicky posts to myself and others, I could give a flying cat whether you take me seriously, or not.
Shhh, Malakhi. Do you hear that? It's the call of the Wild Turkey...
Exactly what does it matter what he does with his money? Are you suggesting some form of stalking to find out what he does meets with your approval? Slander isn't enough? He has not been charged with anything and yet you want to treat him as if he has been.
Fine..looks like you are getting what you want, but what about the rest of us? Do you just want to jump on the band wagon of the AMA and take away the presumption of life for the whole US population?
Maybe..just maybe there are people that love their disabled relatives. Maybe..just maybe there are people that love and take care of their sick and infirmed in no matter what condition they are in as long as it is not terminal.
I can tell you their a millions of mothers and fathers of disabled and brain damaged children that are horrified at the precedences that are being set.
Were you aware that as of a few weeks ago the AMA does not want anyone to be keep alive or presumed to want to live unless the have evidence to prove it? New laws are being set in Florida right now to move toward this new presumption of death. Some states have been pushing for legislation for assisted suicide such as Oregon, others want to safeguard the presumption of life but will not be able to hold up under the pressure if too many states go with euthanasia and assisted suicide because it costs a lot to keep disabled people alive.
Don't you get it buddy? This case is not just about Terri or your family! It's about the entirety of the US population.
Why don't you care about our rights in this matter?
Be honest. You were in favor of the government inserting itself into the private life of Terri Schiavo, as long as it was a judge ordering her death. You had no objection until the government did its duty by stepping in to protect her rights.
It was legally hearsay. Not. MS testified that Terri said something, he testified to what he heard, he testified that he based certain of his own actions on what he heard. He did not testify as to the truth of her statement, so it's not testimonial.
Doesn't it just plain suck when you jump on a thread, and you haven't read the backround? Forget about whether MS's statement was hearsay, or not. Instead focus on his testimony during the malpractice trial. You see, MS promised the jury that he would use the settlement to take care of Terri, and to provide therapy for her. After he received the monies, he suddenly remembered that she "didn't want to live like that". You're a smart guy, so can you figure it out?
One last thing. MS borrowed money from the Schindlers during the duration of that malpractice trial. He promised to pay it back. The Schindlers went into hock to help out MS and Terri. Imagine their shock and horror when MS gets the money and immediately seeks to kill his wife, their daughter. That money was for her care, not to pay off lawyers.
I have included the above portion for your information, since you probably haven't gotten around to reading any of the information available since 2003.
Fuhrman's book on TS has taken a dive?
"Why don't you care about our rights in this matter?"
I *do* care about your rights in this matter. Your rights are not in question. This case has never been about state-forced tube removal. It's about the right of a guardian to remove a feeding tube in consultation with a PVS patient's doctors without the state sticking its nose in.
If you don't want this to happen to you, leave clear legal instructions for your family. That's all you need to do.
"Fuhrman's book on TS has taken a dive?"
Whoever said that, it wasn't me.
I said by not waiting for the autopsy, it's out of date. It speculates where hard information is now available. Obviously, this means a new edition. Which might have been the plan all along.
Excellent post, and I agree with your entire statement. There is no way in hell that I would ever be a party to assisted suicide, euthanasia, or convenience killing....or murder for profit, for that matter.
Under what circumstances? She was only brain damaged. Conservatives usually don't advocate killing the disabled. But they're getting there, eh?
There is no substantial evidence whatsoever. There is no circumstantial evidence whatsoever. There are only baseless allegations floated 10 years after the fact.
Well that was the question at hand.
Very considerate of you to obscure the question, though. All those who got the hearsay issue wrong will appreciate it.
You may be right.
Since my sarcasm apparently went over your head, I'll clearly state that your assertion that the case was decided upon inadmissible 'hearsay' is proven false by the fact that the case was upheld at every level of the judiciary.
Your personal beliefs on the matter do not constitute any sort of refutation of the findings of the court.
Your argument would be valid if the the states were forcing people to have feeding tubes put in but since a few states are forcing feeding tubes to be removed (passive euthanasia) and advocating assisted suicide right now it makes your point mute.
There is no qualitative difference between the state forcing a person to [remove a ]feeding tube, and the state forcing schoolchildren to take Ritalin. Either both are acceptable, or neither are acceptable.
There. I fixed that for you.
You can choose to ignore the circumstances if you wish.
I choose to see the big picture.
Circumstances? PVS, my friend. PVS.
She wasn't ever coming back. A cruel twist of fate meant that the only part of her brain still functioning was the part that regulated her autonomic systems.
Personally, I think what her husband did was the right thing to do. I've already left strict instructions that if, God forbid, I am ever in the same situation, my guardian will do it for me.
Even more so, I know that as her guardian it was his choice to make. The state had no business getting involved on any level with this most personal of all decisions.
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.