Michael Schiavo's side of the story [sicko' barf-ola ALERT]

MSNBC ^ | 3/27/06 | Matt Lauer

[XR7]

CLEARWATER, FLA. - Michael Schiavo...has decided to tell his side of the story...

Schiavo invited us to his home in Clearwater, Florida to talk...It’s all in his new book “Terri the Truth.”

Matt Lauer: I guess you could’ve written a book to honor Terri. After reading it, it’s not really the book you wrote. This is a book that in some ways settles some scores, doesn’t it?

Michael Schiavo: Oh yes, it does.

Lauer: You did think about writing that honoring Terri book?

Michael Schiavo: Oh yes, many times. This book does honor Terri in a way. It sets her free. It tells the truth...

Lauer: You were her first date.

Schiavo: Uh-huh.

Lauer: You were her first kiss.

Schiavo: Uh-huh.....

But the medical examiner was skeptical...and could not conclusively determine just what caused her collapse 16 years ago.

Lauer (at Terri Schiavo’s grave site): How often do you come to her grave?

Schiavo: I try to get out here at least two or three times a month. I drive by a lot though.

On this day, approaching the one year anniversary of Terri's death, someone had left a crucifix by her grave, a grave marked with three dates: her birth date, the date of her collapse, and her death, with a final note from Michael: "I kept my promise."

Lauer: Why was it so important to put that in there?

Schiavo: It was from me to her — it had nothing to do with anybody else. It was very important for me.

Lauer: Do you ever come here Michael and wonder how she feels about this promise, so many years afterwards? Do you think it was it as important to her as it was to you?

Schiavo: Definitely, definitely. She's up there praising me right now… and saying thank you.

[jackibutterfly]

You posted to the wrong person - you meant to post to me, jackibutterfly. It's a video - I've posted it several times, but here it is again:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1381701/posts?page=181

Post #174.

[BykrBayb]

I never actually left. I just haven't had much time for posting lately.

I've watched every video, and listened to every audio that I've seen posted. I keep hearing allegations that there is evidence against Terri, but I haven't seen it yet. For about two and half years now I've been requesting the various evidence that is periodically alleged, but nobody can ever provide it. Hmmm....

[BykrBayb]

I posted to the correct person. I've seen the video you referred to, and posted a link to it myself. The audio or video I haven't seen is the one alleged to have been put out by Randall Terry. This is the first time I've heard that allegation. If there is such an audio or video out there, I wonder why it wasn't mentioned sooner.

[lugsoul]

Probably, since you saw the thread title and clicked on it.

[jackibutterfly]

OK, I see in your post #157 your linked to the same video I've been linking to. Did you mean to send you post to me? You've got me really confused. I don't remember Hodaka talking about a video.

[jackibutterfly]

Ohhhh, ok. gotcha!

[jackibutterfly]

I need to break for lunch - be back soon.

[retMD]

You're welcome. And my sympathies on your loss; I know how devastating it can be. I'm glad to hear you've found someone else - that gives me hope!

[hodaka]

Randal Terry played this recording on the Sean Hannity radio program during the protest.

[hodaka]

I don't know if Sean has any link to this one interview and claim that Randall Terry was making. I know I can't be the only one out there that remembers hearing this on the Sean Hannity show. From what I remember it was a recording of someone, might have been Randall, asking Teri if they wanted to live or die? After the question was asked you can hear Teri moaning, and then Randall says that Teri was saying that she wanted to live. Believe me I'm not like Charles Rangel who will make up facts to bolster their argument

[retMD]

I heard an interview on this, but I'm not sure it was the same one. I seem to recall whoever - might well have been Terry - moaning the words himself to illustrate.

[freedumb2003]

Did YOU watch the video???

Yes and it is pure bunk. I could get a better reaction from my hamster.

That is NOT even close to being any kind of "proof" of anything. It isn't double blind, has no rigor, it is just random noises.

This is the same as seeing pictures in clouds.

[jackibutterfly]

"Yes and it is pure bunk. I could get a better reaction from my hamster."

Can't you see she's laughing WITH her father?? She's remembering how she used to tease her mother. She's RESPONDING! That proves she WAS NOT brain dead or in a coma. Did you forget that she's brain-damaged, and won't respond like you or me? That's how they laugh. In case you're not familiar with how brain-damaged people are, THIS is a disabled person RESPONDING. HOW can you say it's bunk??? Please watch it again, very carefully, unless you just don't care or have no interest. If so, there's no reason to respond to you any longer.

[freedumb2003]

Please watch it again, very carefully, unless you just don't care or have no interest.

I did watch it -- she is "responding" as an animal does. Yes, there is some response to stimulus, but it is not a reasoned response.

Like I said, non-scientific and lacking rigor. If she was "responding" to what was she responding? You might note his voice gets higher and louder then she kicks in.

This doesn't even pass any smell test.

[Diplomat]

You two need to stop pretending that this case has anything to do with "dying with dignity".

The time to decide to allow a love one to die is at and during the period of initial hospitalization. Most of us can agree that it is up to the spouse/family to make these extremely difficult and painful decisions. Few of us would have judged him wrong had he made this supposed "Terri wanted it this way" decision at the very beginning.

Had M. Schiavo done this during the first days/month of Terri's hospitalization, this would never have been news. However, this dispicable piece-of-garbage sued every doctor/insurance company he could find with the stipulation that the money would be used for "Terri's medical expenses and rehabilitation". This is a fact. He won a judgement of a million or two, iirc.

Then, years later, after committing adultery and fathering kids out-of-wedlock, he goes back into court and files a motion stating that Terri told him she "would never want to be kept alive on life support." Funny how the guy couldn't remember this at any stage of his lawsuits against the doctors who cared for Terri before the collapse.

Now tell me how killing your wife years after testifying in a prior court case that you'll do everthing in your power to help and rehabilitate her with the money you're suing to get, is the ethical/honorable thing to do?

I'm sorry that this woman never recovered. Regardless, it doesn't give him the right to kill her off because her long term care inconveniences him and his girlfriend. This was premedited murder by order the court, nothing more.

[jackibutterfly]

But, you admit she IS responding. I hear her laughing, laughing with her father cuz she remembered teasing her mother years ago regarding her lazy eye. So, how can you justify starving her to death??? Even IF she were in a coma, I couldn't justify murdering her. I can't justify murdering anyone. As long as her body is assimilating food, she's alive, and living. When did we start murdering people because they are disabled, or "responding like an animal". She's still a person. And, her parents were willing to care for her. And, who knows, with the rehab that was promised to her that she never received after the award, who knows how far she could have come. But, she was refused the treatment she should have gotten. Instead, that money was spent on lawyers bent on murdering her. HER award money to rehab her was spent to murder her. That's pretty ironic, if you ask me.

[retMD]

The time to decide to allow a love one to die is at and during the period of initial hospitalization.

I have to disagree with this. Up until the last few months of my husband's illness, I held onto the hope that he might recover, despite knowing odds all too well. If I had had to make such a decision for him, I would have waited until there could be no doubt that he would not improve.

There are stages of grief, and acceptance comes last - after denial, anger, bargaining, and depression. I do not agree with Michael Schiavo on some things, but I can understand the need to try everything for his wife (which the reports I've read say he did in the early days) before accepting the harsh truth.

[bjs1779]

William P. Cheshire Jr. - Mayo Clinic neurologist who 'observed' Terri after 5 days of dehydration.

From his affidavit:

“To enter the room of Terri Schiavo is nothing like entering the room of a patient who is comatose or brain-dead or in some neurological sense no longer there. … As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me, I asked myself whether, if I were her attending physician, I could in good conscience withdraw her feeding and hydration. No, I could not. I could not withdraw life support if I were asked. I could not withhold life-sustaining nutrition and hydration from this beautiful lady whose face brightens in the presence of others.” --3/23/2005

Cheshire

[Diplomat]

There are stages of grief, and acceptance comes last...

Except in Michael's case, acceptance came after he accepted money on behalf of his ailing wife.

Nobody is judging you, do not use this evil man as a prop to make you feel better about the difficult decisions you have made in your life. Again, the fact remains that he could have remembered his wife's wishes at any point during the first few years that he was suing the doctors who had formerly treated his wife. The man is a liar. If you take money intended for the medical care of your spouse, I say spending it on attorneys so you can kill her is despicable and evil. And I'll bet you he knows it too.

[retMD]

As I looked at Terri, and she gazed directly back at me...

Except that we know from the autopsy that she was blind, because her visual cortex was destroyed. So she can't possibly have gazed back at him. Also, he watched videotapes, reviewed her records and observed her, but did not examine her. Sadly, I suspect that Dr. Cheshire's hopes for her got the better of objective medical judgement.