Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jwalsh07; FatherOfLiberty; Piltdown_Woman; JeanS; RJayneJ
Previous lawsuit of September 22, 2002 :
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
Civil Action No.: 8:03-CV-1860-T-26-TGW



THERESA MARIE SCHINDLER
SCHIAVO, Incapacitated, by her
Parents and Next Friends, ROBERT
and MARY SCHINDLER,

[snip]

12. In or about February, 1993, Schiavo received the medical malpractice
money, and approximately $750,000 was put into the guardianship fund for
Terri's care.

13. Shortly afterward, Schiavo placed a "Do Not Resuscitate" order in Terri's
medical chart. A few months later, in or about June, 1993, Schiavo directed
Terri's caregivers to withhold antibiotic treatment for an infection she had
developed, in the expectation that she would die from the resulting sepsis,
which expectation Schiavo stated under oath in a deposition.

14. In 1995, Schiavo began living with a woman whom he now publicly
describes as his "fiancee" and with whom he had a child in September, 2002
and with whom he is expecting his second child.

15. From Fall, 1991, and continuing up until the present day, Schiavo has
denied any and all attempts at meaningful rehabilitative therapy for Terri

Page 5 of 33

and, in addition, has denied basic services such as regular teeth cleaning and
gynecological care. He has placed and continues to place unreasonable
restrictions on visitation by others with Terri, including her priest. He
opposed speech therapy that has the aim of weaning her off the G-tube back
onto nutrition by mouth, even though such weaning is a common
therapeutic accomplishment, and Schiavo knows Terri is a good candidate
for such weaning.

16. For the past decade, Schiavo has been so intent on preventing any
improvement in Terri's condition that he has threatened her caregivers with
loss of their jobs if they disobeyed his orders that no rehabilitative help be
given to Terri. Frequently, he expressed frustration that Terri had not died.
During this period, Terri's caregivers report that Terri was saying "Help
me" and "mommy" on a routine basis.

17. Finally, in May, 1998, Schiavo filed his Petition to Discontinue Artificial
Life Support and to Appoint Guardian Ad Litem (hereinafter "the
Petition"), seeking the Court's permission to remove Terri's G-tube.
Schiavo did not state his express desire to withhold food and water by
mouth from Terri, nor did he seek the Court's permission to do so. He did
state that it is "highly likely" that he will re-marry upon Terri's death,

Page 6 of 34

however. The Petition was brought pursuant to Chapter 765 of the Florida
Statutes, concerning advance directives.

18. At the time of the filing of the Petition, approximately $718,000 was in
Terri's guardianship fund for her care.

19. Although initially the Court did appoint a guardian ad litem for Terri and
the guardian ad litem filed a written report recommending denial of the
Petition, the Court removed the guardian ad litem upon Schiavo's
insistence, and no successor guardian ad litem has ever been appointed.

20. In January, 2000, the Petition was tried to Hon. George W. Greer. No
attorney, no guardian ad litem, or any other independent voice represented
Terri at this trial. At this trial, Schiavo remembered, for the first time, that
Terri had told him sometime during the 1980s that she would not want to
survive on "anything artificial."


21. In February, 2000, Judge Greer granted the Petition, even though Terri left
no written advance directive nor was even alleged to have said she wanted
no rehabilitation or food and water by mouth in the event of her incapacity.

___

I am given to understand that as a matter of law, Terri would have to have not only stated that she did "not want to live that way," she would also have had to state that she did not wish to be given food nor water in the event of her incapacity.

 

124 posted on 10/23/2003 9:17:42 PM PDT by First_Salute (God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]


To: FatherOfLiberty; snopercod; DB; brityank
Regarding my earlier remark in Reply 124, above:
I am given to understand that as a matter of law, Terri would have to have not only stated that she did "not want to live that way," she would also have had to state that she did not wish to be given food nor water in the event of her incapacity.

I based that on some of the law that I ran across, but of course cannot find it now.

However, here is the contrary view of the Second District Court of Appeal, which is also in the previous lawsuit of September 22, 2002 :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
Civil Action No.: 8:03-CV-1860-T-26-TGW



THERESA MARIE SCHINDLER
SCHIAVO, Incapacitated, by her
Parents and Next Friends, ROBERT
and MARY SCHINDLER,

[snip]

23. In the course of the appellate proceedings, the Second District Court of
Appeal enunciated the following policies under Florida's statutory scheme
for termination of "life-prolonging" measures under Chapter 765:

A. The incapacitated ward is generally not entitled to an
independent guardian ad litem in proceedings that can result in
her death, as the trial judge "essentially serves as the ward's
guardian" in a Chapter 765 proceeding, and an independent
guardian ad litem would only "duplicate" the function of the
trial judge, regardless of how egregious and obvious the
conflict of interest between the ward and her court-appointed
guardian. In re Guardianship of Schiavo, 780 So.2d 176, 179
(Fla. 2d DCA 2001)("Schiavo 1").

B. A ward can be deprived of food and water, and thus killed,
without proof of any specific advanced directive addressing food
and water by G-tube, and based on nothing more than
spontaneous, generalized, pre-incapacity oral remarks about
"artificial" life support.

C. The requisite medical condition of "persistent vegetative state"
(PVS) can be proven, and the ward killed, based on a mere
preponderance of the evidence.

The judges in the State of Florida do not require much to kill you these days.

The "legal experts" who have argued to take your guns, may not bother, and instead, might merely find you "sleeping it off."

ZZZZZ...buzzZAP!

Next case.

144 posted on 10/23/2003 9:57:10 PM PDT by First_Salute (God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]

To: First_Salute
Thank you very much for the pings. I did read your posts 105 and 124. Wow. Carla Sauer's point #11 is awful.

Aside from the injustice done to Terri, it is a wrong done to all the nursing staff who have to adhere to these inhumane orders.

I hope that hospice goes out of business.

But I'm not holding my breath because Big Money is behind the Right to Die movement (i.e. many politicians and judges are bought and paid for--and the ones that aren't know not to buck the "system").

236 posted on 10/24/2003 10:14:37 AM PDT by attagirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson