Terri's Fight - (Daily Thread/Updates)

Various | December 4, 2003 | sweetliberty

[sweetliberty]

(Thread 11) Link back to thread 10 (Nov. 24-30)

.

Contained in Thread 10:

Who can be a guardian, 1993 letter from Bob Schindler to Michael Schiavo, Palm beach Post editorial and FReeper response, T'wit's song about Schiavo and Felos, transcript of Lee Webb's (CBN) interview with Kate Adamson, partial timeline of Terri's case, the story of Martin and Anne Shapiro and the report on Terri's birthday party,

.

Click on pic for Terri's website

.

This thread serves as a place for posting all new general information and references, along with links following Terri's case, plus information on cable news and talk radio shows dealing with the issue, court cases and press releases. This is also the place to post contact information, prayers and general discussion.

If you have something that qualifies as BREAKING NEWS or FRONT PAGE NEWS, please post it on a separate thread in that category in order to give it maximum exposure and then post a link to the article/thread here so that it will be included in the next update of links. Also, if you post links to articles from original sources and there is also a thread on FR, please link to the FR thread. Many original links become corrupt over time and we want to be able to access the information at will.

You will notice that this thread is not specifically dated. That is because we are just going to keep this one going until we have need of another one.

A reminder: please do not post personal information on the public forum. We have lots of folks on scene down in Florida and we don't want them having any problems with the death squad.

INDEX OF TERRI THREADS ON FR

.

Latest threads on Terri's Case:

As Terri Schiavo turns 40 next week, her loved ones fight for her life

Suspicious Circumstances, the Strange Case of Terri Schiavo

Schiavo asks Pinellas judge to rule without trial

Michael Schiavo tries to block Gov. Bush

Michael Schiavo Again Seeks to Block New Information About Terri

Why Was Terri Denied Holy Communion?

Terri Schiavo's 40th birthday Wednesday

Florida's Bush gets report on Schiavo

Participate in Terri Schiavo's Birthday, December 3, With prayer, Mass Intentions, Cards and Notes

FR Birthday Card: Greetings, Prayers for Terri Schindler-Schiavo

New Guardian Urged for Terri Schiavo, More Evaluation of Her Condition Needed

The Guardian Speaks: Terri Schiavo's guardian files his report; there's bad news and good news.

Terri Schiavo's Family Celebrates Her 40th Birthday, Hundreds Send Cards

Changes Proposed In Right-To-Die Laws - Your help is needed NOW in Florida!

The Case of Terri Schiavo: The Human Rorschach Test

[tutstar]

good work nic

I still think it is so "telling" that they want Terri's bone scan excluded!!!

[tutstar]

Can you give me the url where the article was posted? The one about the kids several of which had feeding tubes?

The other day when I called King's office I mentioned this article to the woman I talked with and she was very surprised. I want to send it to him.

I think that one reason this is touchy with Sen. King is that his parents had cancer (according to his aide). I believe the statutes including feeding tubes as 'life support' may have been a result of this.

Some of the kids in the class have feeding tubes if I recall correctly. Are they going to pull their tubes also?

King has to be reminded repeatedly that he is our 'representative' 'our voice' and we will need to continue to make our voices heard.

[tutstar]

pinging self to your post

[tutstar]

Yes it's been found and posted on previous threads, if one wants it they can find it at Fl Dept of Corporations website.

[tutstar]

Has this been posted previously? I'm in Jax and can't believe I've never seen this! This is what we need!! Budging King seems to be like pulling up a stump!

[Wampus SC]

Checking back in. I didn't feel up to doing more than skimming a few FR posts a few weeks, but that's all taken care of now thanks to massive doses of antibiotics. Whew.

We're getting roughly equal measures of good and bad news, but things are slowly tipping Terri's way. I hope and pray I've interpreted that correctly. She's still the litmus test for the human race, inspiring the good folks to reach new heights, and the Death Brigade to plunge to new depths.

OK, enough of my rambling. Once more into the fray....

[sweetliberty]

Is this the article you were looking for?

Local Students Reach Out to Terri Schiavo

[TexasCowboy]

Re: #19

Very good, Star.
But, then, I expected no less from you.
God bless you, lady!

[Wampus SC]

"Sidenote, I been watching and studying our SUN and I don't like what I see happening again, it's started acting up again on Dec 2nd(The same day we got the bad news) now I know it's way out-there, BUT I know the messages and signs that's connected with these events, somebody has to report it, SO-BE-IT-ME...here's the reaction from the heavens..."

I'll probably get flamed for what I'm about to say. If so then I'll just have to get flamed.
When I first heard you say this I thought there was nothing to it, yet for some reason I started checking it out. Doggone it - there actually seems to be a correlation, and it has happened repeatedly.

Now I'm thinking why shouldn't there be a correlation? After all, this is the current central skirmish in the overall spiritual war.

[STARWISE]

AAah .. thank you, TC --- SWEET DAY TO YOU.

[Wampus SC]

"One such foundation is George Soros's Open Society Institute (OSI). The OSI, through its Project on Death in America, gives millions of dollars for enhancing end-of-life care and none of the Project's money is used for assisted suicide purposes. But the OSI provides grants for assisted suicide advocacy through OSI's President's Fund in its U.S. Programs office."

Soros. Again. He's in this too. Somehow I just knew we'd find him slithering around bankrolling this.

"In 1939, the organization proposed legislation which, its president told the New York Times, was intended eventually to legalize euthanasia for "born defectives who are doomed to remain defective, rather than for normal persons who have become miserable through incurable illness.""

When I read a statement like that, I see someone expressing an intent to kill me. Granted, my "defect" isn't totally devastating, and I'm able to keep going normally - but once something like this starts, the net they throw out to catch people gets bigger and bigger.

What's the first reaction of most people when they hear someone plans to kill them? </rhetorical question>

[msmagoo]

Is this the article you are looking for?

Local Students Reach Out to Terri Schiavo

[msmagoo]

LOL, I posted the link before I saw your post :)
Here is the link to the FR post with the article:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1027709/posts?page=228#228

[msmagoo]

Email from Cheryl:

I wrote the following back when Terri's tube was pulled. I am sending it on again as a reminder to the issues at hand and to remind everyone if they have not written their Advance Directives, to take the time to do so now. Feel free to post or forward on as you desire.
Cheryl
Fight4Terri@aol.com


I am a Registered Nurse with 25 years of medical training.

I voice my opinion from viewing similar patient situations as Mrs. Schiavo's. I've also been involved in several seminars and discussions surrounding ethical questions related to those proposed in Mrs. Schiavo's legal debate.

In my professional and personal opinion, it is too late for Mr. Schiavo to be requesting a feeding tube be removed from his wife. In all the years of my nursing experience, our protocol was very clear, and as follows:

1. In the acute phases of a patient's trauma, should a patient present with a legal living will and DNR (DO NOT RESUSCITATE) declaring that if in the event of trauma, where they were suddenly physically and or mentally incapacitated; not capable of making decisions for themselves with regard to life support issues, i.e. ventilators, gastrointestinal and nasogastric feeding tubes, Total Parenteral Nutrition via intravenous feedings, etc., and had indicated that they wanted no medical intervention whatsoever, the patient was then allowed to die in accordance to their wishes and without ANY medical intervention.

2. However, if there was not a legally written DNR, living will, or durable power of attorney present to indicate the patient's wishes;
the patient was then declared a Full Code and all medical interventions were taken at the time to ensure life support measures. All implemented in an effort to maintain the patient's life. This included, intravenous infusions, tube feedings, ventilators, etc.

Prior to enacting the necessary life support measures, we did not sit around with each other, or with the patient's family, discussing or debating what we "thought" the patient's "quality of life" was at the time.
Or, what we "thought" it was going to be in the future.
Or furthermore, if any of us thought that because the patient's quality of life was acceptable, or not, we then had the right to declare them a code, or no code, providing them with life support measures, or not.

The FACT is, and was,.... if they did not have the appropriate paperwork to declare what their wishes were at time of admission, then all other discussions, and or assumptions, were a moot issue.

No where in all of my 25 years in the medical profession has any family member, friend, adinistrator, lawyer, health care professional, etc., been allowed to determine that after so many years of a patient successfully sustained life via tubes of any kind, and who had maintained the same status over those years, could anyone suddenly walk into a facility and make a random decision without justification, that the patient was not worthy of such intervention any longer. To then request that the tubes be discontinued.

If, on the other hand, the patient began showing a rapid decline in health, clearly showing no signs of improvement, and or ability to be maintained at the same palliative level of care, then the DPOA or next of kin could open a legal case requesting that extraordinary life support measures be discontinued.

However, I've seldom seen that happen. I think mainly because if the patient suddenly had a change in status and began a rapid decline, their life usually ended in a relatively short time, and on their own.

I reiterate, because Terri Schiavo is no longer in the acute phases of her trauma and it is apparent that when her trauma had occurred she did not have a written, legal DNR or living will indicating what her choices were in the event of such a situation (verbal hear say via spouses, friends were not admissable).........should anyone now be allowed to suddenly come along and decide that it is time to terminate her, or anyone's life for that matter.

Dr. Kvorkian spends time in prison for assisting in voluntary suicide.
The irony in this particular case is....Mrs. Schiavo isn't even allowed to verbally volunteer her own suicide. Therefore, removing Mrs. Schiavo's tube feedings at this point in her life...in my nursing opinion, would
be no different from Mr. Schiavo insisting on legal assistance to enact upon a form of homicide.

The laws up until this situation were pretty clear and without question.

If Mr. Schiavo is allowed to do this at this time.....I question how many
other patients who are now residing in nursing homes and who have been successfully nourished via feeding tubes will suddenly have family members appear demanding removal of them. I think that the legal system needs to remain in the courtrooms and leave the ethically and legally clear DNR/living will protocols alone. Up until now, there has never been a question as to how, when, or on who, medical intervention would, or would not, be initiated.

Mrs. Schiavo's situation should be a good lesson for people of all ages to:

1. Recognize the importance of appointing themselves a DPOA (Durable power
of attorney) who clearly understands and has access to the necessary paperwork to substantiate their wishes in the event of such circumstances.
2. Have a legal Living Will and DNR written. Maintain the papers in a safe place where a family member could access them. It is also a good idea to provide a copy to your family physician.

At the very least, Michael Schiavo and the judge have violated Terri's "Patient's Rights." Terri deserves a swallow evaluation to see if she indeed can consume any form of nutrition on her own. If you take the time to read the affidavits from her previous caregivers, prior to removing her tube, they had been slipping her Jell-O, sips of juice, ice chips (without Michael's knowledge) and she managed to swallow.

Michael NOR the obvious demented judge has the right to disregard or violate Terri's patients rights. And this is exactly what they are doing!!!

It is SAD! For a supposedly intelligent nation, we sure have a lot of apathy in this country. We allow things like this to happen, DO NOTHING about it..and then wonder how it happened to us when we find ourselves in such predicaments. One cannot help but wonder why thousands were led into gas chambers and no one did anything to stop it!

Americans become proactive when you know something is blatantly wrong! You will never know when a situation like Terri's may be in your lap.

This is not a matter of your feelings as to whether you agree, or disagree, with her quality of life. It is a matter of advanced directives, patient rights and laws that are being broken and violated by a judge and a crazed spouse who obviously has some ulterior motive other than what he states his wife supposedly wanted.

If Michael truly believed Terri had wanted this...... then why did he allow them several years ago to place the tube in her???
He indeed had to sign a pre-op consent to allow the tube to be placed.

Why didn't he adamently voice his opinion back then about what Terri's wishes were????? Perhaps, because he at that time needed her for evidence until the court case was settled!

Does it not seem peculiar that he motioned the court to remove her tube several days after he won a 1.2 million dollar settlement?????

I have written the Governor, the judge...and various forums. We must unite and find a way to over rule the judge. He is not GOD!

Geesh!

Cheryl F. RN
Former EMT & Paramedic

[Republic]

Good letter.

From my email, FYI.

GEPHARDT says he opposed Bush's involvement in Schiavo matter
Bradenton Herald, FL

Gephardt, speaking Saturday at the Florida Democratic Convention, said he thinks issues like the ones surrounding Terri Schiavo "are best left to the courts.". ...

Oh sure, leave the law-making to the judges - never mind the will of the people, and the values our country was founded on.

Too much power in the hands of the say-so of a judge.. it goes down real crazy when the judge is in the hands of a dark power.

Light our candles, folks! We need to keep on dispelling the darkness!

Note: 'Dis-spell'.. there's a spell cast on the area, blinding otherwise compassionate people.

< name withheld by me >

[terrasol]

KdubRN,

Thank you for poignant information about the ubiquitous
death culture active in current policy drives. Names
like “Last Acts” and “Partnership for Caring” have a
benevolent, almost sanctified quality. The ideas they
spearhead are anything but. As likely beneficiaries of
the right-to-die drive, corporate entities in the hospice
business are major participants in state lobbying
campaigns. Whenever businesses are pushing for policy
changes, there is a profit motive. Because hospice
businesses have dying people as client base, the easing
of laws against initiated death is a matter of profit.
Another business group gaining from lifted restrictions
includes health insurers, SSI, medicare and medicaid.

Besides lobbying state legislatures, a major effort of
the right-to-die proponents is in the area of public
indoctrination. Base sentiments are stirred by terms
like “right” that invoke images of struggle against
injustice. More emotion gets generated through words
like “dignity” and “last acts”. Both convey private
prerogative and mobilize public will toward protecting
presumably threatened interests.

Suggestible amphibian brains are turned vigilant toward
a hypothetical physician order bent on hindering natural
death. This selling of dictatorial physicians is the more
remarkable because the organized medical fraternity is
itself a beneficiary of more relaxed euthanasia laws.

The cliché “national healthcare crisis” is merely a cover
for the general cost ceiling. Simple arithmetic shows that
more patients will divide the limited cash pie into more
units, driving assignable cost down. Fewer patients
conversely move the assignable cost upward. Organized
medicine understandably shuns lowering its financial
niveaux. Therefore reducing the number of healthcare
recipients is a matter of business prudence.

Since policy boards inform physicians, the right-to-die
ideology is easily disseminated through journals and
newsletters. Those not amenable to instruction run the
risk of being labeled anti-progressive and become subject
to smear campaigns aimed at their professional competence.

The voices of physicians staying within the sanctioned
line become relay points for inducting the public mind
into the paradigm of enlightened scientific views. This
ostensible enlightenment combines with the visceral drive
to protect “rights”, leading to suicidal public complacency
toward policies that are utterly detrimental to individual
sovereignty.

A 1989 report in the New England Journal of Medicine
suggested informing patients about drugs suitable for
suicide. Among the 12 collaborating physicians was Dr.
Ronald Cranford. The Associate Professor of Neurology
then moonlighted giving paid testimony in favor of
terminating the lives of incapacitated persons.

Fancying himself a medical ethicist, Dr. Cranford got
himself elected to the Ethics Committee of the American
Academy of Neurology. To the uninformed, this signifies
that he is an ethical physician. The gullible public
mind easily transfers this veneer of respectability to
Dr. Cranford’s macabre projects: The Hastings Center's
"Guidelines on Termination of Treatment and the Care of
the Dying", "Guidelines for State Court Decision Making
in Authorizing or Withholding Life-Sustaining Medical
Treatment" and Cranford’s contribution to the book
"Intended Death: The Ethics of Assisted Suicide and
Euthanasia". None of these necrophilic endeavors by
the ethical doctor draws public scorn.

In addition to ideological crawl of pseudo enlightenment,
there is also a concerted media campaign, a new phase of
which will launch on December 8 in Talahasse. The idea is
to soften the public mind toward acceptance of a Brave Dead
World to come. A pertinent press release may be seen at:
biz.yahoo.com/prnews/031205/laf025_1.html. “In an effort
to encourage a national discussion about end-of-life
choices, the nation's oldest and largest right-to-die
organization will launch a national campaign Monday
(Dec. 8) beginning in Tallahassee.”

Mergers of euthanasia groups as Last Acts and Partnership
for Caring facilitate stepped-up propaganda under the
nomenclature of advocacy for the dying. Because of the
degree of public stupefaction already achieved, these
organizations can admit with impunity that they are
dedicated to “promoting social change”.

The clueless public reads this as upcoming betterment,
instead of seeing it as flagrant usurpation of individual
sovereignty. In classic propaganda fashion the subversion
is presented as “empowerment” of the individual. “Together,
we are empowering and engaging consumers, informing medical
and health professionals, and acting as advocates for
quality end-of-life care through policy reform.”

[nicmarlo]

Can't Bush refile his motion for Baird to remove himself for bias if Baird's rulings seem overly protective of Felos and Greer? Bush has already expressed concern that there is a conflict of interest, and is well aware that Greer has skirted the issue of HINO's multiple children out of wedlock. Wesley J. Smith called Schiavo's new family the "bull elephant in the living room", that no one wants to acknowledge.

Sorry, I think I overlooked your post....didn't mean to...I wasn't on much yesterday and got pinged quit a bit...just saw this now.

Answer to question: yes, I believe Bush would have every right to, once again, ask that Baird recuse himself in the future......he would wait until Baird has done yet another thing that is highly questionable as to Baird's "neutrality" on the issue of Consitutionality of Terri's Law. Baird will, IMHO, once again refuse to recuse himself.

Not to worry, however; each time Baird gives Bush more ammunition to put in his pockets, the more Bush has to fire against him in any appeal (and there will be an appeal, again, IMHO).....just pray that the judges to whom Bush appeals are convicted to do what is right and proper and JUDICIAL, and lawful.....because those to whom Bush appeals could deny the appeal to have Baird recused....."just because they can." You know too well how liberal judges can, and have ruled in the Florida Kangaroo Supreme Court in 2000.....

[nicmarlo]

I still think it is so "telling" that they want Terri's bone scan excluded!!!

And, combine that with the fact that Felos filed a Motion for Protective Order so that MS does not have to be deposed....let's see, Michael doesn't have to answer questions under oath, and "no bone scan" evidence, about which to ask questions.......just WHAT IS MS afraid of??

[tutstar]

I'm going to go back and research the statutes about the feeding tubes, just wondering if in any way if affects the children. I'm curious about this because of the reaction that King's aide had when I mentioned the story to her.

I did find this article in Duval County medical journal which was written I believe as a response the Browning case and this is a little snip ( the whole thing is worth reading though)...
notice the last part .....


Some of the problems with any definition of "Terminal" are that there is no commonly accepted clinical definition of "Terminal." Is it —Days? —Weeks? —Whenever death is inevitable? To some extent, the creation of the "End stage" category was meant to clarify "Terminal." But note the broad difference between "no reasonable medical probability of recovery" (found in the Terminal definition), versus "to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that treatment of the irreversible condition would be medically ineffective" (as found in the End-Stage definition). The End stage definition is a much higher standard, and probably results from the lawmakers too closely tracking another state's statute when intending to broaden our own statute.

Furthermore, even Browning addressed the rights of persons who are both mentally and physically incapacitated, but not those who are mentally incapacitated but physically in good health (as can be frequently the case with Alzheimer's patients).

http://www.dcmsonline.org/jax-medicine/2001journals/May2001/choices.htm

[nicmarlo]

But note the broad difference between "no reasonable medical probability of recovery" (found in the Terminal definition), versus "to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that treatment of the irreversible condition would be medically ineffective" (as found in the End-Stage definition).

Terminal: as defined above, all human beings ever born or yet to be born are "terminal."