Terri Schiavo update: Judge Baird's is OFF case.

He contradicts everything the FeelLousy camp says about Terri. And he's a practicing doctor, unlike the people FeelLousy uses as his experts.

Every cop who came to speak to "us" asked us if we were going to be peaceful. I guess they didn't get the word from Hospice about our gentile nature combined with OUR MEAN, HONEST, TO THE POINT SIGNS.

In 1990, the Florida Supreme Court ruled in Estelle Browning v. Doris Herbert that patients have the right to refuse medical treatment, including artificial nutrition and hydration.

And guess what DOOD when Terri allegedly expressed her alleged wish THIS WAS ILLEGAL and food/hydration was NOT considered "medical treatment." Should not the intentions of her alleged wishes, should the conveeeeeeenient anecdotes of cheatin' hubby dearest's family be found credible, yet be interpreted in the light of what it could have legally meant at the time? It's very possible, even if she knew all the law AT THE TIME, she'd still be horrified to learn that in the future this would mean a slow starvation death.

How's it feel to waste so much time here at Free Republic? In the credibility arena, there's a long list ahead of me: GREER, SHERIFF RICE, SAO MCCABE, ALTENBERN OF THE 2NDCA, BAIRD, FRANK NAGATANO, DCF, HOSPICE OF SUNCOAST, MORTON PLANT HOSPITAL, FELOS, MICHAEL SCHIAVO.

Missed me on tv, radio, in newspapers including the NY Times did you? Earned media, my friend. If you had any experience with the media, you'd be working the media hard right now because Michael's gonna need it real soon.

and only idiots wearing black ropes will buy [Felon's] garbage

Some may wish they were wearing "black ropes," figuratively or otherwise.

I don't think this guy has a soul.

He has to, because what else can God damn to hell when his body is gone? (Of course as Christian I never hope this, but if any conduct deserves the volcano treatment in eternity....)

Well we've gone down the slippery slope. Browning had a Living Won't (er, Will). Terri only has anecdotes which would be very convenient for those telling them.

Well guess what there is obviously no clause in the Florida constitution that says the courts may not do something grossly immoral. Because they have.

If you have the source of this "fact" you have a moral,

Stop right there. You have no right to talk about anything moral, until you become so yourself.

Terri's law violates ... the ban on ex post facto laws

HAW HAW HAW! Now we really know you're reaching for thin air. That ban only applies to criminal law.

Heavenly Father, we return to give You thanks that absolutely nothing is hid from You ... not word or deed or intent. Forgive us, Lord, through the Blood of Jesus Christ, for any and all those things done to the detriment of our walk with You or our efforts on behalf of this mother's child. Keep us focused on the task at hand ... to continue to do that which You have set before us, that this beloved daughter be rescued from the pit of hell to which she is now consigned.

Creator God, our hearts are grieved at the knowledge that this precious child is consigned to days and nights without beauty or music or fellowship ... set aside behind closed doors, guarded as if she were the most heinous criminal, deserving of nothing. She has been abandoned, Lord ... cast out by a husband with murder in his heart. She has been abandoned, Lord ... held captive by an attorney who speaks eloquently of ending her life process. She has been forgotten, Lord ... the courts of law dismiss her as if she were not worthy of time or attention.

Our outrage knows no bounds. We praise Your name that You are the Righteous Judge, that You are the Avenger for all who are oppressed, that You require an accounting for every thought, word, and deed. We praise You for our standing before You through the Blood of Jesus Christ ... may Your Precious Blood be claimed by all those who wish Terri harm, else they cannot stand before You cleansed from all sin.

Again, Heavenly Father, we look to You for that one judge among the many ... that one judge who will render justice to this abandoned woman. Give supernatural strength to her family as they continually try to wrest their child from the grip of this evil ... break the chains that imprison her and set her free, O God, we pray in the Name of Jesus, Amen ...

I guess the cops didn't hear about your decorum at the vigil (over a period of DAYS), or about Terri's birthday party, either.

floriduh voter, thanks so much for all that you do and have done for Terri and her family. You will surely be blessed! I would give anything to be there to help out! Don't have the time I once had to give to the cause, but am still praying and try to catch up on the latest.

Well.

All the to-do by certain parties about how ostensibly lawful the court proceedings to "let Terri go" by slow starvation and thirst, seems to me (in my humble opinion) akin to raving about the wonderful German engineering of the trains that carried Holocaust victims to Auschwitz, Treblinka, and similar places. How well these trains held to their engineered specifications! Nary a clearance problem between the pistons and cylinders! The locomotive's output power never fell below 95% of what was designed! The temperature of the exhaust kept a good 400 degrees Celsius below the failure point of the metal! All the wheels were true to within .01 of an inch! Well yes, but what's the POINT???

Yes, thanks FV

I did not get to hear the Hammesfahr interview. Heartened to to hear Terri's condition was discussed in a medically sound fashion.

Kudos to Terri rallyers! Wow - 3 tv stations? There are candidates for election that wish they could be so lucky. Way to go!

I will send another missive to Mr. McCabe to follow up.

“Now we really know you're reaching for thin air. That ban only applies to criminal law.”

Normally I might agree with you. However, the plain language of The Constitution does not make that distinction, it simply states that “[ n]o Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Traditionally the courts have held that this applied only to criminal law since civil law can and is enacted and modified as situation and circumstance change. Terri’s Law however goes beyond this and vacates a prior final decision of the judiciary that, in the Schiavo matter, denies her of a right previously held and affirmed by the court.

Interestingly, the Schlindlers used the ex post facto argument in a complaint asserting that the use of a 1999 Florida law in her case represented a Fifth Amendment due process violation of the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto legislation since Mrs. Schiavo had suffered her injury in 1990. The case was dismissed on other grounds and the ex post facto claim was never argued. Clearly even the legal champion of the Terri’s Fight organization recognizes that non-criminal legislation can constitute an ex post facto violation under The Constitution.

By way of example, let’s assume that the Hightechredneck family owned a piece of property in 1995 and had followed all the requirements necessary to validate and record their ownership. In 2000 the state legislature passed a law that required that the Governor sign all deeds at the time of recording or the deed is null and void. Further, that this new legislation was made retroactive to 1990. As a result of this new law the Hightechredneck’s property was condemned as vacant and declared an asset of the state. I admit that this example is overly exaggerated, simplistic, and extremely unlikely, but would this non-criminal ex post facto law be Constitutional?

The ex post facto argument is not the keystone that will cause Terri’s Law to be found unconstitutional. Several other factors considerations will carry the constitutionality question. It violates the Equal Protection Clause of both the State and Federal Constitutions, it violates the Separation of Power doctrine, it usurps the power of the judiciary, it is a Constitutionally prohibited Bill of Attainder and any number of other prohibited actions.

As I stated in my post, it's only my opinion.

Check your mail.

[I]t is important for the surrogate decisionmaker to fully appreciate that he or
she makes the decision which the patient would personally choose. In this state, we
have adopted a concept of "substituted judgment." [In re Guardianship of Barry,
445 So.2d 365, 370-71 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) ]. One does not exercise another's right
of self-determination or fulfill that person's right of privacy by making a
decision which the state, the family, or public opinion would prefer. The
surrogate decisionmaker must be confident that he or she can and is voicing the
patient's decision.

The Ethics and Advocacy Task Force, as amicus curiae, raises a very legitimate
concern that the "right to die" could become a license to kill. There are times
when some people believe that another would be "better off dead" even though the
other person is still fighting vigorously to live. Euthanasia is a crime in this
state. <section> 782.08, Fla.Stat. (1987). See <section> 765.11(1), Fla.Stat.
1987). Despite the tremendous advances achieved in this century, the world has
witnessed the extermination of retarded and mentally disturbed persons for whom a
foreign government decided that death was the proper prescription. Thus, it
cannot be overemphasized that the remedy announced in this opinion and the
procedures designed to safeguard that remedy are based upon the patient's right to
make a personal and private decision and not upon other interests.
Browning, 543 So.2d at 269 (emphasis in original).

=====================

It seems the FL Supreme Court wants to make clear that the surrogate decision maker is to make the decision that the patient would make if she were able to.

"One does not exercise another's right of self-determination or fulfill that person's right of privacy by making a decision which the state, the family, or public opinion would prefer."

When the decision-maker has a conflict of interest (as MS does) where it would be much better for him if Terri were dead (he could marry the mother of his children, receive any funds that may be left in her trust account, and be out from under the burden of Terri's care, and "move on with his life"), it would seem that the judge must "judge" the integrity of the decision-maker, to ensure that his decision truly is the one the patient would make. So it appears in Greer's "judgment" - despite the fact that MS stopped all rehab therapy after receiving the malpractice award that was to be used for this purpose, despite the fact MS put a DNR in Terri's medical file within weeks of receiving the money, despite the fact that he tried to prohibit Terri's doctors from giving antibiotics for a potentially life-threatening infection she had shortly after the malpractice money came in, despite the fact that he did not follow state guardianship laws, despite the fact that during the malpractice trial MS eloquently stated how much he loved Terri and wanted to care for her for the rest of her life but needed money to continue with rehabilitation therapy, and immediately did an about-face after receiving this money - after considering all of these FACTS that any reasonable person would realize are an indication that MS could be acting in his own interests instead of Terri's, Judge Greer decided that MS's integrity was of the caliber that the FL Supreme Court requires of the decision-maker, and that MS's conflicts-of-interest did not influence his medical decisions for Terri.

Now, has Judge Greer asked himself these questions:

- Would Terri have wanted the malpractice money to have been used for her therapy, or to pay MS's lawyers?

- Would Terri have wanted to be allowed swallow therapy to see if she could eat on her own?

- Would Terri have wanted MS to make life-and-death decisions for her if she knew that Mikey had gone on to live with another woman and had two children with her?

The FL Supreme Court says in the Browning Decision that it is concerned that the right to die could become a license to kill. It is therefore the responsibility of the judge to ensure to the best of his ability that this does not happen. With so many indications that this is exactly what is happening in the Schiavo case, how can Judge Greer find that without a written document AND all of these conflicts of interests that MS is truly acting as Terri would wish?

Judge Greer was WRONG in his finding of facts in this case. It's as plain as the nose on your face. And don't give me this BS about the appeals court upholding his decision so it must be right. The Florida judicial system is protecting it's own. They will never admit that one of their judges is this stupid or this corrupt, whichever it is.

Florida law allows one judge to play God. When the law was written, I'm sure that the legislators that voted for it assumed that the judge would be fair and do his duty and use reasonable judgement to ensure that the patient's rights were protected from abuse by a surrogate decison maker. Judge Greer failed miserably in his duty - and the law makes no provision for stupid or corrupt judges.

I sent another note to B McCabe regarding the rally. I urge all to do so that could not be at the rally.
mailto:berniemccabe@fdle.state.fl.us
I sent the following -

Dear Mr. McCabe;
I followed the rally for Terri Schiavo closely, though I am not from Florida. I would venture to say there are hundreds more like me. There were three television stations and another news outlet present. Excellent coverage for any event, much less an event in which the rights of one individual have been denied.

Forida, with you as its representative, continues to condone a severely disabled woman's confinement to hospice without the treatment and therapy available to all disabled individuals. To be housed in a hospice without being terminally ill is a gross aberration of her rights as an individual.

As Ms. Schiavo cannot maintain her rights, it is incumbent on you to protect them. Thus far, the state of Florida has protected only the rights of those who can vocalize.

I cannot imagine the logic behind your inaction. However, be assured that interest in this case has only escalated. The committment of American citizens to Ms. Schiavo's rights as a severely disabled individual who has been obscenely denied basic treatment and therapy is growing.

Please consider a course of action which ensures that Ms. Schiavo has immediate access to treatment and therapy provided by law in every state of the union, including Florida. Access which has been criminally denied.