Posted on 03/03/2005 9:24:10 PM PST by Ohioan from Florida
A judge released the DCF document seeking intervention in the Terri Schiavo case. She's the brain-damaged woman at the center of a "right to die" battle.
The department of children and families document names Michael Schiavo as responsible for the mistreatment of his wife. The nine complaints cited are very technical. They essentially claim the abuse or neglect of Terri is in the form of the kind of medical treatment Terri is, or in some cases is not receiving.
The complaint accuses Michael Schiavo of: 1. Failure to educate using certain therapies in violation of guardianship 2. Experimental procedures performed without proper medical and legal procedures observed. 3. Lack of manipulation of the ward's (Terri’s) arms causing severe contractures
Circuit judge George Greer says he will make the document available to the public tomorrow. Greer ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be removed March 18th.
Again, you miss the point. The Schindlers have no control over Terri's whereabouts and never did.
Schiavo won't do that.
I know. But I think it is the only solution. It would be the end of the media circus. And as I said previously, either the Schindlers will make the situation work or they will come to grips with a situation they have purposefully avoided dealing with.
Hubby and I visited the Holocaust Museum in DC in May of 2004 and they showed video of what Hitler's regime did to the disabled. It made me sick.
Purposefully avoided dealing with?????
What do you mean? Why should parents ever stop fighting for the life of their child, who is being unjustly sentenced to death?
Have you read the DCF ABUSE COMPLAINT?
I'm not trying to be difficult with this question, but I really wonder...if you're not saying she's a burden because she has to have special care, what, exactly ARE you saying? Again, not picking a fight, but what I'm reading in your post is exactly that.
Hopefully, DCF will do their job.
ContraryMary, never mind, I saw my answer above...disregard question!
Yes, I have read it.
Yes, they should. Does that mean that you, too, will accept the results? Not just results that you agree with?
My Grandfathers name was spelled in the German manner and not Americanised. There was an SS officer with the same spelling that appeared in the newspapers. Even though Grandpas Grandfather came here in 1830, my Grandpa was horrified to see a possible family connection. As the WWII generation leaves us, we forget the horror that was Hitler. He's become just a name used as an insult.
I will never acccept euthanasia. See my post # 213 and # 185.
Does this mean that YOU will accept teh results if she is allowed to live?
Or will you continue to cheer for her death?
Show me where I've cheered for her death. Don't make assumptions. If the Schindlers can take care of her for the next 10 or 20 years (which I think is highly unlikely for various reasons) then more power to them.
Sure sounds like something the cheerleaders of euthanasia would say.
Not at all. I'm just trying to figure our whether you mean what you say.
Do YOU mean what you say either?
This is about euthanasia.
And if they can equate a feeding tube with a ventilator, what else will they equate with it?
A colostomy bag?
A pacemaker?
Prosthetic appendages?
A wheelchair?
They claim this is about 'suffering', but where will it end?
Someone somewhere will see any of the above mentioned items as being a sign of the user 'suffering'.
This is a slippery slope, and rolling over and letting this issue drop isn't an option.
Last time some group decided to show 'compassion' by 'mercy kilings' it ended with millions dead and a global war that didn't really end until two cities had atomic bombs dropped on them.
Just some small perspective on it.
This is not by any stretch about euthanasia -- much as many here would like it to be.
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.