Judge releases DCF document in Schiavo case

If I recall Michael never tried to murder her. She collapsed because of some kind of medical problem, related to low potassium. I will recall the name of the medical condition soon. MICHAEL DID NOT CAUSE THE INJURYS THAT PUT HER IN THE HOSPITAL! Didn't she fall out of bed to sustain injury that those responsible caregivers were sued for?
Wasn't there some sort of malpractice because of Michael following the advice of a doctor to try an experimental treatment that failed? Apparantly at that time he was willing to try to save her if it was medically feasable. That treatment failed and nothing has changed in the 10 years since.

It is simplistic for you to believe that somehow your idea of treatment is better that that which has already tried and failed. There are some cruel things in life that people have to accept and move on beyond. Your "concern" is pretty much a one sided path of suppositions of "what if" and "what could" and "if only" things would be different.
Nursing homes are full of miracles waiting to happen. The sad reality of it all is that the glimmer of "hope" is a non medical emotion rather than a treatment for most. And after a decade of wishful thinking nothing has changed.
A legal guardian realizes the reality of the times. Outside interferance has completely unrealistic expectations based on second guessing suppositions.

I could swear you come out of DU the way you go on the attack when you disagree with someone. Real men can agree to disagree without name calling, but you have lowered yourself to the same level of the opinions you loath so much.
Your vicious impression of a overzealous bigot only strengthens my resolve to resist your anarchist approach of confusing personal private matters with public manipulation. You need to open up the blinders and see the real world beyond your narrow minded Disneyland.

I humbly bow to your judgemental superior morality. NOT!

Now, Dr. Walker....

Q The report goes on to say, "The
10 presumption is that the other multiple areas of
11 abnormal activity also relate to previous trauma."

12 A That's what it says.

13 Q And, again, that's based on the fact that
14 Dr. Carnahan is a rehab physician, that you were
15 asked to evaluate for trauma?

16 A And the pattern of activity is fairly
17 typical of multiple traumatic injuries of relatively
18 recent origin.

19 Q I realize you can't assign a cause to
20 these injuries that you picked up in this report.
21 But typically in your experience, what would be the
22 causes of this pattern of abnormality?

23 A In somebody her age, an auto accident is
24 by far the most typical cause.

25 Q Assume that she was not in an auto
P- 29
1 accident but that she had suffered an anoxic or
2 hypoxic encephalopathy type of injury from a cardiac
3 arrest and had been bedridden for a year at this

4 point. What might account for these abnormalities?
5 A In my knowledge, that type of injury.
6 would not account for this pattern of abnormalities.

dr-walker-t-schiavo-bone-scan-deposition.txt

I have to agree with ozarkman in that name calling because he has a different take on the Schiavo case is just wrong and more akin to the behavior on DU.
O zarkman may be wrong headed on this subject, but he has always been well spoken.

NO NAME CALLING

So since when can a person write posts on a conservative website like the free republic that offends everybody's sensibilities about sensitive subjects like terminating some poor souls's life under the most suspicious of circumstances ?

Most of the people who frequent this website are conservative and have a fervent belief in teachings of christ and real moral principles which dictate abortion and euthanasia is a truly wicked and devious practice.

Ozarkman has a right to his free speech rights but at least at a website like free republic there is no guarantee people are going to be warm and receptive to his opinions.

These people are exercising THEIR free speech rights and if he can't take it that is his own problem.

That's the way it is.

The man might have better luck at websites that support euthanasia.

I agree with you but lanceman had degraded down to name calling. That does not advance our arguements at all. That is the same tactics that liberals use against conservatives. I do not like when our own side goes to that low level.

She did not have a living will - only his word that she would not want to live under these conditions.

You know, I generally agree with everyone on FreeRepublic and have been a member for probably close to 5 years.
I generally lean conservative, but usually middle of the road, sometimes even libertarian. I understand there are many things we will never agree upon, but my utmost concern through this whole matter is not necessarly the right to live or to die with dignity, but the right to make personal decisions without the government piggybacking with bureaucratic mixed signals. Unfortunately because government is involved in personal choices, and since government wants to maintain a PC approach as a way of riding the fence for votes, there within lays the root cause of this whole situation. There is no clearly defined protocal. Everything is left up to the courts and the courts are essentially running our nation, and stealing our time and money because there is always room for litigation. Since most of our elected politicians are also lawyers, there is a blatant conflict of interest in the legal profession when the same people who write the laws also leave loopholes for litigation. Those politicians are padding their pockets on cases just like the Shiavo case.
I deeply regret what the family has been put through. There are no clear parameters of proper action because the medical profession is as equally divided as the legal profession, or the family's as to what is right. This whole fiasco should have been brought to a conclusion a long time ago. Clearly someone will win, and someone will lose, or everyone will lose.

I too am a Christian, but am not of the type that throws morality at people in an offensive way. The people who are judgemental of me are no better than I am because we are all sinners and the Bible tells us not to judge or we too will be judged. Some people who have thrown personal attacks and names at me are the fringes of the far right. Their attempts of intimidation and references to silencing my opinions are no different than liberal attacks on conservative thought. Those are the same things we accuse those at DU with.
No I will not find another site because I generally find favorable opinion here. But I have seen an ugly side of conservatism because I choose to question the intentions of others. I think most people on this site can agree to disagree, but respect one for their ability to give an opinion. That is the foundation of a civilized society. But even in FR, there are some uncivilized people. They mirror the same characteristics of those they dispise. You people know who you are. For the rest of you, Thanks for showing civility.

I was under the impression she didn't leave a living will.

Her parents have maintained they will be more than happy to care for her if Michael would allow them to. Why does he get to decide, when he's already made a new life with the "other woman" and had two children with her? Why won't he allow Terri's parents to take care of her?