Posted on 03/18/2005 10:41:59 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
Greer gives order
Michael may say that Terri once told him she wanted him to call her bitch while watching a Lifetime movie 16 years ago!
Heads Up -- Per FOX News, Tom DeLay will be having a press conference at 3:15 this afternoon...
And O.J. sounded pretty believable, also.
The issue is whether or not Terri wanted to be kept alive in the state she is in. After 15 years, 19 different judges, the court decided based on the evidence they had and the fact that the spouse has the First right and can decide for the patient..in lieu of a living will...in the state of Florida that it was Terri's wishes to not stay in this PVS.
There is a lot of drama about this. That video clip was put together out of 4 hours of tape that did NOT show what was on what we saw. Her brother even yesterday was asking for an MRI ,"It's never been done". Well, the fact is , it was done.
So what you or I or Terri's parents want is irrelevant according to FL law. If I die and my spouse goes with my wishes, I sure don't want some other relative going to the courts to overule that.
I, too, am appalled that some have decided they don't like a law and rather than change it, these sideshows and manipulation of our political system goes on. Thousands of people every day in this country go through this....this is going to be crazy if suddenly I can't decide whether or not I wish to live a PVS state or not. The next thing to go will be the Living Will.
You know you say she is brain dead and frankly if she were at least she couldn't feel the pain of the horrible death they are trying to impose on her.
it really makes me mad that brain dead is equated to diminished capacity. This woman knows her family recgonized them and reacts. She will feel the pain and it will go on for day while she staves to death. It is one of the most painful deaths one can sucuum to.
So get your facts right before you scream she's brain dead because that makes you no better than the brain dead judge.
Oh, and sneeking in to feed her is ok? That's illegal.
Well, guess since we are now not going to abide by a higher law, I suppose we could sneak in and help someone die with an injection.
Apparently you good judgement comes and goes.
Whether any of us " truly, truly, really believe" Michael
is also not the issue. The issue here is that IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA a spouse has the First right to interpret his spouse's wishes.
Fifteen years and NOW they want to take it to Congress and the Fed Courts ?
They patiently tried to work within the Florida system, before finally deciding it was too corrupt. Greer is da?n well aware that Terri isn't PVS. That's why he needs her killed.
We, the taxpayers, paid a fortune to give this family the legal options. Fine with me. But after 15 years and 19 judges, they do this now? I think the courts and taxpayers were the Patient ones, which is ok. I feel badly for her family, but I am furious at the political groups that are just using this woman for their own ends.
A judge is required to remove a guardian if a significant conflict manifests between his interests and those of his ward.
If there is an apparent possibility of a conflict of interest, but it hasn't manifested itself in the guardian's actions, the court is required to appoint a guardian ad litem. Judges are, with a exceptions that don't apply in this case, forbidden from playing that role.
Although some doctors define PVS in terms of predictably repeatable reactions to stimuli, the statutory definition is much narrower. When a doctor describe Terri's condition in terms that met his definition but not the statutory one, Greer took that as testimony that she was legally PVS, ignoring the statutory meaning of the term.
Guardians are supposed to provide medically-appropriate therapy for their wards; even though Michael controlled a trust fund with $750,000 earmarked for such therapy, he not only refused to spend any money on therapy--he even refused therapy that would have been provided gratis by caregivers.
It is unlawful to deny a person food and water by mouth such that they starve. Even if there were a high likelihood that attempting to provide food by mouth would kill Terri, there is no legitimate basis for refusing to allow people who want her alive (such as her parents) from attempting to provide it once gastrostomic feeding is prohibited.
Should I go on?
I'd say it's the family that's been da?ned patient. Were it my kid, I'd have shot the murderous/adulterous SOB ages ago and let my wife raise my daughter.
The fact of the matter is that nearly all of the findings against Terri, and all of the recent ones, have been made by the same corrupt judge who sees no conflict between the interests of a married man who's started a new family with a woman he's pledged to marry, and the first wife that he openly admits to wanting dead. Appeals judges don't actually look at matters of fact; they just determine whether a judge followed the right procedures assuming all his findings of fact are correct
Suppose I invite a judge to look out a window and he refuses, announcing that the sky is green. An appeals court might remand the case because of his failure to look out the window, instructing him to look out the window and reconsider his decision. But if he looks out the window (or pretends to) and still declares that the sky is green, an appeals court will not question his judgement.
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.