Without stating my opinion about this matter, what is unfortunate to see is how many opinions are being offered by people who haven't paid attention to some of the nitty gritty facts.
I've seen freepers espouse that Michael is after the insurance money. And yet according to court papers, Michael formally offered to divest himself entirely of his financial interests in the guardianship estate.
Freepers have said that Terri has not been seen by a neurologist. That's patently untrue.
It's been stated she did not have a CAT scan. That's patently untrue.
It's been stated that Michael refused to let a priest visit her. That's patently untrue. Some of them have given interviews after their visit with Terri and just yesterday she was given last rites.
Terri's sister stated on CNN last night that they don't even know if Terri had a heart attack. Court documentation by numerous doctors provides evidence that Terri did have a heart attack. Her sister denied that Terri had bulimia but that is the very basis under which Michael won a malpractice suit.
Some freepers have said that only Michael was told about Terri's comments that she never wanted to be kept alive with machines and tubes. Yet court testimony indicates her best friend, Joan, also heard Terri say that.
Court testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it.
This is a deplorable situation that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. And it's been upsetting to see absolute lies stated as fact, over and over again on FR. If any good can come of this, it is that people will think more carefully about signing Living Wills and making their intentions clear.
Thank you Peach
I agree 100%
Do you have a link?
Actually, the last time the tube was removed, Terri's priest was not allowed entrance as it was said she'd choke on the Host if given Last Rites. I'll try to find a link for that.
Some of the accusations being flung about have been totally out of line.
This has not been FR's finest hour.
It's not a lie that Terri's mother, father and family are being forced to watch their daughter being killed.
Please direct me to someplace where I can read about all these claims you have made. Thank you.
Michael stipulated that he must be allowed to kill TERRI FIRST, before divesting himself of the guardianship estate. NOT A VERY GOOD DEAL.
And the doctor who was being SUED, was later cleared of ALL CHARGES. That means the CHARGES WERE BASELESS. That means the bulimia was MADE UP OUT OF THIN AIR.
A CAT scan is worthless in diagnosing brain damage because the resolution is not clear enough.Terri should have already had an MRI done to examine her brain in detail.
A very well written and cogent post indeed.
Wonderful response and most of that I found on Terri's own website.
That is not the issue.
Unfortunately, a CAT scan is of limited use in diagnosing PVS.
Why did Michael never permit a PET scan?
Why did he never permit an MRI?
She has never had either. Not once.
I find that baffling.
Without stating my opinion about this matter, what is unfortunate to see is how many opinions are being offered by people who haven't paid attention to some of the nitty gritty facts.
I've seen freepers espouse that Michael is after the insurance money. And yet according to court papers, Michael formally offered to divest himself entirely of his financial interests in the guardianship estate.
Er, Michael ONLY offered to do so if the Schlinders agreed to kill Terri, and that offer was only on the "table" a short while. Read up.
Freepers have said that Terri has not been seen by a neurologist. That's patently untrue.
No one ever said that. They said the neurologists spent little time with her, which IS true.
It's been stated she did not have a CAT scan. That's patently untrue.
Er, once again they said she has NOT had an MRI NOR A PET SCAN (not a Cat Scan).
It's been stated that Michael refused to let a priest visit her. That's patently untrue. Some of them have given interviews after their visit with Terri and just yesterday she was given last rites.
Er, Michael refused to allow a priest to give Terri the last rites THE LAST TIME HAD HAD HER STARVED. He allowed it afterwards and this time. So once again, you are wrong.
Terri's sister stated on CNN last night that they don't even know if Terri had a heart attack. Court documentation by numerous doctors provides evidence that Terri did have a heart attack. Her sister denied that Terri had bulimia but that is the very basis under which Michael won a malpractice suit.
That is because Terri was NEVER diagnosed with bulimia and NO ONE that ever knew her INCLUDING her husband knew she had this supposed "bulimia" - odd, wouldn't you say? It was based on her Potassium falling to 2 (mine has fallen to 1 before and I don't have Bullimia).
If the doctors held out to appeal they would have won.
Some freepers have said that only Michael was told about Terri's comments that she never wanted to be kept alive with machines and tubes. Yet court testimony indicates her best friend, Joan, also heard Terri say that.
Only Michael and his brother and sister in law testified that Terri said that.
Court testimony provided by members of the Schindler family included very personal statements about their desire and intention to ensure that Theresa remain alive . . . at any and all costs. Nearly gruesome examples were given, eliciting agreement by family members that in the event Theresa should contract diabetes and subsequent gangrene in each of her limbs, they would agree to amputate each limb and would then, were she to be diagnosed with heart disease, perform open-heart surgery. Within the testimony, as part of the hypothetical presented, Schindler family members stated that even if Theresa had told them of her intention to have artificial nutrition withdrawn, they would not do it.
Do you now advocate that someone living without a limb or limbs are "gruesome?" Many people who do quite well would beg to differ with you. And of COURSE they would do whatever necessary to save their daughter's life! Who in hell wouldn't?
This is a deplorable situation that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. And it's been upsetting to see absolute lies stated as fact, over and over again on FR. If any good can come of this, it is that people will think more carefully about signing Living Wills and making their intentions clear.
There are many lies stated. As above.
"And it's been upsetting to see absolute lies stated as fact, over and over again on FR."
Excellent post.
I'm afraid it only gives credence to those on the otherside that charge the Republicans, Bush etc. are Fasist/Nazis, that they will say or do anything to make their point or get their way.
I've found this to be a pretty un-biased information site complete with much of the court records and testimony.
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html#timeline
Yes, she was seen by a neurologist, and an experimental treatment involving the implantation of electrodes in her skull was undertaken. But the electrodes were never removed, despite the intervening years since the treatment and the doctor's strong advice to do so. Michael has clearly not kept to a standard of quality care.
Some freepers have said that only Michael was told about Terri's comments that she never wanted to be kept alive with machines and tubes. Yet court testimony indicates her best friend, Joan, also heard Terri say that.
Please post a link to the relevant testimony - probably several will be necessary in order to illustrate the many points you have posted. I have read a lot of material regarding this case and this is the first I have seen this assertion. The root for Michael's knowledge of her wishes is supposedly a remark made after viewing a news program about a person on life support - Terri said she "wouldn't want to live like that". I don't understand how that translates to "I'd rather starve", though.
It's been stated she did not have a CAT scan. That's patently untrue.
CAT scans are not terribly useful for diagnosing PVS. MRIs and PET Scans are considered the standard. The doctor who diagnosed Terri's PVS is well known for his ability to create that diagnosis on the drop of a hat, from what I have read. He is a PVS right-to-die advocate.
It's been stated that Michael refused to let a priest visit her. That's patently untrue. Some of them have given interviews after their visit with Terri and just yesterday she was given last rites.
Michael has refused repeatedly to allow her to receive communion. When the feeding tube was removed previously, I believe he DID refuse to allow access to her by her family's priest.
Terri's sister stated on CNN last night that they don't even know if Terri had a heart attack. Court documentation by numerous doctors provides evidence that Terri did have a heart attack. Her sister denied that Terri had bulimia but that is the very basis under which Michael won a malpractice suit.
Michael has denied that he assaulted her on the night she had the "heart attack", and yet there id medical evidence that she was strangled, and did no6t "fall down the stairs" as her erstwhile husband has alleged. The malpractice money was supposed to have been invested in her care - but a good portion of it now belongs to Felos, Michael's right-to-kill attorney.
Look, I do not have a dog in this fight beyond my own predisposition toward life when there is doubt. I personally see a lot of doubt in this case. You, evidently, do not.
You have asserted a number of patents that do point out the factual errors some Freepers have made, and yet you do not take time to connect the errors to the truths they spring from or are parallel with. Because FR is a discussion forum, such errors will happen, and they do need to be corrected.
I know I have addressed only you this post to you, but I hope that anyone who is interested in discussing the Schiavo case will remember that (1) accuracy is important and (2) we do not need to be uncivil with each other. Passion on a subject can be expressed without resorting to the vitriol spewed by the liberati. I have no intention to offend with anything I have said here, so please tell me if something I typed strikes you as a personal attack.
If I have made factual errors in my post, please point out the problems so I can address them.
I'll get off my soapbox now. [/pet peeve preachiness] ;-P
AMEN!
This is truly the only good that may come from this awful nightmare.
MY Durable Power of Attorney is 15 years old, and am going to update it this week so that no one, no one at all, can come between my wishes and my son's promise to carry it out.
May anyone attempting to keep me trapped in a non-funtioning brain and body, roast in you know where.
I'm sorry for those of you who truly believe you are doing right by prolonging this poor woman's ordeal, and that includes her poor parents.
May God forgive us all.