Posted on 03/20/2005 1:34:36 PM PST by FoxPro
Nothing more...
"The poor woman has no brain left. It is GONE."
If her brain is gone, why does she speak? And she not only speaks, but she answers yes/no questions. She smiles at people, she tells when she is in pain, she moves her head in response to who is speaking and where they are standing. This in not evidence of someone who's brain is gone.
There are so many falsehoods, calumies and misstatements in your short post, it is hard to know where to start.
She hasn't been denied due process. The judge is merely following the law of Florida which he is sworn to uphold. That doesn't make him a 'right-to-die' judge. He has watched the videos the doctor/expert witnesses made of Terri. [It would have been a terrible miscarriage of justice if he were to rely on his own lay opinion of her (as you do). I don't know about the MRI, (I doubt she could be held still enough for it), but so what? Give me your learned medical expertise. What will that show, oh great physician?
As to Michael's testimony being the only basis for the determination of Terri's wishes, that is untrue. I summarized the evidence from the trial at #757 on the earlier thread. She did have a court-appointed guardian ad litem in the trial.
Terri did not want 15 years of forced feeding and diapers. You and those of like mind have forced that upon her. Now you so thoughtfully 'offer' her countless more years of more forced feeding and more diapering. The least you can do is wear symbolic diapers with her to show your 'solidarity' with the condition you think it so noble to impose upon her.
You never will though. You wouldn't want to be force fed and diapered, but she is just useful to your pet political theories and she isn't objecting, is she?
No, let's be honest. Her brain is gone, all that is left is the brain stem. That (the brain stem) is functioning, that is why she can breathe, but the brain is gone and, absent a direct miracle of God, will not grow back.
You second statement has been false for 13 years. There was (and is) no 'evidence' that, with 'therapy', she could be in better shape. That was the unsupported contention of her doctors at the trial, but never then nor since have they offered any 'evidence' that could happen to a person with no brain. It has never yet happened to a person with no remaining brain and it will not happen here.
First, Michael obtained a total of $1 million, $700,000 went to Terri's conservatorship and $300,000 to Michael on his loss of consortium claim.
Second, the malpractice case was settled, not tried, so there was no "court" in which to "bring out the point".
Third, Joan Schiavo (who testified at the trial as to Terri's statements) was no more Michael's "kin" than Terri's.
Fourth, what would be the significance of Terri's wishes on being maintained artificially in a malpractice action relating to her treatment at the time of the heart attack? Lawsuits are focused endeavors to resolve specific issues, one does not simply throw everything at the wall to see what sticks.
Terri's attorney (and Guardian ad Litem) was Richard L. Pearse, Jr. He was appointed by the court on June 11, 1998 (30 days after the petition was filed). I understand that Mr. Pearse was present throughout the trial.
Terri, for reasons that should be obvious even to you, did not appear in court.
And if you are defending Judge Greer, you are clearly on the wrong side of the political and moral spectrum, or are totally ignorant about what this man has done.
Her brain is not gone. Stop lying.
Who has been caring for her all these years? You mean Michael Schiavo didn't hire a lawyer to petition the court. If you do mean that, would you pass me the bowl please. It's good stuff.
I really want to have the same peace you have about Terri Schiavo.
Can you please point me to the scans or x-rays you've seen which reveal her brain's actual condition? It seems to me sharing such proof right from the beginning might have been the swiftest way to counter-act, if not silence, the public outcry over her fate.
Read the summary of the evidence at the trial at #757 of the previous thread. This would be a quick and painless death for Terri if her 'supporters' would stop trying to sentence her to more years of forced feeding and diapers.
And if you are defending Judge Greer, you are clearly on the wrong side of the political and moral spectrum, or are totally ignorant about what this man has done.
I am neither. He is an honest and caring judge and the record demonstrates it. I've read it, have you?
The brain stem is all that remains. The brain itself is gone and has been replaced by spinal fluid. She can breathe only because her brain stem and spinal cord are in tact.
Then why does she smile at her mother and how does she try to talk? And why are her husband and his judge afraid to find out what's going on with her medically, and refuse her even simple therapy?
Yes, Michael has been her primary visitor and has arranged care for her, but did not make any determination about the feeding tube. The Court did that.
You mean Michael Schiavo didn't hire a lawyer to petition the court.
Yes, once the Court indicated that it would find that both the husband and the parents might have a conflict of interest and would be precluded from making the ultimate decision, Michael petitioned the Court on May 11, 1998 to act as Terri's surrogate and determine her wishes regarding being maintained artificially.
The Court did that. Michael was one of five persons testifying regarding Terri's comments on not wishing to be artificially maintained. That's the extent of Michael's involvement in the 'feeding tube decision.'
The evidence in the contested proceeding establishes that. "... [T]he overwhelming credible evidence is that Terri Schiavo has been totally unresponsive since lapsing into the coma almost ten years ago, that her movements are reflexive and predicated on brain stem activity alone, that she suffers from severe structural brain damage and to a large extent her brain has been replaced by spinal fluid ...." (Trial Court, slip. op. at 6)
Through the assistance of Mrs. Schiavo's treating physician, Dr. Victor Gambone, the physicians obtained current medical information about Theresa Schiavo including high-quality brain scans. Each physician reviewed her medical records and personally conducted a neurological examination of Mrs. Schiavo. Lengthy videotapes of some of the medical examinations were created and introduced into evidence. Thus, the quality of the evidence presented to the guardianship court was very high, and each side had ample opportunity to present detailed medical evidence, all of which was subjected to thorough cross-examination. It is likely that no guardianship court has ever received as much high-quality medical evidence in such a proceeding.
I have not attacked the judge and have no interest in attacking him. I know very little about him.
I'm sincerely trying to grasp this wretched situation in a way I can emotionally deal with. If I had your confidence in her actual condition, it might ease my heart somewhat, both about her passing and about the possibly painful process of her passing. I'm a visual learner. I was hoping there were actual scans available somewhere, in the same way that her bone reports were copied to the internet.
Since when does the court have jurisdiction over human life? Oh, I forgot. Abortion. This is the same thing and if you look at all the facts it stinks to high heaven. No matter how you slice it, dice it, mince it, chop it, or sautee it. It stinks like three day old fish.
It would've been simpler to for Michael Schiavo to walk away. After all, he's already begun another life with another woman and kids. So why even continue this destructive course? Terri's wishes are pure conjecture and you know it. It's the same as abortion. The mother says yes, but the baby says no. And yet is has no voice.
Once again, we're back to activists courts determining the value of life no matter how you slice it, dice it, mince it, chop it or sautee it. It's that simple. Murder by the Schiavo and the courts.
Why do you want her to die so vehemently? You're arguing for her death. Plain and simple. It doesn't make sense. How would you feel if it were your child and there was a slight possiblity of hope?
From your posts, it appears you're only getting one side of the picture.
Thank you. This is plain murder no matter how you cut it, slice it, dice it, mince it, chop it or sautee it.
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.