Micheal Schaivo took up with some little sweetie long ago and has a couple of kids with her. How does that behavior fullfil those promises to Terri?!!!
Perhaps because after all those years he realized the Terri he knew wasn't coming back. This story is a tragedy all the way around, with so many accusations but my heart goes out to both sides. If it were my daughter, I can't say I wouldn't be doing exactly what the Schindlers are doing. I can't imagine anything more heartbreaking. I've watched the tape and it definitely looks like Terri is reacting to her surroundings. Her guardian says it took hours to get those few minutes and it could never be duplicated. Just because someone doesn't agree with the Schindlers doesn't automatically make them evil or lying. However, if her nurses, who probably spend the most time with her say she's talking then there should be more follow-up tests done. At this point, both sides have become so entrenched in their positions that I don't think objectivity is possible.
After reading the various threads of FR, I was all ready to buy the "Michael is evil, he did this to her" that seems to be the prevailing opinion. Someone on a different thread pointed out this link: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html and I'm glad they did because it's the most unbiased look at the case I've seen. I would bet if someone started looking closely at Terri's parents, it wouldn't be too hard to twist everything they did into something negative. For instance, why did they wait until after the settlement to "suddenly" accuse Michael of abuse and attempted murder? They were all living together and supporting each other for quite a while after Terri's accident, which to me indicates there was love, trust an mutual respect. Without haveing been there, how do we know that money was the reason Michael "suddenly" remembered Terri's wish not to be left alive like this? How soon after the settlement did Michael bring this up? Hours? Days? Months? Years? Maybe it was something he tried to discuss with the Schindlers over the years but they couldn't discuss it rationally together. Maybe Michael himself refused to acknowledge his wife's wishes until one of his friends/family members who were with Michael and Terri when she said she wouldn't want to live like that reminded him. By ALL accounts (including the nurses), he was very devoted to her for years and evidently still visits her.
I've also read on this thread that they had an argument and he was very angry about her having spent money insinuating that was reason to kill her. I'm betting there aren't too many couples who haven't argued about money during their relationship. That's just not proof enough that he was responsible, especially when you consider there's medical evidence that she had bulimia. Whether he hopped around from job to job is pretty irrelevant. Lots of young (and middle-aged) people do that until they find their niche.
As a wife, I do know there's NO WAY I'd want my husband, as young as they were, to not go on with his life. I love him to much to want him to live in limbo for years and years. Still, if there are more in-depth tests that haven't been done to assess Terri's condition, they should be done. Terri's faith and the practices of her church should be respected, though and I don't know if they have. If the parents are willing to take care of her they should be allowed to...I say this in spite of being thoroughly sickened by the lengths they would go, cutting off limbs, etc. to keep her with them, there is a time to "let go and let God"...reminds me of that bizarre movie, Boxing Helena.
It bothers me, however, that people think that in order for the Schindlers to be right, Michael has to be evil. Maybe he's just wrong.
Cindie
"Someone on a different thread pointed out this link: http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html and I'm glad they did because it's the most unbiased look at the case I've seen"
You've GOT to be kidding me.
I have to say that in spite of the guy's protests at being uninterested and unbiased, that's one of the -most- biased representations of this case I've ever seen.
Look at his timeline! How in God's name does he jump from January 1993 to May, 1998, with only one entry (transferrence to a nursing home) in between? How the hell can he leave out THIS and purport to be objective!?
1993
Feb - Michael Schiavo denies recommended rehabilitation treatment.
Feb - Schiavo and Terri's parents have falling out regarding lack of therapy for Terri.
Feb - Schiavo withholds medical information from Terri's parents.
Feb - Schiavo posts Do not Resuscitate order in Terri's medical chart.
Jun - Schiavo threatens Schindler family with lawsuit.
Aug - Schiavo orders medical staff not to treat Terri for potentially fatal infection.
Sep - Bob and Mary Schindler petition courts to remove Schiavo as Terri's guardian.
Nov - Schiavo admits in deposition that he knew withholding treatment of infection could result in Terri's death.
I'm sorry, it's absurd to leave facts like that out of the equation, especially given that they immediately follow his being awarded large sums of cash which he promised to and was bound to use for her rehabilitation. Please, tell me that you can see that a claim to being objective is ludicrous in light of leaving facts like that out by casually skipping over five years of the timeline which just happens to be the most damaging to Schiavo's case!
Qwinn