Posted on 03/21/2005 7:50:03 AM PST by Pendragon_6
Lets see, first Michael Schiavo beats and strangles his wife Terri, leaves her lying unconscious on the floor until her family arrives to get her to the hospital.
Then Michael Schiavo sues the hospital for $20 million because he needs the money to get his poor wife therapy.
Then Michael Schiavo pockets the money, denies his wife the care he said she needed and finally, claims she really wants to die.
Michael Schiavo killed his wife Terri's cat, melted down her wedding ring and then took up with his girlfriend and lives with her today with their children. Does this sound like a loving husband who really cares about his wife's wishes?
And what do we get on the tube every hour on the hour: “persistent vegetative state” as though any of the talking heads who ghoulishly proclaim Terri's life isn't worth that of a convicted serial killer sitting on death row (for 20 years, while due process goes on).
Michael Schiavo's supporters claim he loved his wife Terri enough to take a nursing degree so that he could take care of her. I think he got that nursing degree so he could inject her with insulin and hasten her death and his complete claim to all the money he won in litigation.
Just take a gander at the sworn testimony of an attending nurse: Carla Sauer Iyer (affidavit* below) but let me save you some time and report a quote of Michael Schiavo's after visiting his still living wife: "When is that bitch gonna die?"
Hmmm. Loving husband or man so afraid of not only not getting the money (what's left of the $20 million) but the prospect of facing a jury for his attempted murder, a charge which is possible as long as Terri lives. Sounds like motive to me.
Michael Schiavo says Terri said she never wanted to be kept alive on machines. Okay. Even if that was her statement (which there is absolutely no corroborating testimony and quite the unusual statement coming from a young, newly married woman still in her twenties and full of life); Terri is not being kept alive by machines!
Terri has a feeding tube from which she gets food and water. Had she had the care and therapy she was entitled to, there is every chance today Terri would be divorced from that louse and feeding herself just fine.
About that “loving husband” crapola: what husband do you know evinces his marital fidelity and love by living with another woman, having children with that woman and dumps his wife in a hospice while waiting for her to die? What loving husband kills his sick wife's pet? What loving husband denies his wife's family visitation?
I ask these questions because the media morons are still stuck with their new term: “persistent vegetative state” and are oblivious to the actual facts of this tragic case.
Continued
I was not following that case but I am sure that the Prosecution played to the jury.
Hell, it's rigged FOR the Prosecution. They go SECOND on the OPENING argument and LAST on the CLOSING argument. Talk about a rigged game. You DO NOT want to get cuaght up in the justice system unless you have scads of money like OJ, Blake, Kennedy's, etc.
So...the moral aspect of this case does not phase you?
Anyone can make such claims. I know what it's like to be lied about in the most horrible way. However, was Michael ever charged, or convicted of any of the claims made against him? NEVER. Well then why not?
It is very saddening for me to witness supposed "Christians" make the most outrageous claims against this man and have others believe and repeat the baseless charges.
WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?
Here's something I wrote (and please to all who disagree - please act like decent Christians and abstain from mindless hostility. If you disagree, just say so and if possible, explain why. Resorting to ad hominem attacks is disgraceful):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LET TERRI DIE AND RETURN TO GOD
A huge outcry has been raised concerning the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. Why the emotion over a common medical practice of stopping artificial treatment when there is no hope of recovery?
Terri has been kept artificially alive for more than fifteen years despite being in a “persistent vegetative state.” What exactly does this mean?
"People in [this] state cannot think, speak or respond to commands and are not aware of their surroundings. They may have noncognitive functions and breathing and circulation may remain relatively intact." (National Institute of Health)
Terri is kept alive by having a feeding tube inserted into her stomach. She has no chance of recovery. If it wasn’t for modern medicine, she would've died within several days of her heart failure.
What exactly is the difference of her and those who are kept alive by ventilators but are also impossible to restore?
When my wife was dying from cervical cancer several years ago, I signed a "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" form. I didn't want to see the woman I loved, the mother of my three young sons, my mate of ten years and eternal companion, suffer more than she had. Seeing her go through three years of pain was more than I could bear.
When she slipped into a coma, we knew the end was near. When she stopped breathing, I was holding her hand, whispering "Go towards the light." And "I will love you forever."
Her sisters were frantic and wanted her to be resuscitated and kept alive for as long as possible on the machines. I put my foot down and said no and informed them I signed a "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" form. As a result, my wife was finally at rest and no longer suffering.
To this day my in-laws still harbor anger towards me and still haven't stopped grieving for my late wife.
Terri's family wants to believe she will recover. They are portraying her husband as being evil for wanting to put an end to the horrible spectacle of artificially keeping this poor woman alive in a permanent vegetative state.
When people are in a situation where it is impossible for them to recover, it is an obscenity to perpetuate life when the only decent thing is to let our loved one go. It is unfortunate cryonics is still considered an outlandish procedure. Those cases that hold hope of a future medical cure should just be cryogenically preserved. I know I would prefer to be cryogenically frozen if I was placed in a similar situation. Nanomedicine a century or two from now shouldn’t have any problem repairing cellular damage from the freezing process and revive those frozen, regardless of their illness.
We humans are designed to eventually DIE. Everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die. How long must this poor woman be kept artificially alive before she is allowed to move on to the next life? Isn’t fifteen years enough?
Her doctors aren’t evil. Neither is her husband. He loves her and wants her to finally be at peace. Living as a vegetable is no way for humans to live.
It is helpful to examine the different situations where artificial treatment is given in cases of medical incapacity:
• Cessation of brain and heart and/or other organ activity
• Cessation of brain activity
• Cessation of cognitive brain activity
• Cessation of heart or other organ activity
Cessation of brain and heart
Must one continually perform CPR upon a person who has drowned? How long must it be performed before one discontinues artificial treatment and face facts the patient will never recover? What if the victim's parents insist CPR be continued non-stop for days on end? One has to face facts artificial treatment may only work within a very small window of opportunity in cases of brain-death and heart stoppage.
Cessation of brain activity
What about in cases of brain-death and the person is only kept alive by machines? If the patient’s brain has ceased to function and the patient is incapable of breathing on his own; the person’s chances of recovery are nonexistent.
Cessation of cognitive brain activity
People in permanent comas lose their cognitive ability. They are incapable of thinking, waking up or communicating. Most doctors agree if these patients haven’t recovered after a year; they will never recover. However, everyone has heard stories about people waking up from comas after 10 years, giving the faint hope that our loved one will also recover some day. However for every one that does recover, thousands don’t and most die a slow death.
Cessation of heart or other organ activity
Modern medicine has machines that can keep a person alive for quite some time if they lose the use of a certain organ, such as kidneys or heart. It isn’t a permanent solution though and the person will need their defective organ repaired or replaced.
Final thoughts
Terri Schiavo suffered permanent brain damage from heart failure. This damage was so severe that she is incapable of cognitive thought. Her brain still works to a limited extent - the involuntary systems such as her respiratory and circulatory systems are still functioning. But Terri, the person, the personality, is not longer there. It’s as if the portions of her brain that stored her person, her memories, her thoughts and her personality were removed. It’s as if her spirit is no longer in her body. The only thing her brain does is keep her physical body alive – it has become nothing more than a hospital respirator or heart-lung machine.
I know it’s heartbreaking for most to see her. She sleeps and awakes, her eyes open and she moves from side to side. But according to all the independent and court-appointed observers, some of whom spent several months by her side, her eyes don’t focus. There’s never been any hint she recognizes anyone or anything. She doesn’t respond to speech or touch. All the remains is involuntary and noncognitive. Those most familiar with her specific case such as medical doctors and courts have all agreed with this assessment. This is why her husband has won every single case against her parents. It isn’t a conspiracy; the facts are obvious when examined honestly.
Fifteen years is long enough. I know what her husband is going through. He wants his wife to rest and stop being the vegetable laying in bed. He was a faithful husband for many years and placed great demands on his time and those caring for Terri for at least eight years before recognizing the hopelessness and decided to end the horror. I don’t think I could’ve lasted that long with the constant pain of seeing my wife in such a condition. At least he had the sense to move on, find another and raise a family while her parents still cling to a miracle of recovery.
We need to face facts. Sometimes God’s answer is no regardless of how fervently we want otherwise. Let us all let her go so she may enjoy her rest with the Lord.
Why would they do that? She is HIS WIFE and therefore, under law, is NOT under the parent's care. the LAW OF THE LAND determines that Michael is her NOK. Get over it.
Why, because someone makes a baseless allegation? I don't think so.
Show me any evidence at all from that time when she entered the hospital that she was assaulted by her husband. I'm certainly not on his side in this but accusations of attempted murder shouldn't be thrown around without any proof.
Of course, but when you begin to DEVIATE from the written LAW, then you have nothing left. It's ALREADY bad enough with frivolous lawsuits that the TAXPAYER funds. Who is funding Terry's care? Michael? Her parents? The TAXPAYERS?
I ask myself when is enough enough?
Bottom line: HAVE A LIVING WILL.
Has his new girlfriend made any statements?
What is this? Looks like propaganda to me. This is not helpful.
Simply sets the tone for the rest of the article. Kind of a summary of all the conspiracy crap out there.
There were also previous injuries that showed up on the xray.
The link to the report by the doctor is on one of these threads.
Outdated? Maybe. But it is the LAW as it stands now. Like it or not.
Dear Michael,
We're going to see to it that Terri lives as full and as long a life as possible. She may outlive you.
Kiss kiss,
Laz
The only business the government should take in this matter is changing the law so a divorce can occur when there's an incapacitated spouse unable to sign forms or be capable of informed consent.
Parents can "abandon" or put up for adoption their children to a legal party, including the state. Husbands/wives do not have that option. We should allow it for these types of cases.
Then, the parents would take guardianship/custody back, and all would get what they want.
The English common law doctrine always assumed some sort of good faith effort on the part of the spouse.
I don't think this guy meets that definition at all...
You are wrong, the husband is not automatically placed as the guardian when there is a conflict of interest. The best known case that illustrated this is the Sunny von Bulow case. But there are scores of others also.
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.