Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No choice for Terri
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 3/24/5 | Debra J. Saunders

Posted on 03/24/2005 9:58:45 AM PST by SmithL

I'VE HEARD the clamor as to why Terri Schiavo must die. No one, it is said, would want to live like her. Her parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, are religious fanatics. Many of her so-called supporters are "pro-life" zealots. Evil GOP geniuses passed a special law to help her live. And so, she must die.

I've followed this poignant case for two years. Also, my husband served at one time as an unpaid informal adviser to the Schindlers. I've heard the arguments, and they often start with: No one would want to live like that.

After all, this case is supposed to be about Terri's "right to die," even though no one knows for sure that she wants to die. She never wrote a living will or other document asserting as much. A court decided that she would want to die, based on casual remarks she made to her husband, Michael Schiavo, and his brother and sister. She told them she would never want to be kept alive by machines.

I hate to insert facts here, but it is a fact that a feeding tube is not a machine. Yet somehow the courts found that those casual comments have the force of a legal document -- and apply to a feeding tube, when they were meant for a respirator.

In so ruling, a judge also ignored claims made by Michael Schiavo when he sued the hospital that first treated Terri in 1990 for $16 million for failing to detect her potassium imbalance. As Newsday reported in 2003, he won $300, 000 for himself for loss of consortium and $700,000 for his wife -- based on the presumption that Michael would care for Terri for the rest of her life.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: schiavo; terri; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
To: robertpaulsen
Could be that Terri said "she didn't want to live like that"

. Could be. Perhaps this logic is something people can hide behind and use for justification. It is your choice to do so.

41 posted on 03/24/2005 10:40:17 AM PST by maxter (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint

So we are all just supposed to roll over and pee on ourselves?! I think not!
Everyone needs a cheerleader.


42 posted on 03/24/2005 10:42:50 AM PST by Mrs. Shawnlaw (Sheep drool, Goats rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

"Were her statements ever made under oath and cross examined? Didn't think so."

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Greer not allow the testimony? Kinda hard to cross in that case.


43 posted on 03/24/2005 10:42:55 AM PST by Fudd Fan (MaryJo Kopechne needed an "exit strategy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cherokee Conservative

Well said, Cherokee. It's not that I disagree so much with Boondocks-- but as I've said before, if you don't wish Terri well, please let the rest of us console each other. Just please.


44 posted on 03/24/2005 10:44:31 AM PST by Fudd Fan (MaryJo Kopechne needed an "exit strategy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint
...unless she had a living will, it was up to the husband

Really, genius? Then why is it not up to the husband/wife also when the wife/husband dies intestate? In every (all 50 states) the state decides who gets what in cases where there is no will...

...besides this bigamist is married now (though, commonly) TO ANOTHER WOMAN!

45 posted on 03/24/2005 10:45:53 AM PST by meandog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint

So we are all just supposed to roll over and pee on ourselves?! I think not!
Everyone needs a cheerleader.


46 posted on 03/24/2005 10:46:24 AM PST by Mrs. Shawnlaw (Sheep drool, Goats rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: meandog

"I even heard the Rev. Jesse Jackass (on MSNBC last night) declare that "it is wrong and unethical to starve and dehydrate her to death"!"

That's not TOO surprising to me. How could he face his "flock" if he sided with legal-ized murder? Regardless, it's --dare-I-say refreshing?-- to hear his and Sharpton's take.


47 posted on 03/24/2005 10:47:30 AM PST by Fudd Fan (MaryJo Kopechne needed an "exit strategy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: smiley

"excellent point...see the repercussions of this???...that's what we're fighting for folks....the slippery slope...."

That was a rediculous scenario, not an excellent point. Florida law permits oral statements to be admitted as evidence in right to life/death cases. Written, witnessed statements or video should be the requirement. It would help in the future and level out that "slippery slope" you fear.


48 posted on 03/24/2005 10:47:53 AM PST by Sun Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The people trying to save Terri's life went about it the wrong way. Instead of saying, "we shouldn't let her die", we should have said, "we want to kill her and everyone else that is just like her".

Only then would the liberals have come out of the woodwork trying to keep her alive. Remember it's Bizarro world where good is evil, and evil is good.


49 posted on 03/24/2005 10:48:52 AM PST by overdog2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thickeye

"is the bitch dead yet?"

What... couldn't come up with anything intelligent to ask?


50 posted on 03/24/2005 10:51:20 AM PST by Sun Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint

What would you say if it was proven that her husband [in-name-only] put her in this condition to begin with? Wouldn't that cast doubt on his objectivity?


51 posted on 03/24/2005 10:55:55 AM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Click on my name to see what readers have said about my Christian novels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sun Soldier

Uncalled for.


52 posted on 03/24/2005 10:56:30 AM PST by Fudd Fan (MaryJo Kopechne needed an "exit strategy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Sun Soldier

I do not see the Terri Schavio case as being ridiculous as you seem to indicate...she is not a "thing" she is a human being who has life....and whose life is going to end because no one seems to want to save a life. Period.


53 posted on 03/24/2005 10:57:27 AM PST by smiley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan
"Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Greer not allow the testimony? Kinda hard to cross in that case."

The 'deposition' was given 15 months after the hearing. How could he "not allow" something that wasn't even given yet?

Oh, and it was too late to reopen that case. Where were all these people before?

54 posted on 03/24/2005 10:58:55 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: meandog
...besides this bigamist is married now (though, commonly) TO ANOTHER WOMAN!

I would hope my spouse would go on with life if I had been in the same condition as Terri. Was he supposed to just sit there and watch Terri breathe for 15 years?
55 posted on 03/24/2005 10:59:31 AM PST by Boondock_Saint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint
i>Terry made her bed when she married that man, unless she had a living will, it was up to the husband.

Its not that automatic.

Florida Law:

744.312 Considerations in appointment of guardian.--

(1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (4), the court may appoint any person who is fit and proper and qualified to act as guardian, whether related to the ward or not.

(2) The court shall give preference to the appointment of a person who:

(a) Is related by blood or marriage to the ward;

(b) Has educational, professional, or business experience relevant to the nature of the services sought to be provided;

(c) Has the capacity to manage the financial resources involved; or

(d) Has the ability to meet the requirements of the law and the unique needs of the individual case.

(3) The court shall also:

(a) Consider the wishes expressed by an incapacitated person as to who shall be appointed guardian;

(b) Consider the preference of a minor who is age 14 or over as to who should be appointed guardian;

(c) Consider any person designated as guardian in any will in which the ward is a beneficiary.

(4) If the person designated is qualified to serve pursuant to s. 744.309, the court shall appoint any standby guardian or preneed guardian, unless the court determines that appointing such person is contrary to the best interests of the ward.

56 posted on 03/24/2005 11:02:03 AM PST by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion
"What would you say if it was proven that her husband [in-name-only] put her in this condition to begin with? Wouldn't that cast doubt on his objectivity?

It's been 15 years and that has not been proven. But don't let that stop you from grasping at straws.
57 posted on 03/24/2005 11:03:25 AM PST by Boondock_Saint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen

Your questions are good ones. And they need answers before Terri is murdered!


58 posted on 03/24/2005 11:04:43 AM PST by Fudd Fan (MaryJo Kopechne needed an "exit strategy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: GianniV

No, you have to go home, fly into a psychotropic drug induced rage and strangle your wife and then try to cover it up by playing along with treatment until you get the malpractice settlement. Then after you don't need her body for evidence anymore you remember that your wife didn't want to live this way. So you spend her treatment money on lawyers. But she just wouldn't die fast enough.


59 posted on 03/24/2005 11:06:06 AM PST by massgopguy (massgopguy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Boondock_Saint

YES!


60 posted on 03/24/2005 11:09:38 AM PST by Mrs. Shawnlaw (Sheep drool, Goats rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson