Check THIS out.
Doctors for Michael Schiavo have said that an MRI and PET are not necessary for Terri because PVS is primarily a “clinical” diagnosis, that is, one arrived at on the basis of examination of the patient, rather than by relying on tests. And the neurologists I have spoken to agree on the clinical nature of the diagnosis, while insisting that advanced tests nonetheless are a necessary part of it. But the star medical witness for Michael Schiavo, Dr. Ronald Cranford of the University of Minnesota, has repeatedly dismissed calls for MRI testing, and his opinion has prevailed.
Dr. Cranford was the principal medical witness brought in by Schiavo and Felos to support their position that Terri was PVS. Judge Greer was obviously impressed by Cranford’s résumé: Cranford travels throughout the country testifying in cases involving PVS and brain impairment. He is widely recognized by courts as an expert in these issues, and in some circles is considered “the” expert on PVS. His clinical judgment has carried the day in many cases, so it is relevant to examine the manner in which he arrived at his judgment in Terri’s case. But before that, one needs to know a little about Cranford’s background and perspective: Dr. Ronald Cranford is one of the most outspoken advocates of the “right to die” movement and of physician-assisted suicide in the U.S. today.
In published articles, including a 1997 op-ed in the Minneapolis–St. Paul Star Tribune, he has advocated the starvation of Alzheimer’s patients. He has described PVS patients as indistinguishable from other forms of animal life. He has said that PVS patients and others with brain impairment lack personhood and should have no constitutional rights. Perusing the case literature and articles surrounding the “right to die” and PVS, one will see Dr. Cranford’s name surface again and again. In almost every case, he is the one claiming PVS, and advocating the cessation of nutrition and hydration.
Thanks, agrace.
I had not seen that. The pattern sounds all too familiar to me. The Schiavo case is similar to patterns in other county probate courts where the estate is fleeced, there are no accountings and the ward dies. But, this occurs in Florida where the opportunity for a "humane death industry" held great profit potential.
It almost sounds as if Campbell got the referral to act as the Schindler's attorney so that the Court would have someone representing the Schindlers who would go along--not raise too much of a fuss. She was probably flattered by, if not dependent upon, Shames for referrals and therefore would not confront him about conflicts, ex parte communications, etc. Shames obviously had his own agenda. After all, state court judges don't make that much money. And, the Schindlers attorney wasn't getting paid. So, she really did not want to anger the judge and stop the flow of referrals on which she would be paid by the county.
It also sounds like Clearwater was selected as the test ground for a strong right to die movement. Hospices are like the early abortion clinics. Florida was a perfect state to start this business as it has a large elderly and gay population. When the Schiavo case was being developed, the gay population was a death culture as the AIDS drugs were not as sophisticated. Also, health care reformers at the time advocated the reduction of life-prolonging measures for the elderly. Hospice was viewed as a benign alternative to hospital death. Politicians were lobbied and contributions flowed so that the legislative scheme of Florida was supportive. Hospice now had the potential to be a very profitable service. Michael Schiavo and the right to die movement intersected to their mutual profit.
The Schindlers seem like very decent people. It is very sad that this happened to their family. The practice of law is supposed to be about serving the client. What a pity.