Posted on 06/15/2005 12:27:19 PM PDT by veronica
(1st Add: Includes comments from George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney.)
(CNSNews.com) - Terri Schiavo's body did not show any signs of trauma or other criminal activity that would explain her brain injury, nor was there evidence to support previous diagnoses of a heart attack or an eating disorder, the Florida medical examiner who conducted her autopsy said Wednesday. A representative of Terri's family complimented the report, but said it still leaves many questions unanswered.
"She died of dehydration," Dr. Jon Thogmartin, the Florida medical examiner for Pinellas and Pasco counties said, noting that the official cause of death would be listed as "complications of anoxic encephalopathy."
"That's the only diagnosis that I know for sure, is that her brain went without oxygen," he added. "Why? That is undetermined."
George Felos - attorney for Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo - said the report confirms what he has argued all along.
"The courts have found that there was no abuse of Terri, no evidence of abuse, and that's what the medical examiner found," Felos said.
Terri Schiavo collapsed under unknown circumstances in 1990. Michael Schiavo was awarded nearly $2 million in judgments and settlements in a medical malpractice lawsuit claiming that the collapse was caused by a heart attack triggered by a potassium imbalance, caused by an undiagnosed eating disorder, bulimia nervosa. Thogmartin challenged that determination.
"No one observed Mrs. Schiavo taking diet pills, binging and purging or consuming laxatives and she apparently never confessed to her family or friends about having an eating disorder," Thogmartin found. "Furthermore, many other signs of bulimia nervosa were not reported to be present."
Terri was "heavy" as a teenager, according to Thogmartin, and had lost more than 100 pounds after graduation. The eating disorder diagnosis was based on that fact and a low potassium level measured during a blood test about an hour after Terri was first hospitalized.
"Her low potassium level appears to be the main piece of evidence purporting to show that she had an eating disorder," Thogmartin said. But he noted that she received numerous medical treatments when she arrived at the hospital that would have lowered that measurement.
"Thus the main piece of evidence supporting the diagnosis of bulimia nervosa is suspect," he concluded.
"Once you eliminate the potassium problem, which is known in bulimics, you end up with a 26-year-old who used to be healthy, who now lost the weight, is reveling in her thinness now, enjoying her life and doesn't want to gain the weight back," Thogmartin said. "If that's a bulimic, there's a lot of bulimics out there. It's just not enough."
Thogmartin said that because he cannot, "with reasonable medical certainty," ascertain why or how the blood and oxygen to Terri's brain were interrupted, he cannot rule on what started the chain of events that led to her death.
"The manner of death is different from the cause of death. Manner of death is the circumstances of death or how the death came about," Thogmartin said. "Since I don't know the circumstances or can't tell, actually, what the underlying cause is, the manner of death has to be 'undetermined.'"
Other allegations and theories addressed
Thogmartin dismissed the theory that the oxygen depravation to Terri's brain might have been the result of a myocardial infarction, the medical term for a "heart attack," or death of heart muscle from coronary artery disease.
"Mrs. Schiavo's heart was anatomically normal without any areas of recent or remote infarction," he explained.
In response to the allegations that Terri's collapse was the result of a physical assault, Thogmartin noted that she received nearly 30 X-rays, CAT scans and ultrasound examinations during the medical examination that followed her collapse.
"Any fractures - including rib fractures, leg fractures, ankle fractures, skull fractures, spine fractures - that occurred concurrent with her initial collapse would almost certainly have been diagnosed in 1990, especially with the number of physical exams, radiographs and other evaluations she received during her initial hospitalization," Thogmartin said. "No fractures or trauma were reported or recorded."
There was also, Thogmartin said, "no evidence to support or the evidence did not support," various allegations that Terri was abused or neglected after her initial brain injury.
Was Terri in a Persistent Vegetative State?
Thogmartin brought in Dr. Stephen Nelson, an expert in pathology of the brain and central nervous system, as a consultant during the autopsy. Nelson stressed numerous times that the diagnosis of a "Persistent Vegetative State," which was used to justify the removal of the feeding tube that kept Terri alive, "is a clinical diagnosis, it's not a pathologic diagnosis that has precision associated with it." But he did not dispute the finding.
"There is nothing in her autopsy report, in her autopsy that is inconsistent with Persistent Vegetative State," Nelson said, adding that there was evidence to support the finding.
"A normal brain weight for somebody who is approximately 41 years of age ought to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,200 to 1,300 grams," Nelson explained. "Her brain is 615 grams and is largely reduced to what is termed granular atrophy ... associated with the loss of blood flow that happened many years prior.
"Those all are consistent with what is reported in the literature for Persistent Vegetative State," Nelson added. "We found nothing that is contrary to what has previously been reported for Persistent Vegetative State."
Nelson compared the physical condition of Terri's brain to that of Karen Ann Quinlan, the New Jersey woman who died in 1985 -- nine years after her parents won a court battle to remove her from a respirator.
"Her brain, Karen Ann Quinlan's, weighed more than Terri Schiavo's brain weighed," Nelson said. "The findings here are, perhaps, worse, even, than Karen Ann Quinlan."
Thogmartin also concluded that Terri's brain injury was irreversible.
"Her brain was profoundly atrophied," the medical examiner concluded. "This damage was irreversible and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."
Michael Schiavo relied on the diagnosis of a Persistent Vegetative State when he sought permission from the Florida courts to remove Terri's feeding tube. He and two of his relatives testified that Terri had said she would not want to be kept alive in such a condition. Thogmartin discussed the contention by many right-to-life advocates that Terri's family should have been allowed to offer her food and water by mouth after that feeding tube was removed.
"She would not have been able to consume sustenance safely or in sufficient quantity by mouth," Thogmartin said. "Mrs. Schiavo was dependent, therefore, on nutrition and hydration by her feeding tube and removal of her feeding tube would have resulted in her death whether she was fed by mouth or not."
In layman's terms
After a technical explanation of his findings, laden with medical language, Thogmartin was asked to summarize his findings in an exchange with one unidentified reporter:
REPORTER: "In layman's terms, did Terri Schiavo starve to death?"
THOGMARTIN: "No."
REPORTER: "Did she suffer any neglect or abuse?"
THOGMARTIN: "No."
REPORTER: "Will we ever know what caused her death?"
THOGMARTIN: "I don't know."
Pamela Hennessy, spokeswoman for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation and Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, complimented Thogmartin on his report.
"However, it does seem that the conclusions of his report leave as many unanswered questions as there were previously," Hennessy said. "For instance, if Terri did not suffer bulimia and she had as healthy a heart as Dr. Thogmartin proclaimed, what caused her collapse?
"It doesn't really bring much in the way of closure to [the Schindlers] as far as what happened to their daughter, why this happened in the first place and what could have been done for her," Hennessy concluded.
Thogmartin said he is open to answering those questions.
"It is the policy of this office that no case is ever closed, and that all determinations are to be reconsidered upon receipt of credible new information," he explained.
"In addition to fading memories, the 15-year survival of Mrs. Schiavo after her collapse resulted in the creation of a voluminous number of documents, many of which were lost or discarded over those years," he continued. "Receipt of additional credible information that clarifies any outstanding issues may, or shall cause an amendment to her cause and manner of death."
"....and let MS continue his path w/no solid evidence himself about even any "wish to die"."
You seem to have it reversed...
I believe that without any evidence to the contrary, a spouse is allowed to make these decisions, are they not ?
Example?
"That is an outrageous thing to say. Why do you think they would do something like that? Because they felt their daughter was still alive and they wanted to take care of her? What in the hell is so wrong with that? Do you have even the slightest idea what the hell you are talking about?"
I don't get what post you are even referring to. The comment I made was that, when there is a debate about something going on and people resort to hate-filled name calling, it usually is a sign that they have lost the argument when they resort to that.
It was a general statement.
So, what are YOU talking about? Did you mix up my post with somebody else's?
Exactly. I cannot for the life of me understand these people who slam the Schindlers - regardless of whether they "lied" - because clearly they at least wanted to care for their own child/sibling. What is so damn terrible about THAT bottom line? Maybe they're just trying to move heaven and earth to gain a simple, obvious, self-evident right they should have! Can you really blame them for it?
This is alot like a question put to people worried about slimeball criminals and their "rights" (also I guess we can add in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo) - "Did Dirty Harry ever shoot any1 who didn't deserve it?"
Conversely for the Schindlers - did they ever "lie" as a means to some despicable end - or just to save their daughter and care for her themselves?
Would you agree that a conflicted spouse who has broken the marriage contract should not be making those decisions?
"Example?"
Mostly, all the abilities they always said that Terri had that she did not have, and the autopsy now shows that there is NO WAY she could have had.
Also, the sham they tried to pull with the "following the balloon" video.
Also, lying about saying they were denied access to her medical records when they had them.
All the baseless accusations (read: grasping at straws) made about Michael Schiavo that there is 0 evdience for, and one could argue, some evidence directly to the contrary.
Making wild statements and using pointless and dishonest analogies to rile up all the poor saps who don't know any better.. "we don't starve criminals! yadda yadda yadaa" as thought it's the same thing.
I could go on.
That may be so, but again here is where true JUDGEMENT was lacking - why would you LET even an official guardian/spouse do things that would lead to her DEATH, esp. in light of the fact that real relatives are there to help her and take her off his hands? This is all absurd. If a judge has any doubt in his mind about the (deadly) intentions or even the abilities of a "guardian" that might bring about even death to the "guarded", is it not his right to do something to change that guardianship? (I don't know, but it should be.)
addendum: It's not that I am purposely trying to bash the Schindler's for it's own sake..
But lies are lies, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I sympathize with them a lot, because I know they were taken advantave of my a lot of people who benefitted from feeding the delusion.
Post 654: "The one group of people during this whole case that were consistently dishonest and consistently told us things that we now know were not, and could not have been, the truth, were the Schindlers and their mini-armi of lawyers and Randal Terrys."
It was outrageous, IOW, that you not only state that the Schindlers were full of lies, but that you imply they are so *terrible* for doing it all to help & save their daughter. My, my, what a horrible thing to do!
It was CLEAR what Houmatt was referring to - it had nothing to do w/how people handle debates!
Thank you. I believe he either is unsure on how to backtrack to see what post I was referring to (his own) or he is simply trolling.
Cute. Over the top sarcasm seems to be a way of life on FR.
In the Schiavo case, there was no proof Terri wanted this. It was all hearsay. Testimony given was conflicting. Seems to me the correct thing in that case is to err on the side of life.
Perhaps you prefer erring on the side of death.
And what about the 2 doctors that claimed she was PVS because she did not react to them visually? What about them, given that she was blind does not this make those 2 quacks dishonest?
Amen. This post deserves to be repeated over and over...Thank you for expressing my thoughts so clearly.
"And what about the 2 doctors that claimed she was PVS because she did not react to them visually? What about them, given that she was blind does not this make those 2 quacks dishonest?"
Well how could she repond to them visually if she was blind anyway? She could not react to or process visual stimuli in any manner whatsoever.
Though blind is almost not the right term to use in this case.
I am not sure if many people truly realize how damaged her brain really was. It was such that the concept of "vision" had no meaning in her condition, any more than asking if the number 9 is "happy".
The only doctors who ever said she was not PVS were doctors paid by the Schindlers. What do you think they were paying for? They spent the money, you better believe they wanted the answer they wanted. It wasn't "Here, take an objective look at my daughter".. it was "Here, take this cash, and say she's not PVS"
Sad but true.
So you admit they did have a video. So their interpretation of what was on the video is different from yours. Why does that make them a liar? Seems to me you throw that word around pretty easily. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar.
lying about saying they were denied access to her medical records when they had them.
Got proof?
All the baseless accusations (read: grasping at straws) made about Michael Schiavo that there is 0 evdience for, and one could argue, some evidence directly to the contrary.
And of course, Saint Michael made no baseless accusations against the Schindlers. Riiiiiight.
Making wild statements and using pointless and dishonest analogies to rile up all the poor saps who don't know any better.
So people who don't believe others should be starved/dehydrated based on hearsay evidence are 'poor saps.' I see.
"we don't starve criminals! yadda yadda yadaa" as thought it's the same thing."
That's true. . .it's not the same thing. A criminal is found guilty of a horrid wrong by a jury of their peers. Terri wasn't found guilty of anything, yet was killed in a manner far too heinous to be used with individuals convicted of multiple murders.
Karen Ann Quinlan was MISDIAGNOSED: She did NOT have cerebral cortex damage.
Karen was allowed to 'vegetate' without therapy, perhaps because of this misdiagnosis.
Another problem with this M.E.'s comparison of the post-mortem weight of the brains of Terri and Karen: Unlike Terri, Karen Ann Quinlan was NOT dehydrated to death.
I wonder if these M.E.s took into account the effect extreme dehydration --over a period of nearly two weeks-- might have on brain weight.
This is false. At least one other Doctor not paid by the Schindlers opined that she might be minimally conscious.
Since you made the assertion out of ignorance I would not call you a liar but there is no doubt in my mind that you wouldn't hesitate at all if the situation were reversed.
Blind is blind, no matter how you try to redefine it, and detecting brain capabilities by using eyes that do not work is quackery and will always be quackery.
"Mostly, all the abilities they always said that Terri had that she did not have Also, the sham they tried to pull with the "following the balloon" video.
So you admit they did have a video. So their interpretation of what was on the video is different from yours. Why does that make them a liar? Seems to me you throw that word around pretty easily. Anyone who disagrees with you is a liar."
Do you realize what you are saying? I put it in quotes for a reason. They took 4 hours of video of completely random movements, cut out a few seconds where her random movements are smiliar to the motion of the balloon, and submitted that as evidence of her tracking. Which we know know was impossible anyway and could have never happened. Also, if you look at the video, you will see that the person holding the balloon is following the movement of her eyes, not the other way around. But don't take my word for it, watch the video. It's a poorly executed ruse, however sincere it's intentions. Sometimes a truth that hurts is better than a lie that feels good.
"All the baseless accusations (read: grasping at straws) made about Michael Schiavo that there is 0 evdience for, and one could argue, some evidence directly to the contrary.
And of course, Saint Michael made no baseless accusations against the Schindlers. Riiiiiight."
Exactly what accusations did he make against the Schindlers?
"So people who don't believe others should be starved/dehydrated based on hearsay evidence are 'poor saps.' I see."
The "poor saps" I referred to are people who bought into all the lies told by "experts" who never gave a damn about Terri, but only wanted to squeeze some cash out of the Schindlers during a time they were extremely vulnerable and willing to try anything to hold on to hope, rather than accept what is unfortunately true. Feeding their delusion that she could respond and be helped for their own benefit, knowing it was very likely not true.
"Blind is blind, no matter how you try to redefine it, and detecting brain capabilities by using eyes that do not work is quackery and will always be quackery."
Her eyes worked just fine, that's what you don't get. There was nothing wrong with her eyes. It was her brain. She could not see because there is NOBODY home.
It's like saying that a telescope is not working properly because nobody is looking through the eyepiece.
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.