Posted on 09/11/2006 8:17:41 PM PDT by aculeus
We have always been told there is no recovery from persistent vegetative state - doctors can only make a sufferer's last days as painless as possible. But is that really the truth? Across three continents, severely brain-damaged patients are awake and talking after taking ... a sleeping pill. And no one is more baffled than the GP who made the breakthrough. Steve Boggan witnesses these 'strange and wonderful' rebirths
For three years, Riaan Bolton has lain motionless, his eyes open but unseeing. After a devastating car crash doctors said he would never again see or speak or hear. Now his mother, Johanna, dissolves a pill in a little water on a teaspoon and forces it gently into his mouth. Within half an hour, as if a switch has been flicked in his brain, Riaan looks around his home in the South African town of Kimberley and says, "Hello." Shortly after his accident, Johanna had turned down the option of letting him die.
Three hundred miles away, Louis Viljoen, a young man who had once been cruelly described by a doctor as "a cabbage", greets me with a mischievous smile and a streetwise four-move handshake. Until he took the pill, he too was supposed to be in what doctors call a persistent vegetative state.
Across the Atlantic in the United States, George Melendez, who is also brain-damaged, has lain twitching and moaning as if in agony for years, causing his parents unbearable grief. He, too, is given this little tablet and again, it's as if a light comes on. His father asks him if he is, indeed, in pain. "No," George smiles, and his family burst into tears.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Consider the source.
And its attacking a woman who just lost her child.
Telling, huh?
It doesn't matter to the gossips that Terri is actually mentioned in the Guardian article, they simply parachuted into the thread after they were pinged. When have the facts ever gotten in their way?
Very telling.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q. What was her bladder condition?
MS. She had a UTI.
Q. What is that?
MS. Urinary tract infection..
Q. What did the doctor tell you treatment for that would be?
MS. Antibiotic usually..
Q. And did he tell you what would occur if you failed to treat that infection? What did he tell you?
MS. That sometimes urinary tract infection will turn to sepsis..
Q. And sepsis is what?
MS. An infection throughout the body..
Q. And what would the result of untreated sepsis be to the patient?
MS. The patient would pass on..
Q. So when you made the decision not to treat Terri's bladder infection you, in effect, were making a decision to allow her to pass on?
MS. I was making a decision on what Terri would want..
Q. Had the bladder condition been treated?.
MS. Yes.
Q. And was...what was the reason that the bladder condition was treated?
MS. Sable Palms Nursing Home said they could not do that by some Florida law which wasn't stated..
Q. But you didn't change your opinion or your decision to not treat the bladder condition?
MS. We did change it..
Q. Correct?
MS. Repeat the question..
Q. You did not change your decision not to treat the bladder condition, correct?
MS. I had to change my decision..
Q. Sable Palms changed it for you?
Attorney Nillson Objection.
Q. Okay. Is there any reason that you would not make the same decision that you previously made if the problem came up again?
MS. Repeat your question. You're losing me here..
Q. Let me be more specific. If your wife developed another condition that could result in her death, is there any reason that you would not take the position that you're not going to treat that condition and you're going to instruct the doctor not to treat that condition?
MS. I wouldn't instruct anybody, no..
Q. You instructed the doctor not to treat the condition, correct?
Attorney Nillson Objection.
Q. You did instruct the doctor not to treat her bladder condition, correct?
MS. Uh-huh. Yes..
Q. If a similar...would you do the same?
MS. I'm thinking..
Q. Take your time.
MS. I probably wouldn't instruct the doctor to do it..
Q. So you've changed your opinion?
MS. Sort of, yeah..
Q. Why have you changed your opinion?
MS. Because evidently there is a law out there that says I can't do it..
Q. Is that the only reason?
MS. Basically, maybe..
Q. What you're telling me is, is that there is nothing in your belief or feelings that have changed. The only thing that has changed is the fact that you perceive the law prevents you to do what you intended to do
MS. Correct..
Q. What did you do with your wife's jewelry?
MS. My wife's jewelry?.
Q. Yeah.
MS. Um, I think I took her engagement ring and her...what do they call it...diamond wedding band and made a ring for myself..
Q. What did you do with her cats?
MS. Her cats were put to sleep on the advice of my mother-in-law.
(Note: The veterinarian who performed the euthanasia of Terri's pets came forward to say there was never any suggestion from Terri's mother that this be done and it was done only on Mr. Schiavo's insistence.)
No sweat. I just wanted to be sure I understood your comment.
Short form. This is Michael Schiavo stating under oath that he attempted to deprive Terri of medicine for a painful urinary tract infection, knowing that it would most likely kill her. (Ladies who have experienced a UTI are invited to imagine how it would feel if it just got worse and worse until it killed you.)
Q. You did instruct the doctor not to treat her bladder condition, correct?
MS. Uh-huh. Yes..
Q. And did he tell you what would occur if you failed to treat that infection? What did he tell you?
MS. That sometimes urinary tract infection will turn to sepsis..
Q. And what would the result of untreated sepsis be to the patient?
MS. The patient would pass on..
I just posted the the condensed version of his testimony. Earlier on, he tried to blame his doctor to have her killed this way like it wasn't his fault. I just showed where he admitted it.
I simply condensed it even further (working from your post) :-) This is focused and short, even if leaves out the sweetly romantic vignettes of his swiping his wife's wedding rings and killing her cats.
Come to think of it, when he stole her wedding rings -- isn't that a divorce?
The post is missing. Are you criticizing an attack on Mary Schindler?
I'd tend to dismiss this as an anecdotal story; or perhaps something in perception. The pathology of alzheimer's isn't something that would lend itself to treatment by Ambien.
bump
The short is answer is "the families." I'll explain that below. Let's first examine why it's still an irrelevant strawman question.
I answered it already when I said that no one is advocating life at any cost, much less at the expense of millions or billions of dollars. It's like me coming here and asking "Which Freeper is going to pay for my new house with the Olympic sized pool?" If no one answers such an absurd question by giving me a detailed financial plan showing how they'll buy my new house for me, that doesn't mean that everyone's dodging the question.
Then there's the fact that taking care of these people is not going to cost the money you and Hildy are talking about. For instance, there are thousands and thousands of people in Terri's condition right now across the country, they just aren't controversial. So, the idea that we have a choice between starving patients to death or paying 80% taxes is nothing short of ludicrous. Go ahead and assume that the cost doubles or triples when the Boomers become decrepit (highly doubtful), and we're still not anywhere near the costs y'all are discussing. If you and Hildy are really worried about 80% taxes, then concentrate on immigration reform and social security privatization instead of trying to get nursing home residents done in.
Now, we turn to the families. The only hope for our medical system is privatization. I have no doubt that a market based system will not only cost less, but will be more humane. Sure, there will be cases where someone could recover but the money isn't there, but that's what charities and insurance companies are for.
Lastly RS, I suggest you take a look at posts 84 and 291. That's the kind of person Hildy is, right there. In her world ultra-cheap PVS cure=Demand for killing.
Oh, and even though I'm skeptical about the effectiveness of this drug, I'd like to note that Ambien costs about $2 a dose. Oh, the horror.
I was not referring to adultery. It's true that he technically had a conflict of interest when he took up with another woman and was therefore technically an unfit guardian, but I'm not all that concerned with what he was doing with his schmacke. I'm concerned with what he was doing with his authority as guardian.
Still sure that removal of this guy as guardian would immediately be overturned? In minutes?
Hardly compelling testimony IMHO.
Why would a nut, who's own psychiatrist who told the Schindlers they should of called the cops when he flipped, be allowed to be a guardian?
=====================================================================================
Michael Schiavo's 1993 Guardianship Hearing
13 It's my understanding that you, at least at one
14 time, were treating with a psychiatrist?
15 A Right.
16 Q Who is that?
17 A Doctor Peter Kaplan.
18 Q Are you still treating with him?
19 A No.
20 Q Was this something that -- I mean, the treatment
21 that you received, was this because of what happened to
22 your wife?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And was it for a temporary period of time?
25 A Yes.
___ 82
1 Q How long was it for?
2 A Couple years, on, off.
3 Q And now you don't see the doctor?
4 A No. I haven't seen him in over a year.
5 Q Are you on medication?
6 A None.
7 Q At one time were you on medication?
8 A I was prescribed medication, I picked it up and
9 never took it.
10 Q What type medication were you prescribed?
11 A I was on -- I took some, Welbutron one time, some
12 Pamelor. I was on Elavil or Prozac, but I never took the
13 medication. I used to fight the doctors all the time, the
14 family doctor, Doctor Kaplan.
15 Q Let's go back over the medication again. What
16 medications were you prescribed by the doctors, if you
17 recall?
18 A Welbutron, Pamelor, Elavil, Prozac. That's all I
19 can recall. Not all at the same time.
20 Q That's my next question. Were these all
21 prescribed at different times?
22 A Yes. They're like -- maybe, he would prescribe
23 them when I got real down. I mean it's -- I'm talking
24 spans between each one.
25 Q Was there any reason why the doctor changed the
___ 83
1 medication?
2 A Because a lot of it made me sick to my stomach.
3 A lot of it was clouding my thoughts and I didn't like
4 that. It's an artificial stimulant, and I didn't want to
5 be artificially stimulated.
6 Q You took at least some of it?
7 A Some, but nothing to become addicted, if you want
8 to use that word.
9 Q Did the doctor change your medication from, say,
10 Melabutron to Pamelor --
11 A Welabutron --
12 Q -- to Pamelor at your request?
13 A I called him up and told him I wasn't feeling
14 well on these pills. And he says, well, let's try this.
15 Q Is that what occurred also from, when Pamelor was
16 changed to Elavil?
17 A A lot of them were making me sick to my stomach.
18 Q What about when you were prescribed Prozac?
19 A I don't think -- I think I got the prescription
20 filled, but I don't think I ever took it.
21 Q But you did take the others?
22 A One or two pills, three maybe, never took a whole
23 prescription.
24 Q Did you ever express to Mr. Schindler or Mrs.
25 Schindler at any time that you felt like committing
___ 84
1 suicide?
2 A Oh, yeah, felt like dying lots of times. Human,
3 you know, a lot of people like to die, you know, expressed
4 that to my own parents.
============ ========================================================
ST PETERSBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT
INCIDENT
90-024846
To:
Arrived: 06:33 Completed: 08:55
Ape/Unit: 2210
Zip: 33716
PERSONS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ADMINI STRATION Officerl: BREWER, PHILLIP R Officer2: TOWER, RODNEY L -Route...: HOMICIDE > > SHE WAS FOUND WITH HER HEAD FACING EAST OUT INTO A HALLWAY AND HER
FEET AND LEGS POINTING WEST ON THE BATHROOM FLOOR. HE STATED SHE
SHOWED NO OUTWARD SIGNS OF VIOLENCE. THE POLICE WERE CALLED BECAUSE
OF HER AGE AND BECAUSE THE SITUATION SEEMED UNUSUAL.
WRITER FOUND NOTHING UNUSUAL INSIDE THE APARTMENT. THERE WERE NO SIGNS
OF A STRUGGLE OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD INDICATE A CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED.
VARIOUS BOTTLES OF PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION WERE PRESENT
IN THE KITCHEN; HOWEVER, ONLY TWO WERE PRESCRIBED TO THERESA.
Do you have a date for the guardianship hearing? Something more specific than 1993?
Dep. of Michael Schiavo --Nov. 19, 1993
That phrase, "clouding my thoughts," is frightening! -- especially in a man who very well may have caused his wife's injuries in the first place. After all, we have no explanation whatsoever how a healthy young woman, quite surely asleep, ended up face down on the floor, in cardiac arrest and nearly dead, soon after Michael got home late that Saturday night. Healthy young women just do not keel over. When healthy young women end up suddenly dead or injured, it is almost invariably domestic violence.
I think it is plain to see that he also said he took none of them in the same breath.
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.