Terri Schiavo's Brother: Misinformation About Her Euthanasia Death Remains

Princeton, NJ (LifeNews.com) -- Terri Schiavo's brother Bobby Schindler has been on a speaking tour this week that's taking him to colleges and universities across the country. Schindler was at Princeton University on Tuesday and he told students there that misconceptions still exist about his sister's euthanasia death.

Terri died in March 2005 after her former husband won a court order to take her life despite requests from the Schindler family to provide her with medical and rehabilitative care.

Though more than three years have passed since the Schindler family's lost their years-long legal battle to save her life, Schindler says the public still wrongly believes some of the misnomers that appeared in the media.

Though Terri was not on artificial respiration and not in a persistent vegetative state, Schindler told the students many Americans still think that was the case and that Terri had no interaction with his family and that she had some sort of terminal illness.

Though “much confusion still exists about Terri’s condition, Terri was not terminal or dying, and her brain injury was not going to cause her to die,” Schindler said, according to a Daily Princeton report.

He said Michael Schiavo, who is now remarried to the woman he dated during the debate over Terri's life, also made up his mind about Terri's condition without basing his opinion on the facts.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that Michael [Schiavo] fabricated the [death] wishes and that his brother and sister did as well and that they perjured themselves in front of the judges,” the newspaper said Schindler said.

Schindler told the students he's worried about the long-lasting effects of the debate surrounding his sister and that more Americans will see disabled people like Terri as a "non-person."

“There is no such thing as a person who is a non-person. There is no one so disabled that they have lost their value or dignity,” Schindler said. He said such a view would be akin to “walk[ing] down the same path that led to the Nuremberg trials.”

“Once you achieve emotional distance from people who are ‘different’ from you, it is easy to look the other way while they are being killed,” he added.

Ultimately, according to the Princeton newspaper, Schindler said Americans need to stand up and fight for the disabled, terminally ill and others who are in jeopardy of becoming the next victims of euthanasia.

“We need to fight today to protect those among us who need our care,” Schindler said. “It’s our dream in the future that legal bigotry against the disabled will be as taboo as insulting someone’s ethnicity."

Related web sites:
Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation - http://www.terrisfight.org

Once again, you call me a "liberal disruptor," and you say that it's because my opinion differs from that of Freepers. I am a Freeper. I have been a Freeper for a very long time. I think it's very presumptuous of you to think that you speak for all Freepers. You say that because my opinion differs from yours that I am "pro abortion" and a "liberal" I'm neither. You and I just have a disagreement.

I happen to be very sorry that this woman is dead. I am just a realist. I don't presume to make my conservatism based on a single issue. I just believe that it's counterproductive to continue to debate this topic. However, debate it I will since you continue to do so.

There is such a concept as "none of our business." This issue falls into that category. Do you think that this is the first time a person in her state was allowed to die? How long and how many thousands of dollars and how many more tears needed to be shed before the inevitable was faced? That isn't your call or mine. That is the call of the family.

In this case, the family disagreed. There was a tremendous amount of controversy. However, this matter was settled by the family through the court system. When courts become involved, one side is going to be unhappy with the decision. I presume both sides were unhappy that this woman found herself in that position. So am I. You can't find it in your heart to respectfully disagree and walk away; letting her rest in peace?

Oh, I am a fool because I won't "speak out" against abortion? I believe that I said I was against abortion. That isn't speaking out?

Could it be that I am not sufficiently zealous in my opposition according to your standards?

Lat time I checked, our Republic was a nation of laws. That means that until Roe v. Wade is overturned, legal abortion is the law of the land. So, if my neighbor chooses to exercise her legal right under the law, whether or not I agree with it or not, there is nothing I can do about it. The only thing I can do is exert my objection against abortion within my own family. Outside of breaking the law, I cannot prevent my neighbor from having an abortion. I choose to obey the law.

Yes, I call you a liberal disruptor and other things I reserve for critters who spout leftist mantras on pro-life threads. If you had any bone of legitimacy on these threads you would have taken the time to find out truths rather than harass and you show no comprehension or willingness to wise up.

You may be just fine and transparent on other threads but when you come here you are quickly shown for what you are. We have heard all the spew you urped up many times before and recognize it. We also recognize your techniques as standard unimaginative. You had an opportunity to learn, to become informed and to identify yourself as a real conservative rather than boasting how conservative you are and how great a FReeper you are, but your behavior lays a clear trail.

I suggest you return to DU and your other sites where you will feel more at home, and less at a strain to show you are a conservative.

I notice that you have included the moderator in many of your posts. I presume that you think I will be banned because I am offering my opinion on this matter. This is a discussion forum. I have been called a fool, a liberal disruptor, a troll, and other things for stating my opinion.

Do you honestly want debate on this topic, or do you prefer that everyone rubber stamp your opinion in response? I am offering my sincere opinion on the matter. Because I disagree makes me no worse a conservative than you. You say I am spouting "leftist mantras" on a pro-life thread. Well, I am pro-life. I do not believe in abortion. I wouldn't be involved in any abortion. If my wife tried to have an abortion, outside of the pregnancy being a threat to her life, I would do everything within my power to prevent it from happening. The same goes for my daughters.

But, I have no authority in anyone else's life. I am not "allowing" others to have abortions." I have no power to prevent others from having an abortion except committing an crime. I will not commit a crime to prevent my neighbor from having an abortion. If she asks my opinion, I will tell her that I do not believe in abortion, and think it's wrong. However, beyond that what would you suggest I do?

As for the Terry Schiavo matter, I have repeatedly stated that I am sorry that she is dead. However, the matter was settled by a judge's order. The family chose to use the courts because of their disagreement on whether or not her medical status offered any hope of recovery. As I understand it, many believe that her husband was responsible for the state she was in.

But, to the best of my knowledge, no charges have ever been brought against her husband by any district attorney. To the best of my knowledge there are no plans to bring any charges against him, but I welcome corrections on this issue. Remember, the fact that someone is constantly urging the district attorney to bring charges does not constitute official plans to bring charges.

That business aside, the matter is legally closed. That is why I urge everyone to move on and let her rest in peace.

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.