Terri Schiavo's Family, Pro-Life Group to Mark "Terri's Day" on March 31

Life News ^ | 1/8/09 | Steven Ertelt

[wagglebee]

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The family of Terri Schiavo and a leading pro-life Catholic group are set to again mark Terri's Day on March 31. The Schindler family and Priests for Life are urging people to make preparations now to mark the day and to remember the disabled woman whose former husband killed her.

The groups are urging individuals, families, churches and and organizations to observe the "International Day of Prayer and Remembrance for Terri Schindler Schiavo, and All of Our Vulnerable Brothers and Sisters" -- otherwise known as Terri's Day.

March 31 is the fourth anniversary of Terri's painful 13-day starvation and dehydration death after a court awarded her former husband Michael the right to take her life.

The two organizations established this day last year to foster education, prayer, and activism regarding discrimination against the disabled.

The Schindler family established a foundation to help the disabled receive legal help and appropriate medical care and treatment and the day is a reminder that those aids exist for people in situations similar to what Terri and her family faced.

Suzanne Vitadamo, Terri's sister, and Bobby Schindler, her brother, told LifeNews.com about the importance of the special day.

“Sadly, our recent headlines are a clear indication that what happened to Terri is only getting worse. We are seeing that many of our institutions caring for our most vulnerable are being encouraged to devalue the sanctity of human life," they said.

"Indeed, this is influenced by a very strong pro-death movement continuing to work very hard to legitimize euthanasia and assisted suicide," Terri's siblings added.

Fr. Frank Pavone, who was with Bobby and Suzanne at Terri’s bedside as she was dying, is also helping to promote the day of remembrance and action.

"As we consoled Terri and prayed with her, what I felt most strongly was the presence of countless people around the world who, by their love, prayers, and tears, accompanied Terri and her family through those difficult days," he said. "I am confident that these same individuals, families, and Churches will want to observe Terri’s Day."

Related web sites:
Terri’s Day - http://www.TerrisDay.org
Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation - http://www.TerrisFight.org
Priests for Life - http://priestsforlife.org

[wagglebee]

There was no "there" there.

That IS NOT an objective term, she was able to breathe on her own WITHOUT any life support. Additionally, she was showing remarkable progress when HER MONEY was being spent to rehabilitate her, then her ESTRANGED, ADULTEROUS "husband" spent all of HER MONEY killing her.

And I certainly would want my wife to decide these things (if I didn't file the right paperwork), as the law allows.

Florida law at the time of the injury DID NOT allow for the removal of nutrition and hydration. It wouldn't bother you if your wife left you for another man?

[freedumb2003]

That IS NOT an objective term, she was able to breathe on her own WITHOUT any life support. Additionally, she was showing remarkable progress when HER MONEY was being spent to rehabilitate her, then her ESTRANGED, ADULTEROUS "husband" spent all of HER MONEY killing her.

She was clinically brain-dead. That IS an objective term. Her so-called "progress" was an invention of the lay observers.

Florida law at the time of the injury DID NOT allow for the removal of nutrition and hydration. It wouldn't bother you if your wife left you for another man?

If I was brain dead, I would want her to be happy. Now, my wife's value system is such that she would never "cheat" -- even technically -- on me. But I would earnestly want her to have someone to lean on and to love her. We can all meet up in heaven some day (well, if I can clean up my act) and work out the details.

I am sorry, my FReind -- I really think this situation was too much government trying to insinuate itself on a private matter. Mrs. Schaivo was quite brain dead.

[wagglebee]

She was clinically brain-dead. That IS an objective term.

"Brain death" has a very precise medical and legal definition, it occurs when the brain no longer operates the heart and lungs (look it up if you don't believe me). Terri Schiavo's heart and lungs had worked fine for well over a decade WITHOUT any machinery. As ALL of you other contentions are predicated upon a state of brain death which DID NOT EXIST, they are irrelevant.

I really think this situation was too much government trying to insinuate itself on a private matter.

Since when is a biological family trying to keep someone alive government insinuation?

[freedumb2003]

"Brain death" has a very precise medical and legal definition, it occurs when the brain no longer operates the heart and lungs (look it up if you don't believe me). Terri Schiavo's heart and lungs had worked fine for well over a decade WITHOUT any machinery. As ALL of you other contentions are predicated upon a state of brain death which DID NOT EXIST, they are irrelevant.

Her higher functions were flat-lined. The EEGs were very clear -- she had no cognitive functions.

Since when is a biological family trying to keep someone alive government insinuation?

When her legal spouse asserted his legal rights, as recognized by all modern jurisprudence.

Her mommy and daddy didn't have any standing and the court was very patient in even allowing them to speak.

As you noted, it is important that people memorialize their wishes. In the absence of that, then the spouse legally gets to decide.

I, for one, do NOT want the government inserting itself into a personal matter. And, thank God, the government stepped away in this case, as it should.

[wagglebee]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

[wagglebee]

Her higher functions were flat-lined. The EEGs were very clear -- she had no cognitive functions.

Lack of cognitive functions (which is disputed) IS NOT brain death.

When her legal spouse asserted his legal rights, as recognized by all modern jurisprudence.

Then why was the investigation of her accident sealed?

As you noted, it is important that people memorialize their wishes. In the absence of that, then the spouse legally gets to decide.

ONLY with regards to the removal of life support; however, since Terri WAS NOT on life support this is a moot point.

[BykrBayb]

She was clinically brain-dead.

Not according to the doctors hired by her estranged husband with money embezzled from her rehabilitation funds. As a matter of fact, none of the medical professionals who examined her, nor the ones who testified without examining her, nor the lawyers retained to clear the way for her death by forced dehydration ever claimed she was brain dead. Only ignorant nobodies with no connection to the case, but with an agenda of corrupting our medical and legal systems have ever made that claim.

Her so-called "progress" was an invention of the lay observers.

So now Michael Schiavo is a "lay observer?"

St. Petersburg Beach has special day for coma victim

I really think this situation was too much government trying to insinuate itself on a private matter.

The government ordered that an innocent woman be killed using a method too barbaric for a dog. If the government had stayed out of Terri Schiavo's private life, and simply maintained its pre-existing status, she'd be alive today, and probably experiencing some level of improvement as a result of the rehabilitation the jury decided she was entitled to.

[BykrBayb]

As you noted, it is important that people memorialize their wishes. In the absence of that, then the spouse legally gets to decide.

No, the law specifically forbids substituted judgment.

[Just mythoughts]

IIRC her brain was in sufficient order it kept her heart beating 13 days until she died.

And wasn’t it a government order that pronounced a death sentence... upon an innocent woman?

I cannot believe any conservative would want their attachment to anything the government put this woman through.

[BykrBayb]

You’re absolutely right. She even had enough brain function to keep her lungs operating for 13 days. That requires quite a bit of brain function.

And yes, the government did pronounce a death sentence. It wasn’t just an order to allow removal of extraordinary measures, as some would have us believe. Her death by dehydration was a requirement of the order.

There is no such thing as a conservative who would approve of the torture and murder and of an innocent woman.

[freedumb2003]

No, the law specifically forbids substituted judgment.

Huh? So if you have medical problems your Mom and/or Dad override your spouse's wishes? Or worse, the GOVERNMENT gets to decide?

Yikes! I don't much care for the Nanny State you want to instantiate.

[BykrBayb]

The law really does forbid substituted judgment. Look it up.

I am not the one promoting the nanny state. You are the one advocating the government deciding that some lives are not worth living.

[freedumb2003]

I am not the one promoting the nanny state. You are the one advocating the government deciding that some lives are not worth living.

I am saying the immediate family (not the extended family) should decide. The government's role should be only in determining who is "immediate family."

As it did, properly, in this case.

[freedumb2003]

The law really does forbid substituted judgment. Look it up.

Not sure what I should look up. If you are brain-dead and there is no "substituted judgment" then who is allowed to make decisions on your behalf?

[BykrBayb]

Decide what?

The decision you’re talking about is whether or not to kill an innocent person. There can be no valid question as to who should make such a decision.

[BykrBayb]

What decision?

Why are you afraid to say what the decision is? If you truly believe what you’re advocating is right, then have the courage to be honest about what it is you’re advocating. Say it. Say what the decision is you’re referring to.

[MEGoody]

There was no "there" there.

There were conflicting opinions on that.

Had I been in Mrs. Schaivo's (I didn't know her so I won't call her by her first name) position I would be begging for release.

That's you. Surely you know that not everyone would feel the same way.

And I certainly would want my wife to decide these things (if I didn't file the right paperwork), as the law allows.

I understand. But once again, there were conflicting accounts of what she wanted by people that were equally close to her. It seems prudent to err on the side of life in such a case.

[wagglebee]

If you are brain-dead and there is no "substituted judgment" then who is allowed to make decisions on your behalf?

EVERY argument you have made is predicated on a condition of "brain death" which DID NOT EXIST.

You seem either incapable of understanding that a person whose heart and lungs function on their own IS NOT brain dead or you are unwilling to acknowledge this because it interferes with your agenda. Which is it?